Hi folks, lots 'o stuff happenin for me this summer, none good.
Now Fall begins and with it a whole new life begins for me. I'm happy to say, I'm off to a good start with new, good people in my life that have nudged me back toward the place where I belong.

So..., I find myself taking on a project, the scope of which is undetermined but potentially could become something interesting.

Basically what I'm looking for is someone with experience with brook trout conservation SPECIFICALLY in threatened suburban habitat that rely on springs and seeps rather than the traditional freestone high gradient head waters everyone seems to assume the trout need.
My instinct says the springs are key and management should be similar to what water districts use to protect their water sources.
The land in question belongs to an excellent conservation/river steward org and is linked to several other nice sized parcels. Although they are aware that suspiciously wild looking trout turned up in electroshock surveys, and of persistent rumors among fishermen, they really have [had] no clue what they were sitting on.
I have stepped out of cranky old lonerdom and volunteered to help them. My motives are not purely scientifical but we'll leave that story for around the campfire.
Suffice it to say, last night I went on a hike with one of the folks in charge to look at the streams. I was able to show them conclusively not only do they have breeding brook trout, they have a bunch!

They have been casting about looking for management options for their land but haven't surveyed it much beyond invasive plants. I hope to convince them to manage it for the trout, although rare as the pure wild ones are, they are not protected and don't pull in the donations.
My biggest fear is a very strong tree and plant bias and an obsession with invasive plants. One thing they want to do is burn to recharge the scrub oak - pitch pine forest. I love burning, but the thought of those shaded banks denuded of cover scares me.

So that's it in a nut shell. I'm looking for people who might have looked at such a thing before.
Of course I'll google the heck out of it but I don't have access to scientific journals.
Thanks.

That sounds like a really cool project! Just a thought: a winter burn followed by planting of fast-growing native riparian veg (maybe black willow) would ameliorate the shade issues.

hey Mike,

Even with a "good" land steward, it's not a rosy outlook. Too many linkages between groundwater quantity/quality and effects of urbanization. Saw a great talk by some folks in MD DNR last week at the AFS meeting: watershed groups have dropped ~$8,000,000 on restoration of three urban streams (with the latest high-tech groundwater replenishment, buffering, channel modification to facilitate appropriate sinuosity & gradient, pool/riffle ratio, etc. etc. etc.). Any guess as to the results? No significant change at any of the metrics used to assess fish community health and stability. None. Guess they look prettier to folks jogging by them, though...

If all of recharge area is protected, you might have a shot for short-term protection. Any roads upslope? Beware effects of road salt in recharge area; this appears linked to loss of some suburban brook trout pops in SE and mid-Atlantic regions, especially once they've been isolated by development...

Hard to say without knowing a bit more about the system, but I would suspect that the threat of a burn depends on timing and intensity of burn, distance from bank, and pop size. A healthy population should be able to weather the little bit of extra silt and carbon spike, and the increased deposition of CWD (especially if large) following burn will likely increase survivorship of juveniles and density of adults.

good luck!

My first thought was Mass Audubon for advice. But I think Newt is basically right, a winter burn of some of the area to begin with and maybe mechanical removal of invasives along the stream? The Trustees of Reservations did work like this years ago, too, although finding wild brook trout anywhere within 495 (yes?) is pretty amazing.

That sounds like a really cool project! Just a thought: a winter burn followed by planting of fast-growing native riparian veg (maybe black willow) would ameliorate the shade issues.

...though a winter burn would be dropping sediment right when YOY are the most vulnerable. I'd be more tempted to wait until later in the spring; yeah, higher flows/precip will move more sediment, but it will also flush it out of the system faster. Of course, I'm not a plant person, so this might not be effective for original intent. Thoughts, ideas, opinions, etc.?

If what is there now is a remnant of a fire-adapted ecosystem, a controlled burn should not remove the larger trees/plants that do the bulk of the shading. In fact, it may promote their regeneration so that the stream can continue to remain shaded.

As to when to burn - that depends on the physiology of the target species. Spring burns can be more effective than winter burns because it is able to get at growing shoots. During winter, perennial herbaceous plants are somewhat protected underground and have carbohydrates stored up. In the spring they send the carbohydrates to create new shoots; burning then can weaken them more than in the winter. Depends on what you are trying to eradicate.

Listen to nativeplanter, she knows better than I do!

hey Mike,

Even with a "good" land steward, it's not a rosy outlook. Too many linkages between groundwater quantity/quality and effects of urbanization. Saw a great talk by some folks in MD DNR last week at the AFS meeting: watershed groups have dropped ~$8,000,000 on restoration of three urban streams (with the latest high-tech groundwater replenishment, buffering, channel modification to facilitate appropriate sinuosity & gradient, pool/riffle ratio, etc. etc. etc.). Any guess as to the results? No significant change at any of the metrics used to assess fish community health and stability. None. Guess they look prettier to folks jogging by them, though...

If all of recharge area is protected, you might have a shot for short-term protection. Any roads upslope? Beware effects of road salt in recharge area; this appears linked to loss of some suburban brook trout pops in SE and mid-Atlantic regions, especially once they've been isolated by development...

Hard to say without knowing a bit more about the system, but I would suspect that the threat of a burn depends on timing and intensity of burn, distance from bank, and pop size. A healthy population should be able to weather the little bit of extra silt and carbon spike, and the increased deposition of CWD (especially if large) following burn will likely increase survivorship of juveniles and density of adults.

good luck!

A great talk eh??? I'll have to pass the word along that at least one person liked it...all kidding asside I'll get back on topic. We (MD DNR-Scott) also has a publication out about how even the smallest increases in impervious surfaces, whether they be from roads, roofs, or other factors associated with land alteration (soil compaction from heavy equipment removing tree) causes thermal regime impairment, followed by declines and ultimately extirpations in brook trout.

Edited by ashtonmj, 22 September 2010 - 07:43 PM.

Thanks folks!
Seems I have set something in motion with my pics of little trout. We got interest!
I'll be leading a couple of TU guys on one walk and conservation commission and locals on another next week.
[For those that know me, appreciate the irony of me leading a crowd to a secret spot! ]

There is interest in managing for the trout. I don't think they'll burn anything until an expert can tell them the trout won't be hurt.
The only plan now is to sell as much white pine and other market wood as they can.

Dave, my first instinct was not a rosy picture also. I'm optimistic after seeing what's happening there and the interest there is.
The good news is there's very little industry in the water shed. True, there's a bunch of billion dollar horse farms pumping in non-point source nutrients by the truck load, but these people care and can be coaxed to cooperate.
Saving the water is gonna be the key.

Bruce, this is WAY inside 495. The land they aquired would have fit a ridiculous number of million dollar homes. If the aquifer is as good as I believe, they could supply a good size town with water. It's all protected!
This place is really special.

Years ago I went fishing for brook trout with a friend in a tiny creek system in Acton. We caught several of the most intensely colored brook trout I ever saw. I can't imagine those were stocked... and maybe that creek is still there. I couldn't even tell you exactly where it was now. And then there were some interesting places in Winchester. But, I hope yours works out and can be preserved.

I'm not to familiar with true "conservation" of this type of system, but can lend you what little information I have on the subject. My experience on this subject is limited to the electrofishing I did one summer in WV. I shocked lots of streams but only once each.

I sampled a good handful of spring fed creeks (karst system) in otherwise non brook trout habitat that contained reproducing, wild brook trout. Many of these streams were running through mostly treeless agricultural areas. The amount of coldwater produced by the springs was enough to keep these streams cold year-round and provide stable flows-at least closer to the springs. Further downstream the stream warmed quickly with a lack of canopy cover and coldwater species diminished. As others have already stated, canopy cover for shading will probably be critical for keeping temperatures lower and any burning should be done smartly. With those systems I was dealing with, the limiting factor for brook trout definitely seemed to be strictly thermal, as water quality from the karst springs was generally excellent. I was dealing with areas that were mostly agricultural in my areas and didn't have much development which sounds slightly different from your area.

I'm not to familiar with true "conservation" of this type of system, but can lend you what little information I have on the subject. My experience on this subject is limited to the electrofishing I did one summer in WV. I shocked lots of streams but only once each.

I sampled a good handful of spring fed creeks (karst system) in otherwise non brook trout habitat that contained reproducing, wild brook trout. Many of these streams were running through mostly treeless agricultural areas. The amount of coldwater produced by the springs was enough to keep these streams cold year-round and provide stable flows-at least closer to the springs. Further downstream the stream warmed quickly with a lack of canopy cover and coldwater species diminished. As others have already stated, canopy cover for shading will probably be critical for keeping temperatures lower and any burning should be done smartly. With those systems I was dealing with, the limiting factor for brook trout definitely seemed to be strictly thermal, as water quality from the karst springs was generally excellent. I was dealing with areas that were mostly agricultural in my areas and didn't have much development which sounds slightly different from your area.

I'd like to hear about elcetrofishing. It would be impossible in tiny streams the fish are currently in. There is a larger, more impacted stream on the property which both streams and springs feed into. At some point I'd like to find larger fish finding refuge in springs in the main stream.
Truthfully, I'll learn what I personally need to know with #18 Hare's Ear on 7X. But that doesn't count every fish in the pool. I'd have to extrapolate.

The main brook is very impacted with nutrient load and warmth. It grows unsightly filimentous goo where it flows and duckweed where ever it sits still. The effluent from a 30 year old WWTF comprises something like 80% of the headwaters. [Sounds nasty but is actually the case more often than you'd think around here.]
The stretch which flows through the property appears to have been a mill pond during colonial times. It was certainly a beaver pond many times over since the glaciers retreated. Now it flows through a mucky sedidment under a wide open sky. It runs close to strait in spots that could fit two or three good bends. A few good wing dams and a couple groves of willows could work wonders.
Ironically, when you stand on the trestle and look up the valley, it looks just like a prime spring creek. No karst here though, just sand. Too bad, some healthy beds of watercress might compete with the green bearded slime.

Speaking of willow, one complicating key element; Castor canadensis. They've got both breeding brooks backed up outside the property [upstream] and most people want want to nuke 'em. I say they're holding water back to charge the aquifer which feeds the springs which are the key.
They would certainly make it tough to grow willows. We'd have to come up with some fence or something.
I'd be curious to what others think re the beav??

Years ago I went fishing for brook trout with a friend in a tiny creek system in Acton. We caught several of the most intensely colored brook trout I ever saw. I can't imagine those were stocked... and maybe that creek is still there. I couldn't even tell you exactly where it was now. And then there were some interesting places in Winchester. But, I hope yours works out and can be preserved.

Ahh, you brought a smile to my face Bruce. I lived my teenage years in Acton. I haven't explored those creeks in decades. There is some pretty decent patchwork protection within the immediate system. Obviously development whittled away the best habitat and the water district taps the aquifer to the bone. However the good people, in their wisdom, once they got their 1.5 acre of lawn, have protected a bunch of white pine monoculture and some "worthless" swamp. I can't swear any natives remain but the brooks are still known to give up some decent holdover stockies.

I'm glad they protected what they did but it also killed the charm for me. As a teenager it was just me, a few knowledgeable adult flyfishermen and an old drunken muskrat trapper.
Now on nice day you'll run into 20 different people, most with loose dogs, and they all glare at you as if you're trespassing.

Speaking of willow, one complicating key element; Castor canadensis. They've got both breeding brooks backed up outside the property [upstream] and most people want want to nuke 'em. I say they're holding water back to charge the aquifer which feeds the springs which are the key.
They would certainly make it tough to grow willows. We'd have to come up with some fence or something.
I'd be curious to what others think re the beav??

Don't let anyone drive out beaver. They're a keystone species to this kind of ecosystem. But their activity is "unsightly" to the ignorant. If you visited North America 500 years ago the habitat of streams would have been defined by beaver activites in most places. "Controlling" beavers is one of the stupidest ways people can play God in the name of restoring ecosystems. These same people will look at you like you pooped on their shoes if you point out the role of beavers, of course.

Don't let anyone drive out beaver. They're a keystone species to this kind of ecosystem. But their activity is "unsightly" to the ignorant. If you visited North America 500 years ago the habitat of streams would have been defined by beaver activites in most places. "Controlling" beavers is one of the stupidest ways people can play God in the name of restoring ecosystems. These same people will look at you like you pooped on their shoes if you point out the role of beavers, of course.

Pretty close to my words as well. I'm gonna quote you though.

Someone even suggested the dams kept the trout from moving upstream. I told 'em, bring a lawn chair and watch that low spot. You'll see how they do it.

Mike,

For what its worth, I've spent the last couple years working on brook trout in coastal Maine. Some of our brookie watersheds up there had quite high levels of impervious cover (>12%) and were able to maintain healthy, wild populations of brookies. A combinations of cooler annual temperatures and abundant springs/seeps seem to be largely responsible. This is not to say that urbanization is not a major threat - it absolutely is - but as you move north, it appears to be less potent at wiping out brook trout.

Good luck!

Dave K.

I'd like to hear about elcetrofishing. It would be impossible in tiny streams the fish are currently in. There is a larger, more impacted stream on the property which both streams and springs feed into. At some point I'd like to find larger fish finding refuge in springs in the main stream.

Actually I've electrofished streams that weren't much more than a mere trickle...actually more like puddles separated by what is a small riffle in higher water. Its actually much easier to get more accurate results with smaller streams.

I believe you are right that there will be some fish finding refuge in the springs, and there are fish probably moving into your mainstem creek, at least seasonally. Check out this concerning movement of brook trout among tribs/mainstem: link

I'm not too familiar with your type of system, but sounds like there is potential. Good luck

Thanks!
FHD, I might want to pick your brain. Any salters?

Thanks for the link BC, that's the stuff I'm looking for.

I've been taking pics which I will share but highlites are the spring which surfaces, runs maybe 50 yards as a tiny brook, then goes back underground. It reemerges just before dumping into the main stream. Interestingly, the flow at the very end is considerably more than the little trickle above. Only a portion shows itself in the stream, yet by counting wakes when I disturbed them, I saw 2 or 3 small trout in each mini-pool with at least half a dozen in one larger pool. This in what I would term the worst case scenario water level wise, certainly in my own 30 years around here.
The spring roughly follows the dry coarse of what is obviously a flowing stream during high water.

Right now I'm trying to learn about spring hydrology.
I'm particularly interested in getting my plant friends to id plant communities that point to hidden springs. I swear I see a different color over them on Google sat map.
Now that we get rain, I'll be trying to spot breedding activity.

Thanks!
FHD, I might want to pick your brain. Any salters?

Thanks for the link BC, that's the stuff I'm looking for.

I've been taking pics which I will share but highlites are the spring which surfaces, runs maybe 50 yards as a tiny brook, then goes back underground. It reemerges just before dumping into the main stream. Interestingly, the flow at the very end is considerably more than the little trickle above. Only a portion shows itself in the stream, yet by counting wakes when I disturbed them, I saw 2 or 3 small trout in each mini-pool with at least half a dozen in one larger pool. This in what I would term the worst case scenario water level wise, certainly in my own 30 years around here.
The spring roughly follows the dry coarse of what is obviously a flowing stream during high water.

Right now I'm trying to learn about spring hydrology.
I'm particularly interested in getting my plant friends to id plant communities that point to hidden springs. I swear I see a different color over them on Google sat map.
Now that we get rain, I'll be trying to spot breedding activity.

Search for J.T. Petty in the literature. He was my adviser in college and has done a lot of work on brook trout movement/metapopulation dynamics, etc. Not in spring habitat like that exactly, but with eastern brook trout in WV, so its a close match.

Yes - we had some salters mixed in, although they aren't always easy to identify. None of the stereotypical monster salters though -- they seem to be found further north. You're more than welcome to pick my brain about brook trout conservation. Shoot me a PM.

Here are some pictures from the coastal brook trout project in Maine: