Bob Mallard is the executive director of Native Fish Coalition.

A recent proposal by NH Fish and Game (NHFG) looked to gut the state’s Wild Trout Management (WTM) program. Waters so designated are the only places in the state where wild native brook trout are managed for natural abundance and age/size distribution.

At just 16 waters statewide, three small ponds and 13 small streams, gaping holes in the map including White Mountains National Forest and Pittsburg, and no waters added in 18 years, the program has been faltering for years.

The proposal would have removed catch-and-release (C&R) protection from all three WTM ponds, and while not clear, based on what we heard from NHFG, it likely would affect some number of WTM streams as well. As it is, New Hampshire has fallen behind other states in regard to protecting wild native trout. Maine, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Maryland have all done more to protect brook trout than New Hampshire.

NHFG is knowingly stocking over wild native brook trout in places such as the lower Wildcat River in Jackson and Echo Lake in Franconia. Rather than protect the fish that are there, NHFG tries to mask the problem with stocking. Most front country rivers and larger streams are now propped up almost solely through artificial propagation, as are most ponds and virtually all lakes. Those that are not stocked are subject to unrestricted tackle, no minimum length limit, and a five-fish daily limit.

While NHFG Director of Fisheries Dianne Timmins has stated that she does not believe angler harvest is a limiting factor, she admits to stocking over wild native brook trout in some waters to address what she refers to as “heavy angling pressure.” Angling in and of itself does not depress fish populations, excessive harvest does. Ms. Timmins has also stated that the WTM program has failed to improve the fishing on some waters.

At a time when New Hampshire is experiencing epic flooding and the often irreversible habitat degradation that comes with it, extended droughts and chronic low water, and long hot summers that warm the water, maintaining fish populations at historic levels should be viewed as a success not a failure.

The attempt to gut the WTM program was part of a sweeping proposal that included removing fly fishing only (FFO) restrictions from most stocked trout ponds, imposing biologically unnecessary FFO restrictions on wild brook trout ponds, as well as shortening the season on some waters without the scientific data to support this reduction in opportunity.

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Thousands scramble for health coverage as Medicare Advantage firms leave N.H.

Merrimack Valley bus driver woes lead superintendent to get behind the wheel

Federal judge rules Bow parent can attend school games after protesting transgender athletes

Merrimack Valley schools turn to trust funds to cover $1.1 million budget shortfall

Three new athletic directors and their visions to push high school sports forward

Concord police: 1 wounded in Rollins Park shooting Monday night

Your Daily Puzzles

Cross|Word

Flipart

Typeshift

SpellTower

Really Bad Chess

The proposal was opposed by anglers, businesses, and organizations alike, with very little support. After the public outcry, NHFG wisely shelved the proposal and sent it back to the drawing board. While they said they will revise their proposal with consideration of public input, it would be prudent to get representation from a range of stakeholders in a room to talk it through it to find where we have common ground and what concessions can be made to satisfy as many users as possible.

While NHFG provides countless unrestricted tackle, harvest, put-and-take, and nonnative fishing opportunities for those who desire them, they have done very little for anglers who prefer wild native fish in natural abundance and age/size distribution. Allowing harvest on all waters as was proposed is akin to restricting all waters to C&R or FFO. We would never do the latter, nor should we ever do the former.

What New Hampshire needs is balance and mixed opportunities. New Hampshire anglers, visiting anglers, direct and indirect businesses, state tax revenue, fishing license sales, fish and game expenses, and the resource itself are best served when we offer everyone something and no one everything. The current situation does not do that, and the proposal would have only made matters worse.