We recently received the following letter on TU’s ongoing efforts to protect and restore the fragile Apache trout. What do you think? Worthwhile or a waste of time?
“Not another story about Apache trout (Winter 2012)! What is your obsession with this obscure, apparently inept species? Who cares what happens to them? What miniscule percentage of TU anglers have fished for (or even flown over) these fish? News flash: Since right after the beginning of time, species have come and gone. It’s the survival of the fittest out there. To cry that the sky is falling whenever an ill-adapted species disappears is lousy logic. Yes, much needs to be done to improve the environment, but your focus on obscure causes is a distraction from much larger issues affecting wild fisheries and the folks who enjoy it.” John R.
By Gary Marston January 28, 2012 - 9:58 pm
My opinion is that the efforts to restore the Apache trout are well justified. These trout are some of the more unique fish found in North America and represent a vanishing piece of our natural heritage. It was pointed out that these trout are an “ill-adapted” species, which could not be further from the truth, we simply have altered the stage. Apaches thrive in their native environment and live to reach some rather respectable sizes. These trout are able to survive in some of the more arid and hostile environments of any trout.
Problems didn’t arise until we attempted to “improve” on what nature had provided by introducing other trout species. Up till then these trout were always the top dogs in their environment and didn’t have to deal with interference from other salmonids. Rainbow trout are no better suited to this environment and in fact are much less so, yet wipe out and weaken Apache trout populations through interbreeding and competition. While brown trout seem to do well in the same environment as Apaches, they become a predator never existed before we introduced them to these waters. Brown trout also tend to be found in lower concentrations then Apaches and confer a much lower angler success rate than Apache trout in the same waters. So Apaches are not an “inept” species and are most definitely worth saving.
By Rich Higgins January 29, 2012 - 6:26 pm
Don’t think I can add anything to what Gary said. It’s important that TU protect species that are vanishing due to man’s impact. If a species is going extinct for natural reasons then there is no role for TU to step in. In this case it seems that TU should be doing all it can to help. I don’t think TU’s goal should be just to promote fishing and give us fish to fish for. Even if I never catch an Apache trout, it’s nice to know they are still swimming in the streams they have been in for thousands of years.
By Tim B. Smith February 10, 2012 - 12:06 am
The critic who wrote you that letter is taking a short sighted view which I hope never gains traction at TU. Extinction is the worst of all evils. To lose Apache trout is to lose something forever with no hope of ever getting it back. The states and local economic interests will always be there to be sure fishing opportunities exist. We also need organizations that take the longer view and fight to save a place for biodiversity.
I hope TU never opts for the vision of a simplified, homogenized wilderness that always takes the economically convenient decision and where there is little room for the truly unique except in aquariums and museum jars.