When you raise the question of how best to manage Maine’s trout fishery in a way that will generate trophy-size brookies, a variety of theories flow from biologists and fishermen alike.

Those of us who have been fortunate enough to fish for football-size cutthroat trout on the catch and release waters of the West want to believe that the fisheries management lessons of Wyoming and Montana are directly applicable to Maine. We tend to think that it’s a no-brainer: more catch and release waters in Maine will mean more fish and bigger fish.

If only it were that simple!

For one thing, the habitat is markedly different in Big Sky Country where the big fish grow. I have seen mayfly hatches in that region that resemble Maine snowstorms. And cutthroat trout are not Eastern brookies. Writes biologist Robert Behnke, “The combination of circumstances that is responsible for the phenomenal fishery in the Yellowstone River is not duplicated anywhere else on earth. Cutthroat trout respond to special regulations much better than any other trout species.”

Greenville state fisheries biologist Scott Roy touched upon this topic recently in his weekly fishing report. His refreshing candor and comments on the complexities of catch and release regulations are worth chewing on.

“In an effort to evaluate the effects of catch and release and high length limit regulations on typical small Maine brook trout waters, several years ago we placed catch and release regulations on some ponds in the region,” Roy wrote. “We also placed 18-inch minimum length limits on a few small ponds. Initial results were encouraging. With the additional protection, fish numbers immediately increased. A few larger fish began to appear in the fisheries. Within three or four years, with the abundance of fish steadily increasing, the growth rates started to decrease.

“In many of the waters with the more restrictive regulations, trout became so abundant that competition among the trout forf ood cause the “fatness” of the fish to decline … in effect, the regulation allowed the population to increase to a point were the fish became smaller and skinnier. The results were just the opposite of those that were intended!

“Once (we were) satisfied that the catch and release and 18-inch minimum length limits were not suitable for most of these waters, the rules were changed. However, the strict regulations did work on a couple of the ponds and still remain on the books. It soon became readily apparent why the higher limits were effective on so few waters. The catch rate data from the voluntary surveys and the trapnet results showed that the fisheries that benefited from catch and release and 18-inch length limits were in ponds with very limited natural reproduction.

“With low reproduction, the chances of creating an over-population were greatly reduced. Low numbers of fish meant continued good growth. In these cases, the regulations helped assure that fish could live long enough to exhibit their full growth potential. These situations are not typical when dealing with wild populations but sometimes can be created with hatchery fish if stocking rates are kept relatively low. When used on a

fishery where it is not appropriate, catch and release and extremely high length limits cause over-abundance and ‘stunting.’ That holds true for salmon and togue as well as brook trout.”

Roy concluded, “We are constantly looking to achieve a balance between protecting and harvesting fish that approaches population levels and age structures that provide good growth and catch rates. Special regulations have a part in that process. We have to look at all the available information, not just the stuff that supports our personal preferences.”

V. Paul Reynolds is editor of the Northwoods Sporting Journal. He is also a Maine Guide, co-host of the weekly radio program “Maine Outdoors” heard Sundays at 7 p.m. on The Voice of Maine News-Talk Network (WCME-FM/96.7) and former information officer for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. His e-mail address is [email protected].