Brook trout are New Hampshire’s official freshwater fish. It’s the species of fish most associated with New Hampshire, and important to the state ecologically, socially and economically.
Under state law, Fis 401.03, the definition of “brook trout” is “…brook, rainbow, brown and golden trout, Loch Leven trout and all their hybrids.” This lumps three species of “trout” in the generic sense, one locally extirpated species of trout, a trout strain and hybrids under a single definition.
While brook trout and golden trout (formerly Sunapee trout, now known as Arctic char) are native to New Hampshire, rainbow trout and brown trout are native west of the continental divide and brown trout are not even native to North America. And, hybrids are raised in hatcheries.
From a scientific standpoint, brook trout, rainbow trout and brown trout are all unique species. While they share the same family (Salmonidae) all are from a different genus. Brook trout are a form of char, rainbows are a true trout,and brown trout are a form of salmon.
Brook trout are more closely related to lake trout and locally extinct Arctic char than they are to rainbow or brown trout. Rainbows are more closely related to cutthroat trout than they are brook or brown trout. Brown trout are more closely related to landlocked and Atlantic salmon than they are brook trout or rainbows.
To put this in perspective, brook trout are no more related to rainbow trout than deer are to moose. And they are no more related to brown trout than moose are to reindeer. In the case of Loch Leven trout, they are actually a form of brown trout and virtually indistinguishable from other brown trout.
Making matters worse is the fact that “brook trout” is defined as a single species in the statute that denotes the official state freshwater fish, RSA 3:20, which states, “The brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, is New Hampshire’s official freshwater fish.”
The confusing multi-species definition for brook trout is also used throughout the New Hampshire fishing rules, both printed and online. Under the definitions section, brook trout are defined as “Brook trout: Brook, rainbow, brown and golden trout, Loch Leven trout and all their hybrids.”
Interestingly, most formal programs associated with trout (wild trout streams, trout ponds, wild trout ponds, and wild trout management), are referred to as “trout” not “brook trout,” even though the definition for brook trout includes all species of trout, and there is no formal definition for “trout.”
A sign on the popular Saco River states, “Brook trout daily limit – two fish.” The general law for “brook trout, brown trout, rainbow trout and their hybrids” in rivers and streams is “5 fish or 5 pounds daily limit, whichever is reached first.”
Would we fine a child, or someone visiting New Hampshire from a state that uses species-specific terminology, which most do, for being in possession of three rainbow or brown trout, both of which can be found in the respective section of the river? If we did, would a judge uphold the fine if it were challenged?
The category under General Fishing Laws for Rivers & Streams says, “brook trout, brown trout, rainbow trout and their hybrids,” with no reference to golden or Loch Level trout. And the note associated with the general law states, “brook trout include brook, brown, rainbow, golden, Loch Leven trout and all their hybrids,” with golden trout and Loch Leven trout included, and the word “trout” used only once.
A more prudent, fair and less confusing definition for the various trout species would be, “Trout, when used alone, means brook, rainbow, brown trout, and their hybrids.” Note that removing Loch Leven trout would eliminate a potentially confusing redundancy and removing golden trout would eliminate a non-applicable term which would further simplify what is a complicated and confusing set of rules.
This could be done by changing the definition as noted above and changing roughly fifty occurrences of “brook trout” to “trout” in the online and print fishing rules. No rules, or their intent, would be changed, just how they are worded. And to be clear and fair, some inexpensive cardboard signs would need to be replaced, which could be done at no cost to the state.
This is exactly what the New Hampshire chapter of Native Fish Coalition looks to do. Currently, there is a bill at the legislature that after several changes in scope looks to remove the multi-species definition of brook trout from statute, which currently conflicts with the definition used in the state freshwater fish statute. The amendment is being put forward by State Rep. Ellen Read, who is the clerk for the Fish and Game and Marine Resources Committee.
Once the legal definition has been removed, it will be up to New Hampshire Fish and Game to fix things on their end. Doing so would benefit anglers, especially children who might not be able to understand the rules, and those from outside the state who might assume, and rightfully so, that “brook trout” means exactly that, brook trout, and nothing more.
(Bob Mallard is a former New Hampshire resident and 45-year New Hampshire angler. He is executive director for Native Fish Coalition and a member of their New Hampshire Advisory Council.)