Protecting Rainbow Trout

I am responding to Robert Cunningham’s column “Why Not Save the Trout?” (Commentary, Nov. 39).

Cunningham begins by suggesting that if the “slaughter of rainbow trout” depicted in the film “A River Runs Through It” were to be continued, it would reduce the river to merely “a stream of clear water” devoid of fish. He then goes on to argue that fishing is not a sport but rather a form of slaughter based on “exercises of ego” and resembling a lust for war.

Cunningham is correct in his observation that overharvest by anglers can leave a river virtually devoid of trout. What he fails to indicate is that during the early part of the century when the story depicted in “A River Runs Through It” actually occurred, fly fishermen kept the fish they caught as a standard practice.

Since that time, however, the number of anglers and the extent of environmental impacts to trout streams have increased many fold. In response, many anglers, particularly those who use flies and lures, now release most or all of the fish they catch unharmed.

The movie also accurately depicted fishing as a spiritual pursuit, and as an escape from the turmoil of the human realm and a reconnection with the nurturing power of the natural world. Many anglers do indeed appreciate rainbow trout, in Cunningham’s words, as “exquisite creations of God.” The experience of an angler catching and releasing a healthy wild trout is not unlike that of a whale enthusiast petting a whale or a bird watcher getting a close-up view of a blue jay.

If it weren’t for people who love trout, whales, and birds, these creatures would be faring far worse than they actually are. Anglers have fought long and hard to protect and restore streams and lakes and ensure that trout are not being overharvested. To answer Cunningham’s question, trout are being saved, and it is the angler who is doing the saving.

TOM HESSELDENZ

Executive Director

California Trout Inc.

San Francisco