ABSTRACT
Historic ‘sh studies and management actions in lotic systems of the United States were concentrated on coldwater streams in states where they existed. This focus re¤ects the ease of working with small streams, but also, it was due to an emphasis placed on trout ‘shing. That is not to say that warmwater streams were not ‘shing streams. On the contrary, warmwater streams were much more likely to be ‘shed because they were near human centers of civilization. In 1970, ‘shing opportunities in the United States included 489,000 km (305,625 miles) of warmwater stream ‘shing in 49 states, and it was the only form of stream ‘shing in 29 states (Funk 1970). Warmwater streams were abundant, and everyone ‘shed in them. But ‘shing for the brightly colored trout had an aura of the mystic: One only has to read the writings of early proponents or read A River Runs through It (Maclean 1989) to get the idea. The trout (lure) ‘sherman was the gentleman while the bream (worm) ‘sherman was a few classes lower. When trout streams declined due to over‘shing and habitat loss, state and federal agencies became involved in studies to learn more about these streams and to restore ‘shing opportunity. It also is pertinent to note that funds for study or restoration of streams were available almost exclusively from sales of ‘shing licenses; thus, “nongame” ‘shes, unfortunately called “trash ‘sh,” were not deemed very important either.
