# Should Grayling be re-introduced?



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

I would much rather see the DNR spend the money on stream improvements both for the sand load, and somehow cooling the streams down. Once thats done, go for it, but that would take quite some time. At this particular point, I can see no econmical reason to do as they just don't have the money to throw away. I'm pretty sure there are a couple of streams/rivers that they could try, but then again, unless they can do it cheaply, I just can't see it right now.


----------



## brushbuster (Nov 9, 2009)

Fontinalis said:


> Last but not least, there's that temperature thing. Although the headwaters and just below may be cold enough for grayling, it's just about impossible to fish that area at all, much less fly fish...and the lower river, below Graves Crossing, which is where most of the fly fishermen go, is almost too warm even for brown trout.
> 
> 
> 1. The Jordan is almost cold enough to support BROOK trout to the mouth.
> ...


 The Ausable and other northern streams didnt start to get the sand until the Dams came during the beginning of the logging era. Which is when the Grayling ceased to thrive.Its Amazing how much damage all those dams did, And they only used them for a few years until they built railroad grades to get the timber out. Sad thing.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

The Cut river below Higgins Lake I believe would work down to cc bridge. It is pristine but its not really long enough.


----------



## METTLEFISH (Jan 31, 2009)

kzoofisher said:


> The public won't support the removal of desireable fish no matter what the reason so an area that has a poor fishery now would need to be chosen. QUOTE]
> 
> Most of us realize the DNR will do what IT wants, and pay little attention to the public. The largest portion of the effort should be in habitat restoration. A "green belt & fresheen" law needs to be inacted on and for ALL waters, the "urbanization" of the Riparian zones are greatly effecting most waters near and far from actual areas that are and have been stripped of native plants, having effect on sediment, nutrient and temperature.
> 
> I will always support an effort to restore what was when possible, even if I have to give to get.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

They successfully got the wolf population reestablished and that program cost the DNR millions of dollars. That does not include the millions of dollars that are wasted on the kirkland warbler that would survive without the help of the DNR. The DNR is good at wasting millions of dollars on everything but what the sportsmen/sportswomen actually would like to see their money spent on. Nongame is the number 1 priority with the DNR and look at the big return that they get from the bird watchers.


----------



## Shlwego (Sep 13, 2006)

REG said:


> European Grayling-
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grayling_(species)
> 
> 
> ...


 
The Grayling this link references (_Thymallus thymallus_) is a similar species, but not the same as the Arctic Grayling species (_Thymallus arcticus arcticus_) we once had here in Michigan. The last thing we need is European Grayling in our waters..... 

I would love to see Arctic Grayling returned to Michigan waters, but I have serious doubts that consensus could be achieved with all interested parties. Even if that were possible, I believe the effort would have to be funded with private money (i.e. donations to an organization dedicated to Grayling re-introduction by people who want to see that happen), because I don't think that public funding (DNR/tax based) would be seen as a wise use of funds by those who hold the purse strings. If enough private money could be generated to completely cover the cost, the DNR _might_ be convinced to support a re-introduction effort. Raising the amount of cash required to do this would be a pretty daunting task, and I don't know of a private organization even considering it (other than perhaps the tribal councils). Does "Grayling Unlimted" even exist???? Should it???


----------



## Jfish (Sep 22, 2010)

Shlwego said:


> The Grayling this link references (_Thymallus thymallus_) is a similar species, but not the same as the Arctic Grayling species (_Thymallus arcticus arcticus_) we once had here in Michigan. The last thing we need is European Grayling in our waters.....
> 
> I would love to see Arctic Grayling returned to Michigan waters, but I have serious doubts that consensus could be achieved with all interested parties. Even if that were possible, I believe the effort would have to be funded with private money (i.e. donations to an organization dedicated to Grayling re-introduction by people who want to see that happen), because I don't think that public funding (DNR/tax based) would be seen as a wise use of funds by those who hold the purse strings. If enough private money could be generated to completely cover the cost, the DNR _might_ be convinced to support a re-introduction effort. Raising the amount of cash required to do this would be a pretty daunting task, and I don't know of a private organization even considering it (other than perhaps the tribal councils). Does "Grayling Unlimted" even exist???? Should it???


From what I understand the "Artic Grayling" and the "Michigan Grayling" are also 2 separate species. So pick one or the other and it will never be the species that once was in MI. Pick the one that thrives with brown trout in it's natural area.


----------



## Fishin' Wizard (Jan 4, 2009)

No.

I would like to eat some though.


----------



## REG (Oct 25, 2002)

Shlwego said:


> The Grayling this link references (_Thymallus thymallus_) is a similar species, but not the same as the Arctic Grayling species (_Thymallus arcticus arcticus_) we once had here in Michigan. The last thing we need is European Grayling in our waters.....
> 
> I would love to see Arctic Grayling returned to Michigan waters, but I have serious doubts that consensus could be achieved with all interested parties. Even if that were possible, I believe the effort would have to be funded with private money (i.e. donations to an organization dedicated to Grayling re-introduction by people who want to see that happen), because I don't think that public funding (DNR/tax based) would be seen as a wise use of funds by those who hold the purse strings. If enough private money could be generated to completely cover the cost, the DNR _might_ be convinced to support a re-introduction effort. Raising the amount of cash required to do this would be a pretty daunting task, and I don't know of a private organization even considering it (other than perhaps the tribal councils). Does "Grayling Unlimted" even exist???? Should it???


If you read the flow of the posts, JFish was discussing UK. The post was not to infer we stock European Grayling, though they seem to hold their own with interactions with Brown Trout.


----------



## hillbillie (Jan 16, 2011)

Sure German Brown and UK Grayling . Why not? WRONG!!!


----------



## Jfish (Sep 22, 2010)

hillbillie said:


> Sure German Brown and UK Grayling . Why not? WRONG!!!


Where's the brown trout from? You guessed it; Europe! Dude what's the difference? Brown trout are an exotic species just like chinook.


----------

