Conewago habitat work

[Zeke16]

I was on the Adams County Trout Unlimited crew that float stocked the Conewago FFOCRO a few weeks ago. We did not put any fish in below the log structure downstream of the pavilion as a "test" of how far the fish will move downstream. ACTU members will be specifically fishing the lower section this year to assess the fish movement.

The stream has been hammered. The Monday after the stocking, the Zeigler Mill Road parking lot had 10 cars and six cars were parked at the bowling alley lot. The catching was meager possibly due to the 42 degree water temperature.

Also, the PFBC Habitat Division has a restoration project planned for this summer, from the upper end of the FFOCRO section down to the parking lot on Zeigler Mill Road. The work will be funded with a $65,000 grant from the DEP that the Adams County Conservation District applied for.

 

[joebamboo]

So, TCU determines where state raised trout are stocked?

 

[Zeke16]

So, TCU determines where state raised trout are stocked?

Of course. Working in tandem with the PFBC, ACTU has stocked streams in the county for decades. When float stocking a section of stream that the PFBC wants stocked, the people on the crew put out fish at their discretion (nice holes, nice runs, good holding water); no one from PFBC is on the water with them. This applies to stocking in other counties that I have stocked. In this case, my understanding is the that the WCO wanted the fish put in high in the FFOCRO section. I personally liken it to a test of fish movement.

 

[joebamboo]

There have been many "tests" to see how far fish will travel. The results have always been the same. Some will go upstream, some downstream and some will stay put.

 

[JeffP]

There have been many "tests" to see how far fish will travel. The results have always been the same. Some will go upstream, some downstream and some will stay put.

I have to agree. Why would TU, that shouldn't even be about stocked trout, be able to determine stocking policies for a stream? With a limited number of streams open to fishing early, why impact a stream like that? So there is a glut of fish in half the stream at the start. Isn't that going to bring a bunch of guys to fish a short stretch? And this hardly sounds like a study. If you want to study it, fine. Then conduct a study.

 

[joebamboo]

JeffP, you are correct. The upper section is being hammered because that's the only part of the stream that was stocked. Thursday I counted 8 cars at the upper parking lot. In my opinion, this plan was totally unnecessary. Just another reason I am not a fan of TU.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

PFBC doesn't let local groups just take the state fish and put them wherever without coordination. I am sure the WCO and Area Fisheries Manager were involved in discussing the plans for this section

 

[joebamboo]

Read Zeke16 post above. (people on the crew put out fish at their discretion).
PFBC employees drive the truck, fill the buckets and have no clue nor do they care where the fish are introduced into the streams.

 

[Swattie87]

Read Zeke16 post above. (people on the crew put out fish at their discretion).
PFBC employees drive the truck, fill the buckets and have no clue nor do they care where the fish are introduced into the streams.

I’ve helped stock for years by the camp my family is a member of. That last sentence isn’t completely true. They do. They need to go in the stream, and section, they were intended to. And the PFBC crews do make sure of that. Yeah, they don’t care if you toss them in this hole, or the one 50 yards downstream, but they do ensure there’s no funny business going on.

For a long while we had the same WCO each year, and got to know him and got friendly with him. We’d rig a tank with an aerator in it on the back of a 4WD pickup and run fish back some lanes that the stocking truck couldn’t go down, and were too far to walk buckets from the road. Anyway, he retired or transferred to another area, and we got a new WCO. That first year or two with him he was very insistent that he ride back with us to make sure the fish were going where they were supposed to. A couple of the parcels have small ponds on them, and I think his concern was fish going into those ponds as opposed to the stream. After the first couple years he too got to trust us and he stays with the big truck on the road now.

But, they absolutely do care where the fish go.

 

[joebamboo]

Ok then, my question is, was this a PBFC "test", or one that the ACTCU arbitrarily decided on their own ?

 

[blitzinstripes]

I have to agree. Why would TU, that shouldn't even be about stocked trout, be able to determine stocking policies for a stream? With a limited number of streams open to fishing early, why impact a stream like that? So there is a glut of fish in half the stream at the start. Isn't that going to bring a bunch of guys to fish a short stretch? And this hardly sounds like a study. If you want to study it, fine. Then conduct a study.

The other thing they are notorious for is dumping half the load in the one big hole at the bend (biggest hole in the whole section). It's frustrating to work through lots of good pocket water with no fish only to find a dozen guys standing over 250 fish in that one big hole.