A November Walk...and more

[klingy]

I like to walk along trout streams in the fall. I often will take short walks to check out spots that I've never fished before to poke around, check for redds, look for fish, or just to have an excuse to get outside. Today I had a couple hours so I checked out a section of the Breeches that I had only fished once or twice before. It is miles downstream of where I usually fish, and I was really looking to see if there was much evidence of wild trout that far downstream. I wasn't going to bring my rod, but at the last second I threw it in the car.

When I got to the stream, I brought the rod thinking I probably wasn't going to use it, but just in case. I walked a few hundred yards of stream on the bank, and actually counted 12 redds, all of which the fish had moved on from. Interesting. Well, while I was there, I should at least throw a couple in.

I didn't have anything with me besides what was rigged from the last time I was out in October - a Letort Hopper with a PT nymph dropper. I stayed close to the bank and worked a run of about 3 feet of water with no redds in the area. Second cast, the hopper went under. A beautiful 12 inch wild brown. Bonus!, I thought. A few casts later, a 6 incher. Took a few steps towards a big sycamore, and drifted a few past a cut under the tree. On the third cast, there was an explosion. A big brown porpoised out of the water and destroyed the hopper. Game on! After a few nice runs and jumps, I landed it. Really interesting fish - had a lot of signs of a wild fish (clean, crisp fins, blue eye spot), but its spotting makes me suspect maybe an old holdover? In either case, this will be a spot that I come back to in the future, and it was a good reminder to get out and take a walk along a stream in the fall. You never know what you'll find!

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

I'm going holdover on this one.

On a hopper inlate November ?. Who cares wild or not. Nice fish and story

 

[SteveG]

Id have to go with holdover as well, and a nice looking one at that. There are wild trout at least to the Mechanicsburg waterworks, which is just a bit downstream from my parents' home. The lower Breeches also gets nice hatches. The only thing holding it back is the stocking culture.

 

[Mike]

Holding it back from what?

 

[Dave_W]

salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
I'm going holdover on this one.

On a hopper inlate November ?. Who cares wild or not. Nice fish and story

Agree - very nice fish. I'd guess holdover too but not with high confidence.

Wild trout are prevalent in the entire length of Breeches but, in my experience, are a bit spotty in the lower river. Great to hear about such obvious spawning activity.

Hopper in November? Not a surprise. My first trout of 2017 was a hopper caught fish in Breeches in January.

 

[PennypackFlyer]

Talking about a dry spell since i'm not fishing as often (once every 2 or 3 weeks)....I went from the Oct Fall Stocking until last weekend to catch a trout at Pennypack Park. It was about a 2lb stocked bow.

 

[SteveG]

Holding it back from being a better wild trout fishery. Just as the PFBC refuses to shock areas that would definitely receive Class A designation.

 

[tomitrout]

So what if it would go Class A, there are loopholes that would still see it being stocked regardless.

btw, nice fish Klingy.

 

[SteveG]

That's a possibility, but maybe it wouldn't be, or perhaps reduced. At the least, it exposes the hypocrisy of the PFBC and their failing program.

 

[Mike]

Not necessarily holding it back from having a better wild Brown Trout biomass. When stocking was terminated in 40 wild Brown Trout streams in Pa the biomasses showed a 50/50 chance of increasing. Twenty streams showed numerical increases, 16 showed decreases, 4 did not change....and that's when more trout were being stocked in Pa and there were more trout anglers.

 

[SteveG]

Here's my issue with data like that, trout move seasonally and in response to environmental factors. Sure, some streams, limestoners are a prime example, will always have a decent year-round baseline, but even the fish in there move in and out of tribs or out to larger water. Fish don't know the boundaries of when one stream "becomes another".

 

[PennKev]

SteveG wrote:
Here's my issue with data like that, trout move seasonally and in response to environmental factors. Sure, some streams, limestoners are a prime example, will always have a decent year-round baseline, but even the fish in there move in and out of tribs or out to larger water. Fish don't know the boundaries of when one stream "becomes another".

I agree it doesn't identify if other factors are in play. If you survey the stream, then stop stocking, then you have a hot/dry year, then survey again... ...well yeah, biomass decreased, no suprise there. Maybe it would have DECREASED EVEN MORE had stocking continued.

When you only have data for a couple points in time, that data can be borderline useless, particularly without context.

As far as assigning Class A status goes... ...meh. It's the mega spot burn. Too many anglers are too insecure about fishing non-class A streams. They need that stamp of approval in order to have confidence in fishing a stream.

I can see the utility of the designation on streams in dire need of protection from imminent threats, and maybe the very best of the best. Otherwise.... ..meh.

 

[afishinado]

Study: Wild brook trout do suffer from stocking
January 2, 2014 Jeff Mulhollem Editor

Finding confirms PF&BC’s program

Harrisburg — Recent research conducted by the U.S. Geologic Survey in New York shows that stocking brown trout into streams harboring wild brook trout is harmful to the native trout populations.

The finding, which confirmed the beliefs of fisheries biologists and other officials in the Keystone State and beyond, mostly validates stocking practices employed in recent years by the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission.

USGS researchers found that direct interactions between brown trout and brook trout – such as competition for food – over time diminish brook trout populations.

Repeated stocking of brown trout in brook trout habitats can drastically decrease brook trout numbers, noted James McKenna, USGS scientist and lead author of the study

“There is great potential for brown trout stocking to reduce native brook trout populations,” he said.

Improper brown trout management could threaten vulnerable brook trout populations, according to the study, which is published in the North American Journal of Fisheries Management and available online.

The Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission, which has been stocking trout for more than a century, in recent years has been trying to protect vulnerable wild brook trout populations from interference from stocked browns, pointed out Dave Miko, the agency’s chief of fisheries management.

“Our approach has evolved over time, and we now take into account the species mix of what we stock and the wild fish that are present in systems,” he said.

“Actually, beginning in 1983 with Operation Future, the commission began to take a close look at the effects of stocking trout on top of wild trout, taking wild trout populations into account when developing stocking allocations.”

Of the 1,200 stream sections the commission now stocks, only nine of them have brook trout-only wild populations, and in seven of those, the agency stocks brook trout only.

Only in Double Run in Sullivan County and Moose Creek in Clearfield County are fish stocked over brook trout-only wild populations.

Double Run, a small Class B water, gets just 300 rainbows preseason. Moose Creek, which is a Class C water, is stocked both preseason and inseason with both brooks and brown trout.

There are many stream sections that have both brooks and browns reproducing in them, Miko explained. All of the wild brown trout streams at one time would’ve been native brook trout streams.

“Wild trout populations in streams can differ significantly,” he said. “A stream can have just a handful of wild trout or it can have 3,000 wild fish.

“So we are definitely going to continue to stock streams that have just a handful of wild fish in them to continue to provide opportunities for fishermen.”

Pennsylvania differentiates between wild trout stream sections: Class A waters are “the best of the best” having the most wild fish and water chemistry and are never stocked; Class B stream sections have thriving wild trout populations, but some are stocked; Class C and Class D wild trout waters have some wild trout and are usually stocked.

“We stock the lower classes of wild trout streams because they do not offer enough opportunities to anglers,” Miko said.

However several Fish & Boat commissioners the last few years have advocated not stocking Class B streams to see whether their wild trout populations might improve and expand and become Class As.

“We do know that stocking trout over wild fish can suppress wild trout populations,” Miko said.

“What this new study does is add some additional support to the belief that stocking of brown trout in general can displace wild brook trout,” Miko said, adding that brown trout tend to outcompete brook trout whenever the stream habitat is beneficial to both species.

“In higher elevations and headwaters streams, brook trout tend to have strongholds there and brown trout don’t infiltrate,” he said.

“That could be because of the acidic water chemistry of the headwaters and water temperatures are also a big factor. Some headwaters, in general, are colder than brown trout prefer.”

Brown trout can withstand temperatures up to 78 degrees; 72 degrees is the top temperature for brook trout.

“To me the USGS report confirms that we’ve been doing the right thing because we only have those two stream sections that are wild brook trout only that we have been stocking,” Miko said.

“We are always trying to balance providing opportunities for anglers with a resource that we are charged to protect, and we are very careful.

“I think we do a pretty good job of that – we stock 3.2 million adult fish.”

Link to source: http://www.outdoornews.com/2014/01/02/study-wild-brook-trout-do-suffer-from-stocking/

 

[Dave_W]

While I don't have data to back this up, it's just my personal experience having fished Breeches for over three decades...

Wild trout populations have increased dramatically in YB over the last decade or so (as is true on multiple other local streams as well). This seems to be the consensus of other YB regulars too. Stocking and fishing pressure on YB remains high too. My overall sense is that angling pressure on YB is lower than a generation ago, but other YB regulars who fish the stream claim the pressure is higher than ever.

What to make of all this? Would the wild BT population increase in both numbers and biomass if stocking were abated on YB? Perhaps.
Nevertheless, I'm convinced these days that YB is an example of how wild BTs can increase and thrive in spite of stocking and pressure from traditional anglers.

 

[Swattie87]

I think in part this shows that WILD Brown Trout are relatively difficult to catch...In conditions that most anglers like to fish in anyway. The guys out there in dialed in rainy up and off color conditions, or FFing during a prime hatch are the kind that will almost without exception be C&R anglers.

On nice, sunny days, with lower, clearer water when most traditional catch and keep anglers prefer to fish, wild Browns are notoriously difficult to catch. To the point that a lot of serious wild Trout anglers (myself definitely included) don't really like to fish for them in those conditions...I'll usually try to find Brookies in those conditions, or WW fish.

Good case in point...There is a small freestone wild Brown Trout stream I fish a couple times per year that gets a single PFBC allotment of fish pre-season, but gets several much larger doses of club fish from a co-op hatchery in its headwaters. Fish it in the Spring and you'll catch nothing but stockers. Go back in the Fall (I did this September), and you'll catch nothing but wild Browns. They were clearly there in the Spring, but didn't get caught, while the easy prey stockers did.

 

[sarce]

Excellent fish. I never would have thought to fish a hopper at this time of year!

 

[SteveG]

Most streams have seen wild trout pops increase over the past decase or two. I lean toward the idea that overall water quality statewide has increased, due in part to conservation efforts, CWA, etc.

Swattie, I have an idea of whats going on with the stream you mentioned. Feel free to pm me if you want.

 

[Mike]

Are the effects of terminating stocking over wild Brown Trout masked or overridden by other behavioral and ecological factors...movement, drought, etc? Is that what's being suggested? if so, then that could be viewed by other anglers as one counter-argument to the cessation of stocking over the populations.

Likewise, stocking impact on wild Browns may also be below detection at the population level when Rainbow or Brook Trout are used, if stocking frequency is low, or if angling pressure is relatively light.

Note, in the stream info previously presented annual climatological, year class, etc variations were at least partially accounted for by the fact that stream examinations variously occurred over a period of years.

 

[SteveG]

How would that be a counter argument? It just means people will have to learn how to fish, instead of chasing white trucks around.

 

[afishinado]

Mike wrote:
It appears that some believe that the population effects of terminating stocking over wild Brown Trout are masked or overridden by other behavioral and ecological factors. That may be true, possibly in many cases, but if so, then that could be viewed as one counter-argument to the cessation of stocking over those populations. Likewise, stocking impact on wild Browns may also be below detection at the population level when Rainbow or Brook Trout are used, if stocking frequency is low, or if angling pressure is relatively light.

Note, in the stream info presented above annual climatological, year class, etc variations were at least partially accounted for by the fact that the years during which individual streams were examined prior to and after stocking cessation also varied.

What streams that support Class A equivalent biomasses have not been surveyed? One wonders how it is known that they are Class A equivalents if no survey has taken place.

Mother nature allows the wild population to grow to it's carrying capacity. By definition the carrying capacity....is the carrying capacity.

The carrying capacity of a biological species in an environment is the maximum population size of the species that the environment can sustain indefinitely, given the food, habitat, water, and other necessities available in the environment.

Adding hundreds or thousands of fish from an outside environment to the present wild population pushes the stream environment way over the carrying capacity. How can anyone believe that's a good thing?

Attracting hundreds or thousands of apex predators (anglers) doesn't do anything to help the wild population either. How can anyone believe that's a good thing?

If someone asked the question to any biologist about any wild creature: "what result would one expect if a self-sustaining wild population was invaded by all adult creatures of the same species, driving the population dramatically over the carrying capacity, while at the same time increasing dramatically the number of direct predators"....what would their answer be?