Another big improvement...this time a limestoner

[Reeder]

I agree with Afish about naming or not naming at one's discretion without expecting criticism. On the other hand, I am puzzled why an employee of the Fish & Boat commission whose commercial work (as opposed to private scouting) is public (or should be) wouldn't name the stream. If it's in the public domain in the form of a commission (taxpayer) report, what's the objection? Also, I, too, would be interested in what caused the stream to rebound. Just sayn'

Puzzled? Tax payer funded studies and results are on a need to know basis, civilian. Commoners will be the last to know, after they have waited until the info is formally released, and the appropriate red tape has been waded through. That is the way it works. I too respect anglers wanting to keep certain info quiet, but you certainly make a good point. We have a local big mouth up my way who likes to think of himself as the fly fishing guru. After he gets done telling everyone how he caught 25 trout already that day, he will proceed to tell them any real info that he knows, like where he saw you catching them, and what fly you told him you had on, and how you were fishing it. Next thing you know, you've got a new guy in your favorite stretch an hour before you get off work, every night of the week. I learned to keep quiet around him. A good freestone and a local loudmouth is a pain in the butt, a good limestone and the internet can turn into a nightmare. Just picture the 20-30 vehicles parked along every good stretch of Spring Creek on a weekend. What am I catching them on? Flies. What kind of flies? Dry flies.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

SlingerFlyRods wrote:
The bucket brigade wants to do as little as possible. They won't fish it unless there's a bridge or a clear groomed path to the hole. Trust me when I say the secret is safe in class A and wilderness streams.

Anyone who wants to talk 5 to 6 miles up a wilderness stream in Potter county because I name drop hammersly go for it. The bucket brigade isn't as bad as you think it is outside of stockers.

Maybe I'm just too "used" to those streams up there, but hard to believe that name dropping that stream would be "spot burning". Seems like everyone knows of it, but as you said, few will put in the effort (to their loss).

 

[troutbert]

My guess:

The upper part of Tulpehocken Creek.

And the reason for the large improvement in trout populations is probably due to improvements in flow, caused by changes in operations of the limestone quarry up there.

Any other guesses?

 

[Oregon_Owl]

It would have to be a stream where a lot of riparian buffer work is making a difference, or the removal of a dam in the headwaters.

My guess would have been the Manatawny (some pastures fenced off there in the past 5 years in the upper watershed), but Mike said that there was little evidence of fishing going on except for this one angler, so I'll guess the Willow, which I think has also had fencing and riparian work done along much of its length.

Fish and find.

 

[FarmerDave]

Sylvaneous wrote:

McSneek wrote:
What's interesting about this post is the OP is the PAF&BC Regional Biologist (may not have title correct) and has not been hesitant to share specific stream information in other instances. I find the lack of specific information in this post inconsistent with others he's made.

I suspect this stream is in the Lehigh Valley somewhere. Just a hunch.
.

Already, Little Lehigh, Saucon, the Easton Bushkill, the Monocacy, Trout Run and Cedar Creek are well know, for decades, to have wild brown trout in abundance as well as Cook's creek and a few others that I can't remember since I haven't lived there in over a decade. The upper Jordan near its origins does. And another creek, forgot it's name, up North East of Nazareth does too. I can't remember if Hoqendaqua does or not. So does Pocono creek, right along the road. And several others tribs whose name I do not know. So there. BIG REVEAL! Go get 'em boys!

Now, what's the creek's name? Trindle Spring Run was one of the 'worst kept secrets' for wild rainbows. Hogestown run does too, but both streams are so small that not many people will bother with them after a few adventure trips. Neither could be a go-to stream unless you live right there. It would be good if they improved, but really it would provide a minor bit more of fishing, overall, again, unless you live right there. Am I afraid of a ton of traffic on Sage Run by telling people there are an inordinate number of 11-15" wild browns in it? No, because once you see it, you probably will only fish it once.
So just say it so we all can know what's going on. Good news of this type is too rare to hide.

Syl.

Jason, we may disagree quite a bit, but I think you have a point.

Every time I drive past Sage Run, I smile. I have no desire to actually fish it. It is just good to know that it does have wild trout. In my younger days I may have liked to try it once, but only to say I did. But I also think what a nice thing it must be for kids growing up along it.

Besides, everybody knows Sage Run only has gemmies.;-)

The stream in the OP was stated as an urban/suburban stream. I personally would have no desire to fish something like that either unless if flowed through my back yard.

I think, if Mike intentionally left out the name of the stream, he probably has his reasons and I am fine with that.

Maybe it flows through Mike's back yard. ;-)

 

[FarmerDave]

joebamboo wrote:
I'd like to think we are all adults and are able to take a little criticism without getting our feelings hurt. This was not meant to be an "Attack" on anyone!

Bingo!

And I'm sure you realized my response to you was in the same vein. No offense intended or taken from this end.

Besides, I haven't fished with bamboo for a couple years now, but I still prefer it. ;-)

 

[troutbert]

Maybe Hay Creek?

 

[Chaz]

wgmiller wrote:
Here's what the PFBC defines as the "Southeast". So that's a starting point...

http://fishandboat.com/fishpub/summary/troutregs_se.htm

Mike's area includes York County. It does not include Lehigh and Northampton. I believe Lebanon County is included in Mike's area.

 

[Chaz]

McSneek wrote:
For those who think wanting to know the name of this stream constitutes everything from laziness to spot burning what if Mike had posted this instead?

A formerly improving urban-suburban SE Pa limestoner has taken a substantial turn for the worse. An approximately 5.5 km segment has gone from a mix of probable class B and class A equivalent segments in the 1990s to a fairly low density, relatively low biomass wild brown population in two-thirds of that stretch and no wild trout in the upper third in 2015. These situations are never satisfying.

Would you think the name of this stream was relevant and worth knowing?

Probably more relevant than a stream achieving Class A. Because we need to know as much as we can about when things go south.

 

[Chaz]

Coughlin wrote:
I agree with Afish about naming or not naming at one's discretion without expecting criticism. On the other hand, I am puzzled why an employee of the Fish & Boat commission whose commercial work (as opposed to private scouting) is public (or should be) wouldn't name the stream. If it's in the public domain in the form of a commission (taxpayer) report, what's the objection? Also, I, too, would be interested in what caused the stream to rebound. Just sayn'

My best guess would be that it's 90% on private property and therefore closed to the public, unless you ask permission. I'm goin' to guess it's in Temple PA. Just a guessI have only fished it twice.
My feelings about posting the names of streams, the tip came from an angler who asked the stream not be named, I get that. PFBC Biologist respects that. What I don't get is that guys think they are protecting streams by not naming then. That just counter productive to protecting streams. Most streams can support some harvest, the real issue is they don't get any protection at all from harvest.
I think that 2 fish a day on a WTS, should be the minimum protection, with no harvest on the majority.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

troutbert wrote:
My guess:

The upper part of Tulpehocken Creek.

And the reason for the large improvement in trout populations is probably due to improvements in flow, caused by changes in operations of the limestone quarry up there.

Any other guesses?

Thought about that, but that's in Lebanon County and I thought Mike said this was Skuke.

 

[Zak]

"Additionally, a second reason that I did not disclose the name of the stream to an audience, as some have supposed, is because the substantial improvement was revealed by a very reliable angler, who had grown up near and fished the stream since his youth. The stream has been on the wild trout list probably since it was first released, so it has not been a secret. The local angler's report of the improvement and his reliability was the sole reason for the survey, as there was the possibility of finding a Class A equivalent population in an improved limestoner. Reliable anglers are a valuable informational resource."


Man, I called that one from a mile away. It's respect for the person that promted the survey. I've been on the other end too and am grateful that Mike isnt dumping all the info I give him to everyone and their mother. If he did....I wouldn't tell him stuff anymore. Mike has proven to be a trusted person to me and I dont trust many.

 

[poopdeck]

I enjoy Mike's posts. I really don't know why it puts himself through it.

 

[Chaz]

The_Sasquatch wrote:

troutbert wrote:
My guess:

The upper part of Tulpehocken Creek.

And the reason for the large improvement in trout populations is probably due to improvements in flow, caused by changes in operations of the limestone quarry up there.

Any other guesses?

Thought about that, but that's in Lebanon County and I thought Mike said this was Skuke.

That is still in the Schuylkill Basin. Clearly not urban though.

 

[FarmerDave]

It's Shut Your Pie Hole Creek.

 

[joebamboo]

No offense taken FarmerDave

 

[wildtrout2]

poopdeck wrote:
I enjoy Mike's posts. I really don't know why it puts himself through it.

Same here. I've often wondered this myself. I guess that's just old school commitment and dedication to duty. Wait, isn't that what fidelity is? It is, it's just that I see this so rarely I'd forgotten what it looks like. Mike's good people, we need more like him! And, it's not every day somebody comes up with a 100 post thread. lol

 

[Acristickid]

PA as a whole has gotten better and or at least the Laurel Highlands. Most mountain streams have some number of brookies and now add to that wild Browns.

Also, I have a circle of 10-15 fishing buddies and half of them fish very hard- once a week or more and 2 of them caught wild tigers within the last year. One buddie caught 2 or 3 in the last year. To me, that's an indication things are better at least in the Laurels.

 

[foxfire]

yes, acristickid, the past two years I've caught more wilds from streams that probably never had them. Mainly due to habitat, and sewage improvement programs.

 

[jdaddy]

JackM wrote:
Let him who has not posted an uninteresting thread throw the first stone.

You must have a bucket full of rocks then because IMO JackM posts are the end all be all of informative posts. Likely the most interesting man in the world, particularly live in person.

There are any number of reasons that Mike may have chosen to not name the stream. One of the biggest things I can think of is that it may be on private land and he is concerned about traffic leading to posting of the property.

Or in other words . . . .