Bait Fishing in Special Regs Saucon Creek

Martinlf, thanks should really go to ebroesicke here. He and his Monocacy chapter have really been active on this. I just gave a little background that I was aware of but he's really been leading the effort to inform the mayor, etc. of why wild trout are important and a true asset to Bethlehem and shouldn't be jeopardized because of a few vastly uninformed people spreading misinformation.

Also CLSports, I'm pretty sure the survey the WCO is talking about is the population sampling survey they periodically do. I don't believe it's a specific report on the issue of flooding but rather based on the data from the fish survey they've kind of correlated the several missing or diminished age classes of fish to the several large floods that have happened in the last 10-15yrs. The same goes for the Bushkill in Easton. However an ongoing (and increasing) problem for both streams (and just about all the Lehigh Valley streams) that has likely contributed to the overall decline of the population as a whole is the sediment, which not only buries spawning grounds but also effects many of the hatches. In that regard some of the floods may have actually helped (short term) some by better moving that trapped sediment down out of the system. Removing more and more of the numerous obsolete dams that plague each LV stream will go even further towards hopefully reversing the sediment buildup trend.
 
Thanks for your work on this and keeping us informed. I sent a message to the mayor about this. And I urge others to do the same.
 
Ryan,

I was assuming it was one of the Biologist Reports that the F&BC does periodically that he was talking about. It seems the last one, as shown in an earlier post, was done several years ago (2004).

I am not sure what you mean by a sampling survey. Is this done independently of the biologists reports that they post on their website? I assumed that if he had detailed info like that, then they did a shocking survey of the stream.

As far as flooding issues, it can wash out sediment as well as bring in new accumulation of sediment laden water. This is not a high grade stream that can wash out that much accumulation in one flood event. It will accumulate quicker than it can wash out on a low grade stream especially in the pool areas.

It is quite obvious how bad the flooding gets in that area. You can see the floodplain is quite flat and wide and debris in the trees is a telltale sign of how high and wide the floodwaters get there.

That section needs riparian buffer help as well.


 
CLSports wrote:
Ryan,

I was assuming it was one of the Biologist Reports that the F&BC does periodically that he was talking about. It seems the last one, as shown in an earlier post, was done several years ago (2004).

I am not sure what you mean by a sampling survey. Is this done independently of the biologists reports that they post on their website? I assumed that if he had detailed info like that, then they did a shocking survey of the stream.

As far as flooding issues, it can wash out sediment as well as bring in new accumulation of sediment laden water. This is not a high grade stream that can wash out that much accumulation in one flood event. It will accumulate quicker than it can wash out on a low grade stream especially in the pool areas.

It is quite obvious how bad the flooding gets in that area. You can see the floodplain is quite flat and wide and debris in the trees is a telltale sign of how high and wide the floodwaters get there.

That section needs riparian buffer help as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am talking about the electro-fishing surveys the biologists perform. I've been on several that they've done on the Bushkill in Easton (I'm a member and past president of the Forks of the Delaware chapter and myself and several members and our new president have spoken often on the issues and best theories based on these streams and the data.) I don't disagree at all about the flooding issues, they can indeed help and hurt but on a healthy stream & riparian habitat flooding and high water events in general are natural occurences that help move sediment down and out through a system. It's nature's own power wash. With the amount of dams still remaining (particularly on the Bushkill) combined with the low gradient of these streams AND the increase in sediment laden runoff over the last 20-30yrs unfortunately the floods (for all their destruction) have been one of the only tools in moving some of this sediment that these streams have had.
 
I've been following this thread with a lot of interest since I consider the Saucon to be my home stream. In looking at total stream miles vs. stream miles under special regs and just considering the streams in Lehigh and Northampton County with special regs, there are 81.28 total stream miles in the Bushkill, Monocacy, Saucon, and Little Lehigh Creeks. Of that 81.28 miles, 7.87 miles (9.7%) are under some form of special regulation. (Of that part of those streams that are stocked, I cannot find anywhere on the PFBC site the stream mileage that is stocked.) The Saucon Creek's total length is 14.91 miles and the special reg area is 2.10 miles (14.1%). These figures do not include all the other streams that are stocked. I cannot understand how those who want all the streams stocked and made open to bait fishing can even contemplate an argument that there are not enough bait fishing opportunities available.
 
Thanks for this post and these statistics. I'm still working on hard copy letters to all the commissioners, having emailed my thoughts in previously. I'll send hard copy to the mayor of Bethlehem also, and I'm considering a letter to the governor, for what that might be worth.
 
I've been following this thread with a lot of interest since I consider the Saucon to be my home stream. In looking at total stream miles vs. stream miles under special regs and just considering the streams in Lehigh and Northampton County with special regs, there are 81.28 total stream miles in the Bushkill, Monocacy, Saucon, and Little Lehigh Creeks. Of that 81.28 miles, 7.87 miles (9.7%) are under some form of special regulation. (Of that part of those streams that are stocked, I cannot find anywhere on the PFBC site the stream mileage that is stocked.) The Saucon Creek's total length is 14.91 miles and the special reg area is 2.10 miles (14.1%). These figures do not include all the other streams that are stocked. I cannot understand how those who want all the streams stocked and made open to bait fishing can even contemplate an argument that there are not enough bait fishing opportunities available.
Click to expand...

Didn'tcha know them there anglers are entitled to those fish because they bought a trout stamp.

All the more reason to make a wild trout button to fish unstocked wild sections
 
Me too, if it would stop this kind of insanity. Eric, any word from the mayor? Do we know when the next commissioner's meeting is? A flood of letters before then might get them to think twice.
 
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
I've been following this thread with a lot of interest since I consider the Saucon to be my home stream. In looking at total stream miles vs. stream miles under special regs and just considering the streams in Lehigh and Northampton County with special regs, there are 81.28 total stream miles in the Bushkill, Monocacy, Saucon, and Little Lehigh Creeks. Of that 81.28 miles, 7.87 miles (9.7%) are under some form of special regulation. (Of that part of those streams that are stocked, I cannot find anywhere on the PFBC site the stream mileage that is stocked.) The Saucon Creek's total length is 14.91 miles and the special reg area is 2.10 miles (14.1%). These figures do not include all the other streams that are stocked. I cannot understand how those who want all the streams stocked and made open to bait fishing can even contemplate an argument that there are not enough bait fishing opportunities available.
Click to expand...

Didn'tcha know them there anglers are entitled to those fish because they bought a trout stamp.

All the more reason to make a wild trout button to fish unstocked wild sections
Click to expand...

How does that help? It seems to me that would simply be another reason that those who want the Saucon special regs area changed/eliminated. If anything it should be th eother way around. A special stamp needed to fish stocked areas, the funds going to pay for the stocked fish.
 
That's a great idea Franklin! If the PFBC ever could come up with a way after all these years for that stamp to fund the program it would be great!!! But they haven't....

Simpily, stamp buyers feel entitled to Thier fish.
Trout stamp does not fund wild trout projects , access or the fish.
A wild trout stamp would make it that only those that buy it are entitled to fish for them.
Not a hard concept.
 
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
That's a great idea Franklin! If the PFBC ever could come up with a way after all these years for that stamp to fund the program it would be great!!! But they haven't....

Simpily, stamp buyers feel entitled to Thier fish.
Trout stamp does not fund wild trout projects , access or the fish.
A wild trout stamp would make it that only those that buy it are entitled to fish for them.
Not a hard concept.
Click to expand...

Funding aside I don't think there is a solution to the politics involved. We have people who think they should be able to go to a stream and catch fish. If they can't catch any/many they want more put in. Then they want bigger fish. Put them in as well. We ought to just put in more hatcheries and let the public fish them. No need to transport the fish.
 
franklin wrote:
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
That's a great idea Franklin! If the PFBC ever could come up with a way after all these years for that stamp to fund the program it would be great!!! But they haven't....

Simpily, stamp buyers feel entitled to Thier fish.
Trout stamp does not fund wild trout projects , access or the fish.
A wild trout stamp would make it that only those that buy it are entitled to fish for them.
Not a hard concept.
Click to expand...

Funding aside I don't think there is a solution to the politics involved. We have people who think they should be able to go to a stream and catch fish. If they can't catch any/many they want more put in. Then they want bigger fish. Put them in as well. We ought to just put in more hatcheries and let the public fish them. No need to transport the fish.
Click to expand...

You would still have anglers fishing in the yearling raceway, and lamenting about how small the fish are that PFBC stocked in the hatchery this year :)
 
Still working on this.....
 
Biologist Report added to the PFBC website yesterday:

http://fishandboat.com/images/reports/2016bio/5x05_02saucon.pdf
 
The PFBC report suggests there has been a reduction in physical habitat.

For Saucon regulars, what are your thoughts, observations on that?

Have there been alterations to the physical structure of the stream?
 
Just like the Little Lehigh, I would say there is some degradation from an excess of silt. Upstream development, combined with major floods like Irene have caused plenty of bank erosion and resulting silt/sand bottoms. Bottom isn't as solid as it once was and weed beds can't really get going (a trait of all Lehigh Valley limestoners IMHO). The park area has special issues since it is mobbed many weekends with people swimming and building dams.

However, still a decent wild brown fishery.
 
Yes it appears that the Saucon is starting to suffer the same impacts from development that the LL is having. I do think poaching is also a factor on the special regs section.
 
After reading that Biologist report, I was left wondering why the trout population was so high in 1999? Was there less flooding leading up to that year? And is the decline from 1999 until 2004 a result of heavy flooding in those years?

Well, Tropical Storm Floyd hit that area in late 1999 and Hurricane Irene in 2011. That does seem to coincide with the two main drops in population on those charts. Leading up to 1999 there were fewer major storm events.

These factors, in combination with less stream vegetation, excessive silt buildup, & riparian buffer loss will degrade the habitat and cause fluctuations in population.

 
Another thing I noticed about Saucon is there has been an increased number of Corona bottle caps in the park . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top