M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,558
Fisherman’s Paradise special regs were not wild trout management any more than today’s Keystone Select waters are managed with wild trout in mind just because some wild trout are present in some of those projects. When the Paradise was started, it was a Fish For Fun Project and I believe that like those FFF projects that followed, it was likely a stocked trout program from the get-go. (It appears that Spring Ck was first stocked with adult trout in 1930 or 1931). Wild trout contributions to stocked fisheries and their management within stocked fisheries were not considered until the implementation of Operation Future in 1982.
The Little Lehigh FFF was another example of a FFF Project in which a good wild trout population was present. FFF Projects were also established in sections with few or no wild trout. E Br Antietam Ck’s was an example of that.
The first Pa special reg that specifically targeted a wild trout population because of population concerns (ST) or harvest impacts on population size structure was at Big Spring, Cumberland Co.
And again, by the time that any special reg was specifically applied to a wild trout population in Pa (not a wild trout population that was being stocked over with adult trout), select BG lakes and ponds should have had special regs that matched the biology (behavioral ecology) of the species in order to prevent stunting in high harvest fisheries. This , of course, would have been in an ideal world where BG behavioral ecology would have been understood long before it was.
Last edited:
TheAppalachianAngler
Member
Yes and it was a mistake.
History has shown the native fish needed special regs before over harvest occured along with logging.
Had they had it, over harvest would not have occured. That was a long long time ago.
We can disagree but you haven't addressed the main point.
Even still the first special reg was on a wild trout water. Special regs, according to the PFBC, occur for biological AND SOCIAL reasons.
Another thing you are ignoring.
M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,558
That’s right…BG and Brook Trout. Brook Trout are “mountain bluegills,” or they were for kids who grew up (grow up) in mountainous Pa areas with few, if any, farm ponds or public lakes that could be reached by foot or bicycle.
M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,558
Not really; I wrote that a lot. One of my specialities was the use of special regs in stocked and wild trout fisheries. The social aspect was FFO, referenced that way because such management is biologically unnecessary..
Last edited:
TheAppalachianAngler
Member
M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,558
But I did. The main point was proper BG management using special regs in select waters and what better historical management of that species since it was in Pa would have looked like had the impacts of overharvest of large males been understood. Wild Trout special regs were only mentioned to make the point that BG needed special regs in select waters more than wild trout did.
Last edited:
TheAppalachianAngler
Member
In Pennsylvania watersheds, more than a third of historic Brook Trout populations no longer exist, and another 39 percent of the state's watersheds host Brook Trout populations now less than half their original size.
I didn't realize BG had a greater loss. And that loss was the reason essentially the PFBC eventually formed. Continue...
Pennsylvania Trout Fishing, 1866-2018
One of Pennsylvania’s signature spring events involves spending time out in the creek, river, or on the lake trying one’s luck at catching a trophy trout. With the opening day of trout …
nwpastories.com
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,818
I’ve taken up internet forums as a substitute pastime for fishing. It’s better for the fish. We should really just give them a break and let them be.
If you really want to have some fun, buy a Toyota body on frame product, take pictures of your brand new frame, and go to a 4Runner or Tacoma forum and in one of the frame rust threads, make a post and ask if you should take yours in for recall inspection. Beats the heck of out fly fishing for invasive species.
TheAppalachianAngler
Member
Well in reality I'm pretty new here and I'm not sure why you would say this .
I fish in 5 different states and pretty frequently. Tomorrow I'm traveling to NC for 5 days.
I just see a false premise here being peddled, I suppose conversation on native brook trout is frowned upon in a fishing forum? How odd?
I didn't even bring up wild trout in a BG thread, Mike did.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
oh yea prioritizing something thats not supposed to be here while espousing that native brook trout are restoration goal in the state wild life action plan but doing nothing in real life is what PFBC good at. Like those those brown trout species specific protections the more the public and fisheries science community disapproves of how brook trout are managed the harder they double down on their cash cow, invasive species.In Pennsylvania watersheds, more than a third of historic Brook Trout populations no longer exist, and another 39 percent of the state's watersheds host Brook Trout populations now less than half their original size.
I didn't realize BG had a greater loss. And that loss was the reason essentially the PFBC eventually formed. Continue...
Pennsylvania Trout Fishing, 1866-2018
One of Pennsylvania’s signature spring events involves spending time out in the creek, river, or on the lake trying one’s luck at catching a trophy trout. With the opening day of trout …
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
“Native brook trout”
“Species of greatest conservation need”
“Conservation vs. fishing”
hooker-of-men
Well-known member
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
Once they get head control ya gotta take the little ones out on the stream in a chest pack. Its genius, you tell your wife you will
Watch the baby and they do nap time in the baby carrier. You just need diapers, wipes, and your limited to in-between feedings so ya go local and after dinner to beat the heat.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
You’ll notice SOME aberrations from OP topic are socially acceptable here habitually(wild vs. stocked, tangents ect.) but once you get into the conveniently accepted falsehoods driven by fishing bias that are holding back conservation it become suddenly not ok to go off topic even if you joined in later or last.
coyoterahn
Well-known member
You’ll also notice that many posters here enjoy fly fishing discussions and prefer not to banter back and forth forever on a topic that becomes preaching to the choir. Especially those times when we’re trying to separate the fly shi*t from the pepper. 😳🤷♂️🤔
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,818
My post (#69 above) was 100% a joke. I think most who have been around for any period of time know that. My apologies, if you took anything personally with that. That was not my intent.
The remainder of this post is serious, and not tongue in cheek. I’ve largely given up on commenting on threads where native vs. invasive species discussions (usually, but not always, dealing with native Brook Trout) derail the original topic of the thread. And I think I’ve been doing a general good job at that. I find it off-putting, given the frequency at which it occurs, even though I agree with most of the pro Brook Trout discussion points, and found it interesting that someone relatively new to the forum found it odd, if not altogether off-putting. (I don’t want to put words in Kyle’s mouth, just inferring from the context clues of his post.)
It’s not the discussion itself I mind, it’s the frequency and location of which it occurs. Many of these discussions occur in threads that originally had nothing to do with Brook Trout or native vs. invasive topics (like this one) and often ultimately devolve into a discussion about the ethics of fishing for Brook Trout (or whatever native species) at all, which is the point I was mainly poking fun at. The last sentence of Kyle’s post that I responded to is the bottom line…fish more, argue on fishing message boards less. Good life advice.
I’ll go back over and hang out on the Toyota board for a while again. Just washed my undercarriage.
Last edited:
TheAppalachianAngler
Member
Hmm. Perhaps this board isn't for me.
I have like 20 total messages, mentioned brook trout once but only in reply to how Mikes comparison is off when you consider them and it's like it is making ears bleed.
Think I'll just stick to the WV, NC, TN, MD and NY boards.
Ill actually be a consultant at Toyota Next week for a few days and it is going to afford me time in the Smokies.
Semi retirement/Consultant is they way to go. You can travel more, fish more.
I recommend it.
I have like 20 total messages, mentioned brook trout once but only in reply to how Mikes comparison is off when you consider them and it's like it is making ears bleed.
Think I'll just stick to the WV, NC, TN, MD and NY boards.
Ill actually be a consultant at Toyota Next week for a few days and it is going to afford me time in the Smokies.
Semi retirement/Consultant is they way to go. You can travel more, fish more.
I recommend it.
tomgamber
Well-known member
Maybe search the words, invasive, brook trout or fish sticks and check those results. i think you'll understand.
BTW have you figured out that Mike was a PAFC biologist? My apologies if I missed it.
BTW have you figured out that Mike was a PAFC biologist? My apologies if I missed it.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,818
Yeah. Most folks on here agree with a pro Brook Trout agenda for PA. They just don’t want to read about it in a thread about Bluegills. The native fish movement on here has definitely affected the behavior of the message board. Having been here before that movement took hold.
A lot of folks who are frequent posters otherwise just stay out of those discussions when they start now. Myself included usually, though I regrettably took the bait here…But a good reminder of why I usually don’t. There’s definitely some folks whose posts I miss, and others who now post very infrequently. The timing of their departure / decrease in posting activity coincides with the arrival of the native fish movement. Just coincidence maybe, but I’m close friends with one such former poster and can confirm his lack of activity is a direct result of being turned off by all the native Brookie/invasive Brown thread derailments. And a second who hasn’t directly said that, but has certainly implied it makes him uncomfortable to post anything.
I’m a huge Toyota fan, BTW. Cool you get to work with them. For the record, I’m definitely in the camp that they (now) build frames as good as anyone from a rust protection standpoint, you just have to take care of them if you live in a rust belt/salt for the Winter area. (Power wash the undercarriage at the car wash once the roads dry after every Winter weather event. Yes, every time. Then once a year, Spring usually, crawl under your truck for an afternoon and wire brush any rust that’s starting on the welds clean, and touch up with a Rustoleum type product.)
This is my 2017 4Runner, six years old.
Last edited:
