tomgamber
Well-known member
I'll put Jack on standby.
TimMurphy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 2,866
Dear Dave,
I'm reading from "My Back Pages" if you know the old Bob Dylan song. I'd die trying to do some of the things I used to do. That said, it might be worth the try!
Regards,
Tim Murphy
DaveKile
Administrator
Staff member
Okay I don't want to fish with you then.Dear Dave,
I'm reading from "My Back Pages" if you know the old Bob Dylan song. I'd die trying to do some of the things I used to do. That said, it might be worth the try!
Regards,
Tim Murphy
TimMurphy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 2,866
Dear Dave,Okay I don't want to fish with you then.
Ashes to ashes and dust to dust. Just leave me to the Earth. Woodland creatures will live long and prosper over my remains.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
KeviR
Active member
Frank - that's impressive to catch the same fish 3 years apart. Especially that fish. It's equally impressive that you have pictures of it from the same side both times and made the connection. After seeing Bob Bachman's presentation about identifying individual trout from the spot patterns, I've found a few examples where I could identify an individual caught multiple times and always find it interesting. Do you always photograph fish in that orientation for identification purposes?
Last edited:
F
FrankTroutAngler
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 323
I tend to hold the trout in my left hand for photos and hold the camera in my right hand because it is comfortable. Usually this means I'm photographing the right side of the trout, but not always, because I sometimes hold them with the head pointing toward me showing their left side. I don't do it for future identification purposes. None of the brookie photos I posted here were "flipped," but I often do that in my photo essays on FB or HPA to add variety to the photos.
When I got home on the day I caught the 16" native brookie the very first photo I called up to match-up the spots was the photo posted here above the 16"er when it was 14.5". I just had a hunch it was the same trout.
KeviR
Active member
And given what Mike posted about ST growth rate, that's a really old fish at 16".
T
troutbert
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 10,767
How old do people think that 16 incher is? I don't know, but I'll guess 6 years.
wildtrout2
Well-known member
Six or seven years old would be my guess. That's a BIG native.
F
FrankTroutAngler
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 323
My guess is 8 or 9 years old and more like 9. If it were only 6 years old this means that it would have had to grow to be nearly 14.5" in roughly its first 2 years, 8 months of life. We already know for sure that it grew only about 1.5" in nearly the last three years between being caught as a 14.5"er and a 16"er.
For the record, I released it when it was caught at 16". It was actually more like 16.25" as I recall but I always round down to the nearest 1/2" when necessary.
wildtrout2
Well-known member
No matter what the age, that's an extremely rare native for Pa. Probably the equivalent to a 200" typical whitetail buck.
Last edited:
tomgamber
Well-known member
I'm not sure if it translates but growth rates of any fish is relative. Excuse another Idaho anomaly. 7 year drought. Reservoir is all but, if not totally dry. 20 ft snowpack the next year. Reservoir fills up for first time in a couple years. Rainbows stocked in March, grow to 20+ inches by September. Spent a day getting dragged all over the Reservoir, in my float tube, by these fish. We almost didn't fish it. We were just on our wat home and noticed the Reservoir actually had water for a change. Took a couple home. They were almost like steelhead and nicely colored. Checked the stomach during prep and found them full of snails. Good food. Big fish.
wildtrout2
Well-known member
I always do the same. I'm right handed, and much more coordinated using that hand to hold my phone/cam to take pics, so as not to drop it into the water. I use the LIFEPROOF phone case, which is waterproof, but still.
Last edited:
M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,550
That was a drought-caused, in that case, known fisheries management technique to the extreme. Partial drawdowns prior to or during early to mid growing season followed by flooding of terrestrial vegetation that has grown in the space created by the drawdowns are standard practices used in fisheries management to stimulate fish growth and create ideal spawning/nursery habitat depending upon the species and the objective. Flooding the vegetation releases nutrients that stimulate primary and secondary productivity. You don’t see this intentionally done much if at all in Pa’s various agencies’ impoundments not because AFM’s aren’t aware of the benefits and technique, but because of limited maintenance staff time to make frequent adjustments to the discharge, problems with spreading aquatic plants farther out into the lakes, concerns that lowering the recreational pools will expose boaters to more hazards, and because boating and beach facilities are not designed to function at lower water levels.
Last edited:
5footfenwick
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 144
Mike,
I have often heard that larger sized brook trout populations won’t be back. There isn’t a way to get rid of the browns, there isn’t a way to reshade the creeks.(ie restore 500 year old trees to the banks) Etc.
If our state ever did decide to try and restore a single watershed to a brook trout fishery. Which one would they pick? Which one could brook trout make a comeback in? If Any?
My friends and I have often debated this around the campfire after a day of fishing. Usually involving a little whiskey and even littler trout…Loyalsock? Lycoming? Kettle? Beech creek ?What do you guys think?
I have often heard that larger sized brook trout populations won’t be back. There isn’t a way to get rid of the browns, there isn’t a way to reshade the creeks.(ie restore 500 year old trees to the banks) Etc.
If our state ever did decide to try and restore a single watershed to a brook trout fishery. Which one would they pick? Which one could brook trout make a comeback in? If Any?
My friends and I have often debated this around the campfire after a day of fishing. Usually involving a little whiskey and even littler trout…Loyalsock? Lycoming? Kettle? Beech creek ?What do you guys think?
wildtrout2
Well-known member
If it were up to me, I'd start with the upper Kettle Creek Watershed. It shows a lot of promise.
jifigz
Well-known member
From my limited knowledge on the subject and from my angling experiences in various watersheds, I would have to agree.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,765
Not to send this thread down a road that will lead to its demise, but I’d lean more toward a watershed that is impaired and doesn’t yet have any, or many, Brown Trout. Upper Kettle, and the tribs in the upper watershed have lots of Brown Trout.
Beech Creek, if it could be cleaned up, would be an interesting one. Mosquito Creek in Quehanna Wild Area would be another. Bennett Branch maybe. Mehoopany and Schrader would be others IMO, that are probably capable of it now, if the stockers could be kept out of them. Maybe upper Bowmans, but there’s definitely at least some Browns up pretty far. Those options, where no, or few, Brown Trout are already present is where I’d start.
Maybe 30 years ago the Skuke County coal creeks would have worked, but they’ve all had Browns introduced, and are now mostly Browns, with a couple exceptions I’m going to choose not to name.
Beech Creek, if it could be cleaned up, would be an interesting one. Mosquito Creek in Quehanna Wild Area would be another. Bennett Branch maybe. Mehoopany and Schrader would be others IMO, that are probably capable of it now, if the stockers could be kept out of them. Maybe upper Bowmans, but there’s definitely at least some Browns up pretty far. Those options, where no, or few, Brown Trout are already present is where I’d start.
Maybe 30 years ago the Skuke County coal creeks would have worked, but they’ve all had Browns introduced, and are now mostly Browns, with a couple exceptions I’m going to choose not to name.
T
troutbert
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 10,767
How far up have you caught wild browns in Bowmans Creek? I fished for brookies up in the Gamelands a few times and never caught a wild brown.
But that was some years ago, when Bowmans was unstocked up in the Gamelands. Since running into lots of hatchery trout up there, I quit fishing it. My understanding was that it is being stocked by some club, not the PFBC.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,765
The last time I fished it, June 2022, I did only catch Brookies. I was the area of the mouth of Beth Run. Nothing of any size, but it did fish well that day.
I don’t recall exactly how far up the main stem I’ve caught a Brown. Roughly mouth of Cider Run maybe? I’ve caught them well up Cider Run too. Been probably 4 or 5 years since I was in that area.
That’s why I think Mehoopany and Schrader are better candidates. I don’t think there’s Browns in those, other than stocked ones.
Latest posts
-
R
-
-
E
-
LDoes anyone know if it’s viable to raise a trout streams PH?
- Latest: lycoflyfisher
-
E
