Catch and Release on the Tully

[dshaffer]

Just want to let everyone know that the PAFBC has not really rejected our efforts, but said they were going to withhold making a decision until they have formulated new rules.
Here is an exert from the letter I received from Leroy Young:

In 2009 the PFBC completed the Strategic Plan for Management of Trout Fisheries in Pennsylvania. This plan laid the groundwork for our trout management work from 2010 through 2014 and that work continues to the present. Over this period we've addressed a majority of the 25 issues that were identified as areas of focus, and completed many of the accompanying "Strategies" that were identified. Issue 11 of the plan stated "Criteria for the inclusion of waters into special regulation programs for trout fisheries are lacking and the degree to which special regulation programs are meeting management objectives needs to be evaluated." One of the strategies identified to address this issue was to develop specific criteria that trout waters must meet in order to be included in the special regulation program. This is one of the strategies that was not fully addressed during the term of the plan, although staff have developed a draft policy which is currently under internal review. This is among a number of issues that staff plan to bring forward from the previous plan and address in a new trout plan that is scheduled for completion at the end of 2015. Because the special regulation policy is currently under development and due to the fact that we are in the midst of developing a new plan, I have determined that we will not be adding any new waters to a special regulation program through the end of 2015.

He goes on to say that biological and social issues are given weight and then states the overwhelming negative response about changing the DHALO regulations.
I just find it interesting that 400 negative responses got them to drop the DHALO changes, but over 1,300 positive responses for Catch and Release on the Tully is apparently not enough to sway them.
Anyway, THANKS to all that signed the petition! IT IS NOT OVER!
We will continue to try and get the PAFBC to change the small special regulations section of the Tully to C&R ALO.
By the by......it is great to hear that folks are enjoying the holdover fingerlings! This year we will be stocking 5,000 rainbow fingerlings.

 

[dshaffer]

I tried unsuccessfully to break up the above post. My apologies for it being so difficult to read.

 

[Fishidiot]

Wouldn't allow me to edit either - stubborn thread.

Thanks for the Tully update - lots of interested folks here.
( I'm going to move this thread to the Locations forum shortly)
DaveW

 

[FCP]

Now let me see if I got this straight. Was it not just a short time ago, a month or so that the fisheries staff was requesting bait fishing during the harvest period and kids fishing bait year around on all DHALOs. Now they are stating that they will not consider a request to change the Tulpehocken tailwater DHALO to Catch and Release because they are working on a new Trout Plan.

“Because the special regulation policy is currently under development and due to the fact that we are in the midst of developing a new plan, I have determined that we will not be adding any new waters to a special regulation program through the end of 2015. “

The developing a new “Plan” did not seem to interfere with their desire to allow bait fishing on the DHALOs why would it interfere with changing the Tully tailwater to Catch and Release? They would not be adding new water to the special regulation program. The Tully already is special regulation water. They would just be changing from DHALO to Catch and Release.

Also I had the impression that a formal request for the Tully No Kill was made in late January or early February. It really took the fisheries staff until now June 9 to state that they are working on a new trout plan and therefore cannot makes any changes at this time. What is going on here? Am I the only one that thinks this does not pass the smell test.

 

[McSneek]

FCP - we're talking about a State agency here. So often what any of them do doesn't seem to pass the smell test.

 

[Fishidiot]

While PFBC (and other gov agencies) may often seem opaque or - in this case - inconsistent. . . we should keep in mind that it does often take such agencies time to respond to certain issues. The higher up the issue concerns people, the longer the response time. Sometimes a request that seems perfectly routine and reasonable to us (like this), can suddenly get rolled into larger "plans," pending issues of funding, or frequently some new vision or mandate from some high up bureaucrat. . .and this just delays everything.

It's the nature of bureaucracy. I'm not saying we shouldn't cast a skeptical eye on the PFBC, but merely that we should not always assume the worst. Oftentimes, its just bureaucratic clumsiness.

(I work hand in hand with a federal agency and if you think the PFBC is slow and opaque, you ain't seen nothing compared to the Feds. By comparison, the PFBC is nimble and transparent!)

 

[dshaffer]

FCP makes some good points. It was the Winter meeting when I submitted the proposal and it took the PAFBC until early April to respond officially after I sent in a second request.

The Tully IS under special regulations and changing to C&R ALO would merely be extending the "no kill" for 3 months.

Maybe that concept is too simple. Maybe the concept of having a partner to stock the Tully WITHOUT COST TO THE STATE is beyond the pale.

Finally on this site there have been and continue to be many many "sightings/catchings" (and release) of rainbow trout that are 14" and fight like hell. Sounds like these are the two year old fingerlings stocked initially. But that can't be because there are no holdovers because the temperatures get too high.

With the mini-drought we had this spring and some streams in the SE PA area are getting into the mid to high 70's. Isn't it interesting that the Tully just and I mean just got to 70 today for a short period of time. The temperatures have remained in the 60's throughout the recent hot weather with little rain.

Now I await the argument that as we get into the latter part of the summer the amount of cold water diminishes and the temperatures are not sustainable therefore we cannot possibly even think of putting a C&R ALO restriction on the Tully, the poor trout will wither and die. Yep those big dumb raceway fish don't know what to do, BUT those fingerlings that have learned to survive over the winter will do just fine. And those that don't will become food for the Great Blue Heron and the minks and any other creature that needs a meal. Nature Happens!

 

[Mike]

Trout do not have to be spring to spring holdovers surviving a summer to produce such fish. Adult RT stocked the previous fall by the PFBC in the Tully DH Area look much like spring to spring holdovers by the time late May and June roll around the following spring. They are 13-15 inches long, colorful, and very robust. The most reliable identifier that anglers can use to determine whether a RT of the size mentioned above was adult or fingerling stocked is to check for the fin clip that was placed on the fingerlings prior to stocking. That is the purpose of the fin clipping.

 

[dshaffer]

Yes, Mike I think we all know that the fin clipping and there have been fin clipped 15" fish caught and reported. These would be two year holdovers from the fingerling stocking since the fingerlings apparently were not clipped last year as reported to me. Please be assured that going forward all fingerlings stocked by TCO and Tully TU will be fin clipped and of the "warm water" variety rainbow,

I also find it interesting that there are many stories of apparent holdovers whether they are fall stocked fingerlngs or spring stocked adults. It is all good!

 

[Mike]

dshaffer: "I also find it interesting that there are many stories of apparent holdovers whether they are fall stocked fingerlngs or spring stocked adults. It is all good!"


Response: ... and it did not require a change in regulations. All it required was a near doubling of the fall adult RT stocking rate. I say this because it was clearly expressed to me this past winter that there had been an increase in "holdovers" (described as being large) and that was expressed before any fingerling stockings would have produced fish of that size. It was also expressed that the increase in holdovers represented an improvement in the Tully.

Some unidentified improvement in the Tully was unlikely in my view. The factor that can be identified that had changed, and apparently flew under angler radar, was a near doubling of the fall adult RT stocking rate. This was done specifically to annually produce an abundance of these 13-15 inch fish by mid to late spring, starting with the spring of 2010 or 2011. These fish did not have to survive summer water temps to produce holdover-like RT.

 

[Mike]

Good to hear that some fin-clipped fingerlings are now ( late spring, 2015) also contributing to that segment of the "holdover" population that is probably largely comprised, based on the past, of 12 to 15 or 13 to 15 inch RT.

 

[dshaffer]

Mike, since you opened this can of worms.....so to speak......how many RT were stocked in the DHALO for each of the last 5 years during the fall? In which sections were they stocked?

 

[Mike]

RT adults were stocked at the normal fall rate per acre from Blue Marsh down to Reber's Bridge through fall, 2012 and then fall stocking was terminated in that stretch through the present as part of the overall reduction in fall stockings statewide. Those fish were transferred back to the spring stockings in that stretch.

RT adults were stocked at nearly double the normal fall rate from Reber's Bridge downstream to the covered bridge from fall, 2010 through fall, 2014, in order to enhance the abundance of very attractive 13-15 inch fish by the corresponding following late springs (May and June). This unique, specialized management was done in response to our field observations in the Tulpehocken; it was not done by happenstance..

 

[pcray1231]

ok, so they terminated fall stockings on half the special regs area, with the purpose of reducing fall stockings. But they doubled it on the other half?

So in essence, the same number of fall stocked RT are going in, they're just being concentrated to the lower half?

Why?

 

[krayfish2]

It's below the two feeders that offer some thermal refuge.

 

[Mike]

The number per acre was nearly doubled in the lower half as a specific fisheries management technique that was different from the purely "recreational fall fishery" experience that was the objective of stocking in the upper half. Additionally, the timing of the actions you describe was clearly independent (years apart) for each action and the reduction in the fall program was not on the radar when the doubling of the rate in the lower half began.

The lower half has better access and the lower half has better growth rates, two of the differences that are most pertinent to the question at hand.

You will note that the DH area has always been comprised of two separate management sections, which can be seen in the PFBC stocking schedule. That's because the sections are different in a number of ways, two of which are mentioned above, plus the one mentioned by Krayfish, plus others as well. This sectioning strategy has also proven convenient and perhaps more effective for the club's stocking of fingerlings. They are supposed to be stocked in the fall in the upper half, away from most adult trout competition and away from anglers attracted to the fall adult trout stocking program.

 

[pcray1231]

Well, ok.

I don't buy the thermal refuge part of it. You're letting them put the fingerlings, which have to survive summer, above the cooling influences. And you're putting the adults, designed only to survive a winter, below.

Likewise, size. Again, you're stocking adult fish where the growth rates are better, and fingerlings where it's worse?

I do understand wanting to keep the fingerlings away from the influences of the adults and the crowds they draw. That makes sense.

But in general, I weigh that against my fundamental philosophy that I'd rather see fish spread out rather than concentrated. I abhor the situation on some streams where roadside areas are loaded with fish and people, and then you walk away from crowds and there's no fish either. I realize the chicken or egg thing. But the management goal should be to spread out the people and the fish, and thus giving everyone a better experience.

 

[Mike]

You apparently assume that there is a lot of pressure there in fall. There isn't. Also, TU sometimes float stocks the adults, but I am uncertain whether or not they do so in fall. Likewise, they have float stocked the fingerlings in the past, including in the 1980's when fingerling stockings worked well, including in the upper half. In fact, for a few years it was one of my greatest frustrations with that DH Area that very few anglers were fishing the lower half. So experience tells us that the fingerlings can, in fact, do well upstream.

As I recall, you have said that when the PFBC used to stock fingerlings you would find them well down in the "bait area." The fingerlings have months to redistribute themselves before they are fished over in spring, and with the number being stocked there is likely to be movement.

Finally, just because I said growth was faster in the lower half does not mean that growth is slow in the upper half, but initially stocking them up there keeps them out of some trouble.

 

[Chaz]

It's a stocked fishery at a tailwater that doesn't provide enough cold water for trout to hold over from year to year most years. Dump a crap load of fish in during the fall and fill it up again in the spring. It doesn't matter how many fish, it only matters that there are fish and PFBC keeps the stocking going. They will make more fish.