Cattaragus creek (fly fisherman article) conservation issue

[jayL]

They are discussing dam removal, which opens up a significant piece of water. What's interesting is that they claim they should become self sustaining:

The upper cat and its tributaries ... have better water and spawning habitat than any of the tributaries downstream of Springville dam. because these streams already support thriving populations of naturally reproducing rainbow and brown trout (and some native brook trout), excellent populations of wild steelhead could develop.

It does make brief mention of the conflict with resident trout.

What are your thoughts on this. I am unsure about wild trout populations around erie, but this is an interesting potential issue. What is your stance, and what do you think the outcome would be?

I love steelhead, but would not support it. I do believe that it will happen.

 

[RLeeP]

I am against any alterations to any Great Lakes tribs that would imperil standing wild pops. of resident stream trout. So, I would be against any alterations to Cattaragus creek that would expose resident wild trout pops to competition from steelhead.

In my view, it is bad enough this entire circus has been created without additionally screwing up long-standing wild trout pops. But that's just a personal viewpoint.


It isn't (nor is it likely to become) an issue in any of the Pennsylvania tribs. The few streams in the watershed that turn any wild fish of their own are dominated by browns and available spawning habitat is very limited. Nor do I think the steelhead strains used by 3CU and/or the Commission and the timing of the runs lend themselves to the potential of this happening. There simply isn't very much quality groundwater in the drainage, even in the small, 1st order streams with all the attendant difficulty this would produce for eggs, swim up and yoy fish.

This is not to say the PA tribs do not already produce some wild steelhead. They almost certainly do. But I don't think they are much more common than high quality sweet corn from Neptune.


PS: As an addendum, none of what I say necessarily applies to the Conneaut Creek drainage which is quite long and unique among the PA tribs in the nature of its substrate and groundwater abundance in its upper watershed.

 

[AlwaysWading]

The PA tribs harvest very few if any native steel head that simply is the fact. It basically is a water issue and sadly those waters are simply not conducive to that final extension of spawns; little native fish. That will really never change, but then as long as we keep putting in the numbers we do each year, the runs will still be productive.

The only real issue I see on the tibs, is certain groups of people come in and fish out an entire run on a stream. If you wipe out an entire run on a stream, just what do you expect to have coming back in years down the road? Clean out a run and that run is gone forever. It is simple conservation on our part that will allow us to enjoty the tribs year after year, let's not mess it up.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

This is very interesting. Im sure removing the dam will return the historic fish populations of steelhead. This is assuming that wild steelhead pops existed in that watershed. I donot agree with destroying what we have without real knowledge that we will get more bang for our buck than what is already there.

Return to stream to normal or leave it alone?

I vote leave it alone. Then again i dont live in that area, have never fished that creek and only hope to in the future.
so MHO doesnt really matter here ;-)

 

[jayL]

Sal,

I believe the steelhead fishery there is fully dependent on stocking. It would be a purely introduced fishery that would impact existing native and previously introduced desirables.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Well going by what you say Jay then i sure wouldnt change things.

I know i wouldnt want a stocked fishery over a already wild one.

 

[jayL]

That's the thing. The steelies could potentially start a fully wild fishery. The "historic" population of steelies in the area, though, is zero. The dam was there before the steelhead fishery was introduced.

As nice as a big run of wild steelies would be, I can't support it in the name of displacing wild trout.

 

[RLeep2]

>>The only real issue I see on the tibs, is certain groups of people come in and fish out an entire run on a stream. If you wipe out an entire run on a stream, just what do you expect to have coming back in years down the road? Clean out a run and that run is gone forever.>>

If you're talking about the PA tribs, I have a hard time seeing how it could ever happen given that the entire thing is more or less of a Fritos fishery. Regardless of how many fish are taken, the Commission and the aligned area sportsman's clubs (as in 3CU) just make more and the number of fish available is never really diminished. Indeed, if there is a trout fishery in all of Pennsylvania (outside and in additon to some of the bathwater regular stocked streams around the state) where the average angler should have no compunctions whatsoever about taking fish out, it would be this one, IMO.

I mean, that is after all one of the primary things that makes the fishery so good/popular. The creeks host probably 800% of the number of fish that nature would ever allow were it left to nature.

 

[dano]

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/fishpasscattck.pdf

I've been against this proposal from day one.
They already have 30+ miles of stream to fish. The degree of impact by building a passage is unknown. That's good enough for me to base my decision.
Well, there is another self-interest reason.I also have a couple acquaintances who fish the spring hatches for trout on the upper end and they feel all those aggressive YOY steelhead would be a nuisance, especially during dry fly season. That along with the added number of fishermen disturbing their peace on a quiet April afternoon, and hogging all the good pools, quite possibly putting down rising trout.