Changes to regulations in the offing for some streams

[pcray1231]

They don't clean out Oil Creek in the general reg areas. I've had lots of very good trout fishing there in late June and early July (in a cool year, anyway).

They do clean out near the access points pretty quick. But it's a nice situation that they drive the stocking truck on the bike trail, and stock lots of places away from parking access points. Generally, those who hike or bike to fish are not the one's taking limits.

 

[pcray1231]

If you fly fished and then picked up a spinning rod, you WOULD then have access to 100% of the stream. Wouldn't the same be true if you dad (or anyone else) if they set down a spinning rod and picked up a fly rod? Got ya on that one.

The difference is that virtually everyone who fly fishes could indeed have some success with a spinning rod. The opposite is not true. The learning curve for fly gear is much taller, and lots of people simply don't have much hope.

Like I said, under your scenario, it would be equal if you said "this area for artificials only" and "this area for bait only". Yeah, both sides can use the other sides gear and get access to 100%.

I'm not really arguing with you. As it is now, the amount of water off limits to spinning gear/bait types is very low, and it isn't a problem at all. It's gotta be well under 1% of stocked water being off limits to bait. The thought of taking 50% of EVERY stream, though, would change that equation in a heartbeat. It's simply not needed in that much area. Regulations should be as unrestrictive as possible. A famous stretch that sees lots of pressure? Ok, yeah, it makes sense. But we should not be adding restrictions to areas which don't really need them.

 

[salmonoid]

JackM wrote:
The thing about these armchair management discussions that perplexes me is the tendency of us to think that the best management of a stream to satisfy our own enjoyment is the best way for everyone's enjoyment. It clearly is not-- not by a long shot.

Does anyone have research numbers that show the economic impact/license sales for those that identify with fishing for stocked trout vs. those that identify predominantly with a wild trout (mostly C&R) experience? The latter numbers are likely in higher proportion here, but those numbers don't pay the bills. There are good arguments that the bills could be reduced if there was less stocking, or that there could be more bang for the bill if stocking remained at the same level but was concentrated on marginal waters and removed from waters supporting some sort of natural reproduction.

Of course the sentiment on a (mostly) C&R FF site is that creeling a fish is a waste. The opposite side of that coin to a person that does creel a fish is that releasing a fish is a waste. Neither side is right nor wrong. If your goal is to have a stab at a fish again (or allow someone else to have a stab at it), then fish C&R. If you are hungry, creel your legal limit. There are thousands of miles of waterways in the Commonwealth to allow both viewpoints to coexist.

While we go about our infighting, the anti-fishing crowd will further mobilize and marginalize public sentiment against anglers.

 

[Mike]

Bingsbait: Noboby will be cleaning any creek out with the proposed two fish creel limit in place, especially at the time of the year that it would go into effect.

 

[MD_Gene]

Maurice, You sound as militant as I feel about this kind of stuff.

 

[Chaz]

Yawn!!!

 

[troutbert]

In the second part of the article, it discusses the proposal to allow stocking of some Class A streams.

These Class A streams have been stocked for years, "under the radar." But what will be voted on in January is a formal approval of continued stocking of certain Class A stream sections, which would be a change from the former stated policy of not stocking Class A streams.

The article says it's a "done deal", but then says it will be voted on in January.

 

[alatt]

I think thats going to hurt trico fishing in the tully, it already gets poached. TCO in Reading can't be very happy about this

 

[krayfish2]

alatt,

I'm guessing the prolonged 79 degree water releases and 5000 herons are probably hurting it more so than poachers.

 

[Mike]

Legal harvest by anglers in the Tully DH Area is minimal based on angler interviews. It is so low that it is not worthwhile considering as a limitation on the number of trout that survive the summer in comparison to the stream's water temp problems and low flow assisted avian predation impacts. The primary thermal refugia do not have the carrying capacity to support the numbers of trout stocked.

Very good numbers of trout are present in the stream in late June despite harvest with a three fish creel limit being allowed starting on June 15. The new regulation proposal would reduce the creel limit to two fish. That is highly unlikely to be attractive to harvest oriented anglers. Some of these considerations surely apply to some other DH Areas as well.

I would add that if the fall stocking program goes by the wayside in the DH Area, then there will be even more trout available to stock in spring, substantially more.

 

[bingsbaits]

Thanx Mike, didn't catch the part with the 2 fish limit.

 

[BrookieChaser]

Salmonoid, to answer your question in post #23, the number is 1% of anglers buying a license target only wild fish. 34% target only pelletheads. The remaining is a mixed bag.

That is from a 2008 survey cited in the current PFBC trout management plan.

 

[Mike]

"Legal harvest by anglers in the Tully DH Area is minimal based on angler interviews." I found the specific figure that goes along with this statement. Sixteen percent of the anglers interviewed during the harvest period (late June) had harvested at least a single trout from the Tully DH Area over the previous five years. Some of those volunteered that only the single or few fish that were bleeding had been harvested during that time period.

 

[Chaz]

Getting back to Pine Creek, the number of fish stocked in this section during the fall should not be reduced, it gets heavy traffic during the fall, I know I fish there.

 

[CRB]

Sounds like it is a done deal and harvest starts 4th weekend in May.
Commissioners and PAFB make is sound so bad that kids cant fish.

I predict license sales will continue to drop as the baby boomers purchase life time licenses. The younger generations will have to work more to pay for the Social security clan and that will not afford the time off to fish. ;-)

 

[afishinado]

Here is a link to TCO, the shop that depends on fishing and fish in the Tully and does a lot to help out the stream with Tully TU. Included in the link is a letter to the PFBC from the Tulpehocken TU about the proposed changes in regs.