Clark(s) Creek - Streams being considered for wild trout designation (and Class A status)

[Fish Sticks]

I always caught a few small wild browns in what little fast water there was on Clark’s in the FFO section. I had one day where I caught a bunch of decent sized ones that still sticks in my mind. Occasionally caught a native brookie too. I would assume any Class A designation would be above the reservoir. I never went up there.

If there was class A i would assume the same. I have been up there and some sections are long straight and featureless from either obvious manmade channel straightening or bedrock formations that are relatively flat serving as the bottom with no gravel/cobble in some places. Other places however up there are pretty sinuous and have riffle run pool form and have decent numbers of wild brook trout and there are are brown trout up there of course as well.

 

[Fish Sticks]

How big? VERY big. There will be a lot of push back.

They are going to need our support.

They got our support 12 times with no objection on salt run and they still voted to stock it lol.

They had our support with the stocking authorization we promoted that and I was ready to give them credit for that in more public arenas and they killed it for now lol.

No but i agree with you, they will need us pushing. We just have to figure out how to increase “us”

 

[silverfox]

How big? VERY big. There will be a lot of push back.

They are going to need our support.

I just don't think it should be a popularity contest. Sometimes you just have to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

 

[Bamboozle]

Is Section 2 stocked?

Every Section BUT Section 1 is stocked.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I wonder what the total on stocked fish is between state, coop, dauphin county sportsmen, palmyra sportsmen(maybe they just stock stoney I don’t know), pine grove fish and game? ect.

 

[TimMurphy]

I always caught a few small wild browns in what little fast water there was on Clark’s in the FFO section. I had one day where I caught a bunch of decent sized ones that still sticks in my mind. Occasionally caught a native brookie too. I would assume any Class A designation would be above the reservoir. I never went up there.

Dear McSneek,

Twenty years ago when you caught 5-inch fish in Clarks they weren't escapees from the CO-OP hatchery. I used to go to the Appalachian Trail parking lot around 10 AM Opening Day and do an informal survey of anglers as they packed up to go home. If I had a dollar for everyone that had a full chain stringer who complained that they stocked a lot of dinks that year I'd be rich. Most stringers had 2 pasty stockies and 3 brightly colored brooks or browns, they were the dinks.

It made me sad.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

 

[Wild_Trouter]

There were large browns running up Clark's in the Fall that spend the rest of the year in Dehart. I first learned of this and did manage to catch some beginning in 1996. Very hit or miss, but we're talking lake run fish 20"+. I stopped fishing there almost entirely in 2009, so I can't speak to the situation now. I also found about 50/50 mix of brook/browns above Dehart. I wouldn't be surprised if Sections 1&2 are or could be Class A at some point.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Yea i had heard of brookies being caught sporadically near the boy scout camp on clarks. All i have ever caught in lower has been stocked brookies and wild brown trout but from forum memebers and trusted fly fishing buddy at work i know people get em occasionally nowadays in lower clarks.

i’m really interested to hear what PFBC says about the OP’s question and to find out what section that could be and for what kind of proposal, Mixed, brown, brook ect

 

[C_kreek17]

i’m really interested to hear what PFBC says about the OP’s question and to find out what section that could be and for what kind of proposal, Mixed, brown, brook ect

I left a voicemail with the fisheries manager this afternoon. I’ll be sure to post when I hear back from him

 

[TimMurphy]

There were large browns running up Clark's in the Fall that spend the rest of the year in Dehart. I first learned of this and did manage to catch some beginning in 1996. Very hit or miss, but we're talking lake run fish 20"+. I stopped fishing there almost entirely in 2009, so I can't speak to the situation now. I also found about 50/50 mix of brook/browns above Dehart. I wouldn't be surprised if Sections 1&2 are or could be Class A at some point.

Dear Wild Trouter,

If you are old enough to the remember the Big Fish contest in the Patriot-News most years more than one of the top 3 brown trout were caught in Clarks Creek. I'll bet all my money that none of the 6 pounders came from below the dam. They were Fall caught, above the dam, after a big rain.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

 

[salmo]

My son and I caught brookies on Clark’s in the area just upstream from the shooting range, but that was over 12 years ago. They were for sure wild.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I should say while I haven’t caught them in lower clarks I have seen them. Those trickles that one can hardly call streams that interrupt the path from time to time have age zero sized brook trout in them occasionally

 

[salmonoid]

No its not posted up there(above the chains where it dumps into lake) and there is a decent amount of wild native brook trout. Its just stocked really heavily too by clubs not sure about state. I catch all kinds of fugly shaped brown trout with no fins up there. Ashame. That would be another unique life history for brook trout with the deep lake right there if it wasn’t stocked

The lake isn't a native either... Would it be ok to grow bigger native brook trout from a lake made from a stocked dam?

 

[troutbert]

The document says "considered", not "proposed."

I have some vague idea that "considered" comes before "proposed", but I'm not sure of the process. Can anyone help?

I looked through the list, and there are some very interesting streams on the considered for Class A list. It's hard to tell for sure without the section information, but I'm pretty sure some of these are currently stocked, and it would be a very good thing if stocking was ended on them.

It's embarrassing replying to my own post, but...

I think a stream section must have a Class A population two surveys in a row before it is "proposed" as a Class A stream.

When an initial survey finds a Class A population, it is put on the "considered" list, which is what was linked in the original post.

If a second survey also shows a Class A population, then it is "proposed" for Class A, and put up for public comment, then the Commissioners vote on it.

 

[Fish Sticks]

The lake isn't a native either... Would it be ok to grow bigger native brook trout from a lake made from a stocked dam?

Native implies its a living organism. I am not in favor of dams and tail waters. Harrisburgs water supply isn’t going anywhere though.

 

[C_kreek17]

Had a pleasant conversation with the fisheries manager today regarding Clark’s.

From what I gathered, the creek was originally sampled back in the 70s-80s and shown to be a “class c” wild brown stream on section 3, below the dam. This sampling put it on a list for potential consideration. There hasn’t been much in the way of sampling since then, but he said people have been telling him there are more wilds in there now than in the 80s. He’s been eying the creek for survey but there are some logistical issues because they need to sample with pull boats (backpack elctofishers aren’t big enough) and getting those in there is a challenge.

As far as creek being considered for class A, troutbert is right, it will need to be surveyed again and show that it has the biomass to meet the class A standards. If it meets that it’ll be officially proposed for class A. Right now it’s just kind of sitting in limbo on that list until it’s surveyed.

 

[Bamboozle]

Thanks for the update!!

So are we to assume that the "consideration" status for Clarks Creek that was the basis for this thread is only for Section 3, the section that ends up by the Appalachian Trail & gun range?

 

[Fish Sticks]

Had a pleasant conversation with the fisheries manager today regarding Clark’s.

From what I gathered, the creek was originally sampled back in the 70s-80s and shown to be a “class c” wild brown stream on section 3, below the dam. This sampling put it on a list for potential consideration. There hasn’t been much in the way of sampling since then, but he said people have been telling him there are more wilds in there now than in the 80s. He’s been eying the creek for survey but there are some logistical issues because they need to sample with pull boats (backpack elctofishers aren’t big enough) and getting those in there is a challenge.

As far as creek being considered for class A, troutbert is right, it will need to be surveyed again and show that it has the biomass to meet the class A standards. If it meets that it’ll be officially proposed for class A. Right now it’s just kind of sitting in limbo on that list until it’s surveyed.

If a section of clarks turns up class A with any element of native brook trout it will be the ultimate test of if PFBC can find the gonads to tell a bunch of people who don’t know or care about conservation that its not a popularity contest and just like taxes, zoning permits to build near water, ect they can add it yo their favorite list of things to complain about and pound sand.

 

[C_kreek17]

Thanks for the update!!

So are we to assume that the "consideration" status for Clarks Creek that was the basis for this thread is only for Section 3, the section that ends up by the Appalachian Trail & gun range?

That is what it sounds like at this point. Seems like if they do a survey of the lower portion they will also do a survey of the upper. So maybe more of it could be considered at that point

 

[Bamboozle]

IF Section 3 gets any further than "under consideration," becomes Class A and isn't stocked any longer AND the hemlock dead-fall problem is not as severe there as Section 4, (the FFO section) AND Section 4 is NOT Class A...

At the risk of being drawn, quartered and ostracized...

...I think they should make Section 4 a regular "Stocked Trout Waters" section and make Section 3 FFO.

It may lessen some objection to the loss of stocking in Section 3 and Section 4 is VERY under utilized by fly anglers so why not let the conventional crowd drop worms and Trout Magnets into those tiny pockets between the dead trees?

There would be nothing to prevent fly fishermen from fishing Section 4 if they chose to do so but I think it's a waste for the PFBC to continue stocking a Special Regulation Section that is underutilized by the type of anglers for whom it was was created...