Clarks Creek fly sction

Does anyone have a photo of the stream? Never been, and I just can't picture what it would look like that clogged with huge trees. Sounds wild.
Here are some photos from August 2018. There was a huge flooding event that occurred in July while I was out of state. I had heard that there was flooding while I was gone so I went up to see the conditions. I was totally amazed!! The one photo shows a mini sand dune along the bank. There was sand like this all along stream. The other pictures show various views of the same log jam. This one was about 50 yards long and packed pretty solid with only a few gaps where you could see water. Downstream and around the bend from this was another jam but it was even longer than the first though it did have a few more gaps. You could see debris that had been washed up against standing trees as much as 30 yards from the stream bank. During this flood event some of the homes downstream and across the creek from the road had their bridges washed away and the residents either couldn’t leave or get back to their homes.
On my way back home I stopped at the lot at the AT to check it out there. Sand everywhere! The point of land that the creek meanders around upstream from the tubes under the path to the AT was COMPLETELY covered with several inches of sandy sediment!
I have fished Clark at least a dozen times since then and every place I go has long stretches of absolutely flat water filled with lots of this sand/sediment. Such a shame. I never got to fish Clark back when it was in its prime but did get to enjoy it as a much nicer stream than it is currently. I do still enjoy the beauty of the area and some sections of the stream.
 

Attachments

  • CECFBAF7-18B5-47F4-A482-B29AF5ED7130.jpeg
    CECFBAF7-18B5-47F4-A482-B29AF5ED7130.jpeg
    372.4 KB · Views: 97
  • 71E1B270-E3FF-4616-AA4B-E472937EEC9B.jpeg
    71E1B270-E3FF-4616-AA4B-E472937EEC9B.jpeg
    352.8 KB · Views: 97
  • B2771638-5D56-4150-BE78-FF41769C3B66.jpeg
    B2771638-5D56-4150-BE78-FF41769C3B66.jpeg
    475.1 KB · Views: 131
  • 87A84F61-E920-42AA-8F2C-88171EC4A197.jpeg
    87A84F61-E920-42AA-8F2C-88171EC4A197.jpeg
    438.1 KB · Views: 112
I fished it in November (FFO section) & it was awful. Just too many downed trees. But trout are there & surviving. Bait fishermen do well, just toss some minnows or worms & jig them in front of the deep holes. I like to watch them & talk to them to be cordial & represent fly fishers. Plus it's nice to see guys catching trout even if it isn't me. Just make it all open regs is my input but too close to Harrisburg for that to change
The bait guys were fishing the FFO?

If so, I'd still rat them out to the WCO. ;-)
Here are some photos from August 2018. There was a huge flooding event that occurred in July while I was out of state. I had heard that there was flooding while I was gone so I went up to see the conditions. I was totally amazed!! The one photo shows a mini sand dune along the bank. There was sand like this all along stream. The other pictures show various views of the same log jam. This one was about 50 yards long and packed pretty solid with only a few gaps where you could see water. Downstream and around the bend from this was another jam but it was even longer than the first though it did have a few more gaps. You could see debris that had been washed up against standing trees as much as 30 yards from the stream bank. During this flood event some of the homes downstream and across the creek from the road had their bridges washed away and the residents either couldn’t leave or get back to their homes.
On my way back home I stopped at the lot at the AT to check it out there. Sand everywhere! The point of land that the creek meanders around upstream from the tubes under the path to the AT was COMPLETELY covered with several inches of sandy sediment!
I have fished Clark at least a dozen times since then and every place I go has long stretches of absolutely flat water filled with lots of this sand/sediment. Such a shame. I never got to fish Clark back when it was in its prime but did get to enjoy it as a much nicer stream than it is currently. I do still enjoy the beauty of the area and some sections of the stream.
Those photos are depressing...
 
The last time I fished Clarks back in 1986 when I just got back from working 3½ years in Saudi Arabia, my sister lived up just north of Dauphin and I was staying with them for a few weeks. Back then it was fun, but then I was only in my last 30s. This summer again while staying up there with my sister and her husband we drive up Clarks Creek and stopped to take a look the creek and it was overgrown; I didn’t even try to walk over to the creek in most places. The other thing that got to me was the condition of the telephone and electric cables on the power poles all up and down the valley all the way up to the rifle range. Hell some were broken and laying on the ground, and some were sagging almost halfway to the ground. It is so sad the condition of the creek & the valley.
 
Last edited:
This scene was very frequent.
 

Attachments

  • DFDC28B7-C558-49D1-A7FC-512CC2461DB4.jpeg
    DFDC28B7-C558-49D1-A7FC-512CC2461DB4.jpeg
    255.9 KB · Views: 88
...The other thing that got to me was the condition of the telephone and electric cables on the power poles all up and down the valley all the way up to the rifle range. Hell some were broken and laying on the ground, and some were sagging almost halfway to the ground. It is so sad the condition of the creek & the valley.
It's OT, however it amazes me what the telecom industry gets away with in regards to the condition of their cabling infrastructure. I see cables hanging down all the time and all over the place, broken poles and trees leaning on cables just waiting to snap.

In many areas, mine included cell service is so bad regardless of your carrier that we rely on a landline for phone service, the same phone service we MAY need for 911, which is the same 911 service I am paying a surcharge for on my phone bill.

FWIW - I have filed complaints with the FCC against the ILEC's & CLEC's in my area when it effects me to get trees cut and stuff repaired. They hate it when you rat them out, but they won't do the work unless you do...

...THEN the work gets done. 😉
 
Last edited:
It's OT, however it amazes me what the telecom industry gets away with in regards to the condition of their cabling infrastructure. I see cables hanging down all the time and all over the place, broken poles and trees leaning on cables just waiting to snap.

In many areas, mine included cell service is so bad regardless of your carrier that we rely on a landline for phone service, the same phone service we MAY need for 911, which is the same 911 service I am paying a surcharge for on my phone bill.

FWIW - I have filed complaints with the FCC against the ILEC's & CLEC's in my area when it effects me to get trees cut and stuff repaired. They hate it when you rat them out, but they won't do the work unless you do...

...THEN the work gets done. 😉
I have a broken one on my property with duct tape around it. Guess I should complain!
 
Do you think that is reducing the trout population? It's hard to tell just from a photo but it looks like the fallen trees may be adding some better trout habitat.
Folks who have visited recently (which isn't me) have reported reduced flows and a back-up of sand and other sediment. I guess you can draw your own conclusions as to whether this is an improvement in habitat or not.

The last survey I got information about was recent, but only 10% of the stream was surveyed.

Keeping in mind the entire stream is on the Natural Reproduction List, they found both wild brook trout & wild brown trout at the two sample sites located more or less at opposite ends of the sampled section(s). However the numbers surveyed are well below the minimums required for a Class A biomass at 1 kg/ha for BT and .56 kg/ha for ST.

Again, draw your own conclusions.

Based on a comparison to my unscientific catch rates for wild fish long before the "tree problem," I'd say things are NOT looking up.
 
Last edited:
Query.......which is preferable, a trout stream with a higher population of trout, but unfishable because of obstructions, topography, etc., or a stream with a lower population of trout but has plenty of unobstructed access for anglers?
 
I’m sure it provides habitat but as been mentioned it was very frequent. It was a bear to get around the deadfall’s and snags.
 
Query.......which is preferable, a trout stream with a higher population of trout, but unfishable because of obstructions, topography, etc., or a stream with a lower population of trout but has plenty of unobstructed access for anglers?
I'd say in the case of a low biomass stream which despite the presence wild fish is a stocked trout stream, being fish-able is more important especially when you consider angler usage.

I feel this way because I'm the furthest thing from a biologist, however I am NOT in the camp that believes every stocked stream with a few wild fish will become Class A if they stop stocking it.

My sadness over Section 4 of Clark's is that fly fishing there now is a drag and it won't miraculously get better in my lifetime without massive human intervention that isn't likely to happen.

My beef with Section 4 of Clarks is, it is stocked and manged as Fly Fishing Only.

IMHO, if the PFBC is hell bent on continuing to stock it, either clean it up keep and keep it FFO; leave it alone and make it Stocked Trout Water, C&R Artificials Only or DH Artificials Only to which it is better suited...

...or stop stocking it entirely and see what happens in 10 years.
 
My opinion to Afish's Q. It is not about the ease to fish but the loss of habitat over the length of the creek. While I see some locations that likely have fish now that didn't, there are lots of silted in locations that can't clear themselves as this creek used to do. This silt is the sad story to me. It was a pebble bottom mountain creek which is now a silted mess. It's still relatively cold but the water doesn't flush through as it used to.
 
Is the water line still used to supply drinking water? I read that Harrisburg now gets its water from the river. But I don't know if they still use the water line coming down from the dam on Clarks Creek or not.
 
DeHart Reservoir is still the primary raw water supply for Capital Region Water (CRW) who supplies water to the Harrisburg Region.

There is or will be a spillway reconstruction project at the dam, but otherwise things there are normal.
 
Last edited:
Given all of the negative comments about the CRFFO section over the past year or two it seems to me that the angling community could be better served by liberalizing the regs, allowing the use of other gear types that are more effective under the felled tree circumstances that now exist, and probably improving angler use.
Seems like we are always eliminating FFO or DHALO's. When was the last time one was added? There should be more not less. I concede the point that maybe the Clark's FFO could go away, I always did better in the ATW, but why is it such a problem to add more catch and release oriented stream sections when they only comprise less than 1% of the total stocked or wild trout water in the state? I don't think the resource is being wasted when the fish provide multiple fishing opportunities as opposed to hanging from a stringer shortly after being stocked. Just my opinion.
 
Seems like we are always eliminating FFO or DHALO's. When was the last time one was added? There should be more not less. I concede the point that maybe the Clark's FFO could go away, I always did better in the ATW, but why is it such a problem to add more catch and release oriented stream sections when they only comprise less than 1% of the total stocked or wild trout water in the state? I don't think the resource is being wasted when the fish provide multiple fishing opportunities as opposed to hanging from a stringer shortly after being stocked. Just my opinion.
I have zero influence and little insight, but I do know from talking to that region's PFBC fishery folks, reassigning Section 4 from Fly Fishing Only to a different regulation ISN'T something they would recommend or consider without replacing it elsewhere in the region or possibly swapping out the FFO on Clark's Creek with another section (Section 2, 3 or 5) managed as Stocked Trout Waters.

It beats me if a section swap makes sense on Clark's as I am sure the dead hemlock problem is everywhere along the stream and I assume there may be pushback in other sections like Section 5 where you have the children & handicap fishing area and the Dauphin County Angler's & Conservationists facility.

Somehow baring a total dam failure that would wash out all the debris, I have a feeling we are stuck with what we got...
 
Seems like we are always eliminating FFO or DHALO's. When was the last time one was added? There should be more not less. I concede the point that maybe the Clark's FFO could go away, I always did better in the ATW, but why is it such a problem to add more catch and release oriented stream sections when they only comprise less than 1% of the total stocked or wild trout water in the state? I don't think the resource is being wasted when the fish provide multiple fishing opportunities as opposed to hanging from a stringer shortly after being stocked. Just my opinion.
As of three yrs ago there had been a moratorium on the establishment of new FFO waters for nearly two decades. I assume it’s still in effect and for good reasons. As stated a number of times in the past FFO is a remnant of the past when there was little to no scientific knowledge of the low mortality rates also associated with artificial lure fishing. Now we even know that low mortality rates can be achieved with tight line bait fishing. FFO amounts to a social program, as artificial lure (spinning) has limited additional biological impact and it occurs to an extent that is most likely imperceptible to electrofishers, let alone anglers using a whippy-stick.

As for DHALO areas, they have been the alternative to stocked FFO’s and where they had been established had always, at least during my tenure with the PFBC, been at the discretion of the AFM’s based on a number of considerations, not the least of which had been water temps in June and early July, social and access factors, stream size and seasonal flow, habitat for holding stocked fish throughout the spring, proximity of other special reg waters, and “taking” of existing stocked waters for DH purposes, etc. In my case there were stream sections where I sought to establish additional DH management and ultimately one or more conditions proved to be unfavorable.

You may recall that the anglers in the past shot down the idea of opening DH Areas to harvest around June 1. I favored that as an earlier harvest date would have made more waters available for DH consideration because water temps would have been cooler during the earlier allowable harvest period than the period following June 15. While few anglers harvest DH fish, the option is still available for those desiring to do so and cool temps encourage the trout to take lures/flies; warm water temps do not. The idea of DH areas is NOT to push trout to the point that temperature stress is substantial by June 15 such that it inhibits the catching of trout. The original DH areas were selected in streams where water temps were cool until at least July 1, meaning there was at least a 2 week period during which a number of trout could potentially be harvested rather than die due to temperature stress.

A major advantage of these stocked special reg waters has always been the ability to fish them during the traditionally closed late winter/early spring season. With the updated regs regarding fishing outside of stocked trout sections, the knowledge of trout residency results, and the number of wild streams listed, anglers are now equipped to C&R fish a lot more waters during the closed season than ever before. Additionally, with so many anglers practicing C&R fishing in regular stocked trout sections for over a decade now, the argument that these sections are fished out is so much weaker than when the statewide DH program was first established. Even when I fly fish the Tulpehocken I almost never fish the DH area because the fishing is quite good outside of the DH area and I never fish the FFO area on Kettle Ck.

Likewise, I regularly fly fish one of the most, if not the most heavily fished regular stocked trout section known to exist in the state based on angler use and harvest studies, that being the urban section of Jordan Ck, Lehigh Co. Despite this, fly fishing is quite good throughout the spring and up until sometime in late May or early June when the water warms too much.

As for conflicts with bait or lure anglers, I perhaps have one person at most move close to me per year and that’s usually in a narrow stretch where they might take up a position directly across from me very early in the season when less serious anglers may be more common. Big deal…there’s plenty of other water to fish despite the high angler use. This whole idea that I have heard at times that fly anglers need to fish only with other fly anglers who understand the associated etiquette is oh so weak in my considerable experience in waters that most fly anglers would shun.
 
Last edited:
Oh boy... you're just lookin' for a fight... 😉

I avoid FFO's like the plague because they are always more crowded. About the time I decide to visit some local Stocked Trout Waters, the crush is over and many times, I have the whole creek save for a few holes all to myself.

As far as conflicts go, being a bait & conventional fisherman as well, I know how to coexist with my non-fly brethren and usually avoid the stretches where I see bank fishermen with lines out or folks casting lures, just as I would avoid another fly angler working a stretch.

In my long history of fishing, I've had WAY more encounters with discourteous fly anglers than conventional fishermen, but maybe it's my attitude...

My oft repeated $ .02 regarding Clark's losing it's FFO...

I'm not going there to fly fish and neither are a lot of other folks. If it's going to be stocked and managed as FFO, but is severely under utilized because of the issues, I say put the fish elsewhere or add Section 4 to the Stocked Trout Waters list. DHALO may be another option, although lousy casters would lose a lot of lures on all the trees.

To be honest, that section presently is best suited to flipping bait in the openings between the fallen trees and it would be nice if somebody was having fun if I can't because the conditions.
 
Top