Commissioner's Meeting Today: Penns Creek and Big Spring

The Penns Creek proposal was originally to change it to C&R, artificials only, and this proposal came from the commissioners.

Their goal was to increase the number of large trout in the section. They believed that the number of large trout is being limited by the current "trophy" regs, which allows harvest of 2 fish per day, 14 inches and up.

The local fishermen objected to the change to no harvest and to ending bait fishing.

So, they decided to go with allowing harvest of 2 medium size fish, but protecting the larger trout. Again, with the goal of trying to get more big trout in the section.

Whether it will work or not, I don't know. But I think Pat is probably right, i.e. that the population won't change much, because most people are already fishing C&R there.

I don't think the landowners or local anglers are likely to object to this change.

Another reason may be that they wanted to try a slot limit. Other states have done this. It's been talked about for years here in PA. But this will be the first slot limit regs area in PA. If it works out here, they may try it elsewhere, particularly other "trophy regs" areas.
 
So FI's hunch was correct, the change is a compromise made for social reasons primarily: increase the numbers of really big fish for angler enjoyment while preserving the opportunity to harvest some decent fish. If most anglers are already catching and releasing then the occasional removal of 2 fish in the slot should not significantly alter the popn structure ... I think.
No objection.
 
I understand the commission's reluctance to create another new slot limit special regulation in favor of falling back on the C&R Reg, but sometimes compromise requires adjustment.
 
troutbert wrote:
The Penns Creek proposal was originally to change it to C&R, artificials only, and this proposal came from the commissioners.


Another reason may be that they wanted to try a slot limit. Other states have done this. It's been talked about for years here in PA. But this will be the first slot limit regs area in PA. If it works out here, they may try it elsewhere, particularly other "trophy regs" areas.
Click to expand...

Troutbert,
Thanks for the clarification about the original artificial lures proposal.
I was thinking about the slot limit concept this evening and trying to remember if there were any trout streams in PA managed with this regulation. I couldn't think of any off the top of my mind. Thanks for clarifying that this will be the first one. I agree that it probably won't have much effect on population dynamics.... but the PFBC should be commended in my view for being willing to give the slot limit concept a try here in PA.
 
Here we go again, there still has to be a rulemaking process on both of these changes. You will all have a cance to comment to PFBC.
They've got to get rid of Trophy Trout Regs.
 
Chaz: It sounds as though the commission IS proposing to get rid of TT regs on Penns in favor of a slot limit compromise reg. But you don't sound pleased.
 
Browns spawn at about 3 to 4years of age, in Penns that means about 9 to 12 inches+ or -. What it alllows is for fish that make it through the 7 to 12 inch gaunlet to keep growing. I'd like to think it will work, but I have doubts, in part because I don't think anyone has ever really studied this concept. At least PFBC is going to study it, that's a good thing.
Keeping in mind that trout have to change their diet to grow bigger then about 14 inches, I don't see it happening, I hope I'm wrong.
 
In a stable popn, there are fewer fish over 14 inches than any other size class. With that in mind, it makes sense to allow a harvest of fish in a smaller size-slot because there are more of them to lose. Those who know seem to believe that there are relatively few trout harvested from the Penns TT because most anglers are already practicing C&R. So, it should theoretically be better to allow that small harvest to come from a size class that will lose fish through other forms of mortality anyway. Makes sense to me.
 
I'm a fan of the change on Penns creek. I've seen bait guys take some real nice fish out of the trophy section. The big pools below Coburn get fished pretty hard with minnows and worms and I feel strongly that harvesting fish over 14" has a detrimental impact on that section.

I dont' really expect to see a big change in the number of 14"-17" fish from this reg. There are plenty of those fish in Penns now and I don't see that number changing too much. Where I think we may see a change is an increase in the number of fish in the 18"-22" range. It doesn't take very much harvest to put a dent in that population.


 
I don't think you'd get that many in this section in that category regardless of harvest. Penns gets borderline temps. Live that long and their bound to hit a bad summer. And borderline temps harm big fish first.

That said, I think the opposite. If there's going to be any effect at all, it's on fish in the mid-teens. Lowering a population in general tends to lead to a better size structure.
 
I predict it will have a very small impact on the number of 7-12 inch fish for 3 years only.
 
Penns gets borderline temps. Live that long and their bound to hit a bad summer. And borderline temps harm big fish first.
Click to expand...

I did an experiment a few summers ago, when flows were low and stream temps were high. I rigged my thermometer 8 feet below a thingamabobber and threw it out into one of the pools on Penns. Temps in the shallows were in the mid to upper 70s, depending on where you happened to try. The temperature on the bottom of the pool was 66.

Temps on the bottom of the deep pools are not the same as the surface temp, and there are many thermal refuges where fish can find shelter (spring holes and tributaries). It's important to not to fish in these conditions, because when you pull fish out of the thermal refuges it stresses them tremendously to fight a rod in the warm currents. However, if you leave them alone in the refuges they do surprisingly well. I don't think it stresses them all that much except for in the most extreme years.

Penns is far from marginal. There is a substantial populations of wild fish as far downstream as 20 miles below Coburn.


 
For what it's worth, I just spoke to a friend who lives up in Millheim and knows most of the landowners along this stretch of Penns. Apparently they just heard about this proposal too but those he spoke with are in favor of the slot limit approach.
 
Tups actually I like the compromise, it makes more sense then any TT ergulation we have now, because the way the TT regs are now is you remove all the trophy fish from the section. That's not TT regs as a conservation reg. it's a harvest all the big fish so we have more little fish reg.
We'll see what happens, becuase like I said I don't think anyone has studied this concept in the past and now with the experiment PFBC plans to do regular surveys to see how the fishery responds. This is a good thing as long as they have no pre-concieved notions as to how it will turn out.
 
I think this shall be interesting to follow and see how the fish populations and structure may or may not change. Who ever said that Penns is marginal is way off base. The TT section typically maintains temps that are conducive for trout survival for a good distance down stream from coburn. In fact, this stretch becomes a "refuge" area for the trout in the lower river (C&R stretch and below). During summer months, I have seen many anglers (artificial & bait) take large trout from this stretch, dont be fooled that harvest is not occurring in this stretch. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
 
Here's the PFBC press release regarding the changes to Penns Creek:

Slot Limit
 
Penns has become one of my favorite streams. I tend to like larger water, check. Obviously, I favor larger browns, check. Substantial aquatic food tends to make the fish a little pickier, and provides a little more of a challenge. I enjoy the challenge. Finally, I like the remoteness of some of the stretches. Delaware is still my favorite, but Penns is inching up there. Little J might give it a run, but the drive time to get there hurts it. O and I enjoy Jonas. Any shop that provides their personal cell number when they are away on a fishing vacation, and answers any questions, is ok in my book! I can only hope that these slot limits work out for the better.
 
Becker in the spring if you want to run up to Penns during the week or weekend I am game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top