Delayed Harvest - Define??

[wbranch]

Moderator; If you deem this inquiry a nuisance please feel free to delete it. I just though I might be able to get some clarification of the policy.

Under the Delayed Harvest policies is there both Delayed Harvest and Delayed Harvest - Artificial Lures Only distinction?

Also I thought that the term "Artificial Lures" was meant to define flies and various metal, plastic, and wood lures with hooks attached. There is a video on YouTube where two guys are fishing the Tully in the early spring. The video begins with one guy above, and another below, Revers Bridge. The videographer is explaining on how they are using Power Bait Pink Worms and how successful they had been in just a few minutes. I think they caught nine trout in just a few minutes.

I just read a proposed policy on the PFBC web site that indicated there were plans to alter the policy to allow the use of bait beginning the Saturday before Memorial Day and extending to Labor Day. The policy was intended to go into effect January 01, 2015.

Does anyone know if this allowing bait policy is in fact now in effect on the Tully? Also is Power Bait, or any scented bait product, now permitted on the Tully. I've been having an exchange on the comments section of YouTube with the guy who posted up the video. He has been telling me repeatedly that he is legal to use Power Bait because it is deemed not to be edible.

The word "edible" is mentioned in the DH policy. I'm thinking though that the creators of the policy meant edible to fish and not humans. If the scent didn't enhance the fish catching traits of the product why would Berkley profess the product is 18X (or some number) better than non scent enhanced product?

I didn't want to continue sparring with the video poster only to find out I was in error and he was, and still is, legal to use scent enhanced lures on the Tully. He told me he knows of fly fishers, on the Tully, who are enhancing their flies with the application of scent.

Here is a link to the video; Tulpehocken

Delayed Harvest rules from PFBC web site;

##Open to fishing year-round.
##Fishing is permitted on a 24-hour basis.
##Minimum size – 9 inches, caught on, or in possession on, the waters under these regulations from one hour before sunrise on June 15 to one hour after sunset on Labor Day.
##The daily creel limit is three trout (combined species) from June 15 through Labor Day, caught on or in possession on the waters under these regulations. From the day after Labor Day until June 15, the daily creel limit is zero.
##Fishing may be done with artificial lures only constructed of metal, plastic, rubber or wood, or with flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials. All such lures may be used with spinning or fly fishing gear.
##Taking baitfish or fishbait is prohibited.
##An angler in a boat may possess bait and fish caught in compliance with the seasons, sizes and creel limits in effect for a water from which it was taken, provided that the boat angler floats through the Delayed Harvest, Artificial Lures Only area without stopping or engaging in the act of fishing or the boat angler puts in or takes out his boat at an access point within the Delayed Harvest Artificial Lures Only area.
##A current trout/salmon permit (or Combination Trout/Salmon/Lake Erie permit) is required.

Would scent enhanced products fall under the phrase "artificial lures"?

 

[afishinado]

wbranch wrote:
Under the Delayed Harvest policies is there both Delayed Harvest and Delayed Harvest - Artificial Lures Only distinction?

Also I thought that the term "Artificial Lures" was meant to define flies and various metal, plastic, and wood lures with hooks attached. There is a video on YouTube where two guys are fishing the Tully in the early spring. The video begins with one guy above, and another below, Revers Bridge. The videographer is explaining on how they are using Power Bait Pink Worms and how successful they had been in just a few minutes. I think they caught nine trout in just a few minutes.

I just read a proposed policy on the PFBC web site that indicated there were plans to alter the policy to allow the use of bait beginning the Saturday before Memorial Day and extending to Labor Day. The policy was intended to go into effect January 01, 2015.

Does anyone know if this allowing bait policy is in fact now in effect on the Tully? Also is Power Bait, or any scented bait product, now permitted on the Tully. I've been having an exchange on the comments section of YouTube with the guy who posted up the video. He has been telling me repeatedly that he is legal to use Power Bait because it is deemed not to be edible.

The word "edible" is mentioned in the DH policy. I'm thinking though that the creators of the policy meant edible to fish and not humans. If the scent didn't enhance the fish catching traits of the product why would Berkley profess the product is 18X (or some number) better than non scent enhanced product?

I didn't want to continue sparring with the video poster only to find out I was in error and he was, and still is, legal to use scent enhanced lures on the Tully. He told me he knows of fly fishers, on the Tully, who are enhancing their flies with the application of scent.

Hey Matt,

The bait proposal you mentioned was voted down. Here is the past thread discussing it.

As for your buddy...he is wrong (turn him in!!) Here is the DH reg as written by the PFBC:

Fishing may be done with artificial lures only constructed of metal, plastic, rubber or wood, or with flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials. All such lures may be used with spinning or fly fishing gear.

Link to source: http://pfbc.pa.gov/fishpub/summaryad/delayedartificial.html

 

[wbranch]

Whoa there! who said he is my buddy?? I don't even know his name. I actually challenged his claims on the legality of the Power Bait.

Thanks for the link to the original thread. You may delete my post if you want.

 

[nomad_archer]

Here is the Delayed Harvest definition http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/058/chapter65/s65.6.html

I don't think you are on the winning side of the argument. Just because the rubber worm is scented doesn't make it edible.

It isn't much different than a squirmy wormy.

 

[nomad_archer]

afishinado wrote:

Hey Matt,

The bait proposal you mentioned was voted down. Here is the past thread discussing it.

As for your buddy...he is wrong (turn him in!!) Here is the DH reg as written by the PFBC:

Fishing may be done with artificial lures only constructed of metal, plastic, rubber or wood, or with flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials. All such lures may be used with spinning or fly fishing gear.

Link to source: http://pfbc.pa.gov/fishpub/summaryad/delayedartificial.html

Slow down he is using a rubber worm sold by power bait that has some scent on it. I think he is fine. He not using the powerbait can of paste.

http://www.berkley-fishing.com/berkley-bait-soft-bait-berkley-powerbait/powerbait-power-floating-trout-worm/1317147.html#q=power%2520worm&start=3

 

[troutbert]

For regulation questions you can just stop at a Walmart and pick up the regulations booklet. No charge.

The regulations are surely all on the PFBC website, too.

I just find the regulations booklet easier to use.

 

[afishinado]

troutbert wrote:
For regulation questions you can just stop at a Walmart and pick up the regulations booklet. No charge.

The regulations are surely all on the PFBC website, too.

I just find the regulations booklet easier to use.

Lol....I posted the link above.

I would call the PFBC office for their interpretation. Scented rubber worms may be legal.

 

[wbranch]

It isn't much different than a squirmy wormy.

Actually it is a lot different than a squirmy wormy in that the SW is just a elasticized product that some people are calling a fly. The Berkley Pink worms have an impregnated scent attractant specifically designed to induce fish to eat them.

How many guys consider the Squirmy Wormy a "fly" and would have no problems using it in a FFO water?

 

[nomad_archer]

The scent seems to be what is in question. I would say that because scent is not specifically addressed as legal or illegal in the regulations and the construction of the artificial worm meets the definition, he would be legal. Honestly the vast majority of rubber artificial lures for the non fly fishermen these day are impregnated with some scent. I don't just see the current regulation as written being interpreted in such a way that scent impregnated artificial lures would be illegal.

We could argue here all day about the interpretation but ultimately it is the interpretation of the conservation officer that matters. Why not contact the Fish and Boat Commission and ask for an interpretation? Let us know what you find out. If these guys are on the wrong side of that interpretation send that video over and let the WCO handle it.

 

[wbranch]

We could argue here all day about the interpretation but ultimately it is the interpretation of the conservation officer that matters.

I agree with you 100%. I'll pose the question on the PFBC Contact page and see if I get an answer.

 

[nomad_archer]

I honestly don't care who is right or wrong. This would be a good point of clarification. At this point I am just curious. If that asking on the contact page doesn't get you anywhere, I may stop by my local regional office that is 5 minutes from my house and see if anyone is available to answer the question.

 

[allan_s]

Can you please post the video? It can be forwarded to the Southeast Region Law Enforcement office. It is illegal!

Powerbait is illlegal... it is edible. If it looks like a worm, fished liked a worm, baited on a hook like a worm, it is a worm. That is like saying fake grubs could be used or fake eggs... this guy can argue his point in court as far as I am concerned.

 

[afishinado]

allan_s wrote:
Can you please post the video? It can be forwarded to the Southeast Region Law Enforcement office. It is illegal!

Powerbait is illlegal... it is edible. If it looks like a worm, fished liked a worm, baited on a hook like a worm, it is a worm. That is like saying fake grubs could be used or fake eggs... this guy can argue his point in court as far as I am concerned.

The video is linked in the OP in bold blue letters with the word "Tulpehocken"

 

[ryansheehan]

This is the language Maryland uses but the PA regs make it sound like the power worms are ok, but thats just my duh-pinion.


(c) Except for artificial lures, may not possess or use any natural bait, live bait, or any device enhanced with a scent capable of catching fish in these areas

 

[phiendWMD]

nomad_archer wrote:
We could argue here all day about the interpretation but ultimately it is the interpretation of the conservation officer that matters.

This is really what sucks about so many laws. 2 people could fish the same pool with the same "bait" on different days, encountering 2 different officers who could interpret the law differently. It's possible one could walk away without a ticket while the other could find them self in court.

If using powerbait worms with ingredients added to attract fish isn't illegal in DH areas, it should be. What what stop someone from using spray type attractant on a spinner if powerbait is legal?

 

[ryansheehan]

phiendWMD wrote:

nomad_archer wrote:
We could argue here all day about the interpretation but ultimately it is the interpretation of the conservation officer that matters.

This is really what sucks about so many laws. 2 people could fish the same pool with the same "bait" on different days, encountering 2 different officers who could interpret the law differently. It's possible one could walk away without a ticket while the other could find them self in court.

If using powerbait worms with ingredients added to attract fish isn't illegal in DH areas, it should be. What what stop someone from using spray type attractant on a spinner if powerbait is legal?

It doesn't sound lke scent is mentioned at all in the dh laws, so would say scent on a spinner would be perfectly legal as well.

 

[steliejim]

Just my 2 cents, but I remember seeing something posted about this on the PAFBC website last year under county reports. In fact, the article was from a WCO from the southeast region.

He specifically said that any powerbait products were illegal on a DHALO.

Still up to the officer in charge though, on any given stream. I have asked several WCO's about this and all have mixed views about enforcement.

I think the fish cops have bigger fish to fry, no pun intended, than a guy using a scented pink worm on a DHALO.

 

[acesedgley]

I would question if those worms are actually plastic, which IS allowed.
In any case, I think the reg. could be more clear and scent should not be allowed.

 

[DriftingDunn]

phiendWMD wrote:
If using powerbait worms with ingredients added to attract fish isn't illegal in DH areas, it should be. What what stop someone from using spray type attractant on a spinner if powerbait is legal?

Or on a fly. Actually, the scent would probably "stick" on a fly longer than it would on a metal spinner.

Just playing devils advocate here, but why the big hang-up over scent? As I see it, the purpose of the DH rules is to minimize hooking mortality. I would think flies and spinners do that regardless of whether they are scented or unscented. Has a scientific study ever been done showing that scented flies or spinners result in higher hooking mortality?

Note the word "bait" in "Powerbait." It will be interesting to see what the official ruling is on whether a pink Powerbait worm is legal or not in a DH area. I lean toward it being illegal. Also note that the yellow "worm" in the video appears to comes in one long roll and the angler just pinches off a length to use. What is the difference in that versus just putting a blob of Powerbait from a jar on a hook like you would white bread? I definitely lean toward it being illegal.

I also doubt the pink Powerbait worm fits the definition of "constructed" in the law. "Constructed" to me means putting together two or more parts, as in feathers on a fly or beads/blade on a spinner.

 

[phiendWMD]

DriftingDunn wrote:

phiendWMD wrote:
If using powerbait worms with ingredients added to attract fish isn't illegal in DH areas, it should be. What what stop someone from using spray type attractant on a spinner if powerbait is legal?

Or on a fly. Actually, the scent would probably "stick" on a fly longer than it would on a metal spinner.

Just playing devils advocate here, but why the big hang-up over scent? As I see it, the purpose of the DH rules are to minimize hooking mortality. I would think flies and spinners do that regardless of whether they are scented or unscented. Has a scientific study ever been done showing that scented flies or spinners result in higher hooking mortality?

Note the word "bait" in "Powerbait." It will be interesting to see what the official ruling is on whether a pink Powerbait worm is legal or not in a DH area. I lean toward it being illegal. Also note that the yellow "worm" in the video appears to comes in one long roll and the angler just pinches off a length to use. What is the difference in that versus just putting a blob of Powerbait from a jar on a hook like you would white bread? I definitely lean toward it being illegal.

I also doubt the pink Powerbait worm fits the definition of "constructed" in the law. "Constructed" to me means putting together two or more parts, as in feathers on a fly or beads/blade on a spinner.

Scents are bait to me. Their only purpose is to attract fish to something they would have otherwise ignored. It doesnt really matter if it is manufactured with a scent or you spray it on.