Donegal C&R FFO: fall fingerling RT stocked
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
iceyguides
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 311
ok
Chaz
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 8,458
Why bows and not brookies, they are native.
As to bows establishing a reproducing population anywhere in PA where fingerlings are stocked, conditions in PA favor the fall spawning fish over spring spawning fish. So only if the rainbows are fall spawning fish will they have a chance.
To be scientific about this a biologist cannot afford to go into a study such as this with any expectations or the result could be skewed.
As to bows establishing a reproducing population anywhere in PA where fingerlings are stocked, conditions in PA favor the fall spawning fish over spring spawning fish. So only if the rainbows are fall spawning fish will they have a chance.
To be scientific about this a biologist cannot afford to go into a study such as this with any expectations or the result could be skewed.
Warm temps, substantial sediment, poor survival of hatchery brook trout: All good reasons not to use brook trout.
As for pre-study expectations in general (as in "this is what is probably going to happen," "this is not going to work," or something similar), a biologist can certainly have these thoughts or expectations from experience and from the scientific literature. In fact, they often come from reviewing the scientific literature. Nevertheless, as a professional, a biologist will still objectively design and run a study as if those expectations did not exist.
As an example, I was pretty certain that I knew how the wild brook trout enhancement regs, which were applied to select streams outside of SE Pa, would affect wild brook trout population abundance and size structure in the "treatment" streams based on personal observations of angler usage and later by the results of the statewide wild trout stream angler use and harvest study. Had one of those streams been in SE Pa. my thoughts certainly would not have affected the way that I would have conducted the study. In fact, scientifically speaking, finding out that I am wrong is as interesting as learning that I am right, and sometimes even more interesting.
As for pre-study expectations in general (as in "this is what is probably going to happen," "this is not going to work," or something similar), a biologist can certainly have these thoughts or expectations from experience and from the scientific literature. In fact, they often come from reviewing the scientific literature. Nevertheless, as a professional, a biologist will still objectively design and run a study as if those expectations did not exist.
As an example, I was pretty certain that I knew how the wild brook trout enhancement regs, which were applied to select streams outside of SE Pa, would affect wild brook trout population abundance and size structure in the "treatment" streams based on personal observations of angler usage and later by the results of the statewide wild trout stream angler use and harvest study. Had one of those streams been in SE Pa. my thoughts certainly would not have affected the way that I would have conducted the study. In fact, scientifically speaking, finding out that I am wrong is as interesting as learning that I am right, and sometimes even more interesting.
My take is that Mike, from his knowledge and experience as a fisheries biologist, was of the belief that the WBTE regs (C&R for brook trout) would have little or no effect on the abundance and/or size structure of the ST population. But, even with that mind-set, if the program was in his region, he would have done everything to assure the study was conducted in the proper way. And, if he were proven wrong, he would take it like a man, eat crow, and learn something.
Wait, what? Were there no brook trout in the Donegal?
Brook trout fingerlings have very poor survival rates no matter where they are tried. I think it has to do with the over breeding of hatchery stock.
barrybarry
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2009
- Messages
- 399
Caught four browns (no bows) in the susky in Wrightsville some years ago. I have feeling more than a few of the trout in Donegal head downstream. Never had any in the heat of the summer (probably dead and eaten by then) but I did catch one in June.
The stream seems too small to keep and hold much of a population of wild trout. Now if Chiques could support a trout population that would be a fantastic fishery. There are many areas of that creek that look wonderful. Looks, of course, don't support trout.
The stream seems too small to keep and hold much of a population of wild trout. Now if Chiques could support a trout population that would be a fantastic fishery. There are many areas of that creek that look wonderful. Looks, of course, don't support trout.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 6,117
The headwaters of Chiques used to be on the nat repro list, but was removed fairly recently IIRC. It has several small tribs on its upper end that have wild trout, so it's possible there are still some in the upper main stem, even if only migratory.
Mike, is my memory right about Chiques? If so, what did you find on the last survey?
Mike, is my memory right about Chiques? If so, what did you find on the last survey?
wgmiller
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 2,992
The Chiques receives a tremendous amount of sediment from upstream sources during heavy rain events. I've never checked the temperature in the summer, but am 99% sure that it warms well beyond that of trout survival.
With regards to the Donegal, other than its headwaters, much of the stream gets "borderline" in the summer months. Plugging a temp in the neighborhood of 70 is not uncommon. It too receives a good bit of sediment from farming along its length.
If trout are making it to the Susky from the Donegal, then they're taking a "fall of faith" over the dam on Chiques that is right next to 441.
Based on the limited number of naturally reproducing RT streams in the state, I don't have high hopes that the fingerling stocking program will bear fruit. The Donegal has shown that it wants to be a naturally reproducing brown trout stream, so efforts should made to sustain and promote it.
The Donegal certainly has enough size to support a robust naturally reproducing trout population, but is hampered by a number of factors such as silt, temperature, habitat, predation, etc.
With regards to the Donegal, other than its headwaters, much of the stream gets "borderline" in the summer months. Plugging a temp in the neighborhood of 70 is not uncommon. It too receives a good bit of sediment from farming along its length.
If trout are making it to the Susky from the Donegal, then they're taking a "fall of faith" over the dam on Chiques that is right next to 441.
Based on the limited number of naturally reproducing RT streams in the state, I don't have high hopes that the fingerling stocking program will bear fruit. The Donegal has shown that it wants to be a naturally reproducing brown trout stream, so efforts should made to sustain and promote it.
The Donegal certainly has enough size to support a robust naturally reproducing trout population, but is hampered by a number of factors such as silt, temperature, habitat, predation, etc.
barrybarry
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2009
- Messages
- 399
"Donegal has shown that it wants to be a naturally reproducing brown trout stream, so efforts should made to sustain and promote it."
Couldn't agree more.
There's a easily navigated side channel beside the dam. It's been there for years. Unless there's a flood, as much water bypasses the dam than goes over it.
Couldn't agree more.
There's a easily navigated side channel beside the dam. It's been there for years. Unless there's a flood, as much water bypasses the dam than goes over it.
