etiquette question

[wildtrout2]

FarmerDave wrote:
Stocked. ;-)

Just joking. Nice trout.

I know you're joking, that trout reeks wild! :-D

 

[wildtrout2]

Double post.

 

[FarmerDave]

wildtrout2 wrote:

FarmerDave wrote:
Stocked. ;-)

Just joking. Nice trout.

I know you're joking, that trout reeks wild! :-D

It sure does.

 

[troutbert]

wildtrout2 wrote:

lycoflyfisher wrote:
In most places lick run would be more than a mile from either road, especially since your not going to walk straight up those side hills. I bear hunt in that area and in my opinion when someone in your group kills a bear down in lick run, it becomes one of the most remote areas of the state.

Yep, remote describes Lick Run for sure! Here's a pic from the state owned cabin off of Carrier Road. I'd kill to live in it. It has one of the most beautiful views I've ever encountered in Pa. There's a trail that runs from the cabin down to Lick Run, but it's a tight/steep trail that can barely be seen unless you know it's there.

Included, here is a pic of the only trout trout I caught, a pretty brown, after making the mile and a quarter hike down to the stream. Like I mentioned before, the fishing should be better than it is on Lick Run considering it's remoteness and beauty of the stream. I did see a large bear while hiking down that trail!

I know that place. It's about a 1 mile walk and 700 feet elevation change.

If you see a fisherman's vehicle there, it's a near certainty that he went down there to fish.

So, would you hike down the trail to the stream and fish? Or go to another spot.

It seems to be a very similar situation to what the OP is asking about.

I would go somewhere else. I know other streams in the area. As others have said, that is part of the trip preparation. Pick out several possibilities to fish in the area.

 

[wildtrout2]

That region has nothing but back-up options!
TB, depending on time of year, dude could be hunting turks.

 

[Swattie87]

For one measly wild Brown. I’d go elsewhere. Though I wonder if it’s better than the evidence here would suggest. ;-)

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Nope. That one sucks.
A few trout and all chubs.








































what? I'm serious!

 

[wildtrout2]

Swattie87 wrote:
For one measly wild Brown. I’d go elsewhere. Though I wonder if it’s better than the evidence here would suggest. ;-)

Good one! :-D Seriously though, I've fished miles of that stream over several years and found the situation to be the same along most of it's length. The best day I had was on July 12 2014 on the lower end, when I caught 11 trout. Three wild browns (1@11"/1@13") and 8 natives (1@9"). Water was 60F.

As you suggest Matt, it's not worth all the effort to fish Lick Run. And it's a shame too, because it runs through some awesome country. You have to wonder why it won't support a much larger population of trout. If there's some brooks and browns, why aren't there more of them?

 

[lycoflyfisher]

Especially at the lower end I would suspect fishing pressure and harvest by the locals. From guys I know that have fished it over the past 30 years they say success varies year to year based on how many people they thought had hiked in and camped. Suggesting that campers keeping fish took away the larger fish from the population.

 

[Swattie87]

Yeah, I’ve never fished it. Always thought it looked nice on the maps, but its biomass on the Wilderness List was less than impressive, and all kidding aside, most of the reports I’ve heard from guys who have fished it were similar to yours...Meh...It has fish, but should have more.

Have you fished it in dialed in small stream conditions before...warm (mid 50’s water temp or higher), up, and off color? If a small stream fishes slow during those conditions, I’ll generally be willing to write it off as a dud. I’ve had some 2 or 3 fish outings on small streams in less than ideal conditions that have produced 50+ fish days in good conditions though. Conditions matter, a lot in small stream angling.

I’ll bet on the bad angler in good conditions over the good angler in poor conditions any day.

 

[k-bob]

"It has fish, but should have more."

never been to lick run, but maybe it has similar issues to the ones described in the Kettle drainage in linked article below... article is long, technical, but search it for "logging"

http://www.kettlecreek.org/uploads/2/5/6/0/25607137/upper_kettle_creek_fish_habitat_plan.pdf

 

[lycoflyfisher]

good article K-bob. I wouldagree many of the issues noted in the kettle creek watershed are also present in lick run. The watershed was extensively logged at the turn of the century. With virtually no road access to the stream, other than the very lower reaches the only habitat work that could be done would be the strategic placement of large woody debris.

 

[Swattie87]

Agree, but most of the streams in the Kettle report (including Kettle itself) that are similar in size to Lick Run contain good populations of wild fish.

 

[wildtrout2]

Swattie87 wrote:
Agree, but most of the streams in the Kettle report (including Kettle itself) that are similar in size to Lick Run contain good populations of wild fish.

Exactly. In other words, if there's a few wild trout that seem to be doing quite well, like the 11" brown I posted, there must be enough food to reach adult size in the stream. So, why aren't they reproducing accordingly?

Also, the stream characteristics of Kettle and Lick Run are really quite different. Lick has a much more "normal" stream flow, and it has more woody debris along it's length than Kettle, not the channeling and sediment issues that Kettle has. There are plenty of other small streams in area of Lick Run that hold good populations of trout, so it still leaves me to wonder.

 

[salvelinus]

I've never fished it, but have heard that some sections have low populations of fish while others are much better. Getting in there is a lot of work for hit or miss fishing.

 

[wildtrout2]

I couldn't agree more sal. The only reason I went through all of the trouble accessing that upper section (downhill from the cabin) was that I figured the pressure would be almost non-existent up there, and the fishing might be much better than it was downstream. This is part of the learning process with a stream of it's length.

I did see a really large bear at close range going down that tiny trail, so it was worth the hike if only for that encounter.

 

[jacob]

I read a bunch of the previous posts but no way in hell I am reading another 4 pages.

Those with the elitist comments... Well. Uh. Okay. Not really. But you are "entitled" to your opinion.

Those who said do unto others... Well. Yes!

Those who said do your best to respect others space. Definitely.

If someone is being a douche when you run into them on the stream when trying to be courteous by striking up a convo to figure out what they are planning to do, just simply go somewhere else and lead by example rather than get into a tiff. Although, I am guilty of sarcastically paying a compliment or word of encouragement.

I like to believe that most of us fly-fishers are pretty decent.

I think a good rule of thumb is if you are out of sight, that's generally going to be okay.

Every situation and stream (especially) is different and you just need to feel it out. Small streams are trickier but typically less people fish them. If somebody jumped in front of me on a small stream intentionally and within sight for sure, I would let it be known that it's not cool to do that, and precede to just go somewhere else.

Unless I can take them, in which case I am going to hop in above them 15 feet away :hammer: Just Kidding. Although that may be tempting just don't do it.

Plenty of water in PA.

 

[bushwacker]

Wow. I really didn't think this post would turn into 7 pages. Never been to lick run but it seems like a great place to encroach on another fisherman. :-D

 

[k-bob]

Back on the issue of low trout in Lick Run: I think lidar maps available from the state (detailed surface contour) may show channeled stream sections.

http://maps.psiee.psu.edu/preview/map.ashx?layer=1247

Below are two lo-res uploadable images - satellite photo and lidar - of upper Valley Creek, for ex. Left side looks twisty, unchanneled. Unchanneled sections could in general could have narrower channels, faster moving water, less sun. Maybe extra holes if more bends. I have fished through these channeling transitions without noticing them, maybe because of regrown vegetation and the channeling is old. VC of course has lots of fish on the right side of this image, so this isn't everything! Many places that fish well apparently were channeled. But imho unchanneled can be a plus, and a wider channel could lead to thermal issues (link in post 91 mentions kettle plus tribs).

Lick run looks channeled on lidar, could be something of a negative for fish if not large bears . It could have gotten a double whammy of being logged w/ channeling and then extra sediment from major floods in the logging era (see link post 91 and search by "logging").

(btw images below are from google earth version of PA lidar so they are small to upload... penn state lidar link above is much better to use, just zoom in and check/uncheck PAMAP box in upper right blue window... (thanks state of pa and psu for the maps!))

 

[wildtrout2]

bushwacker wrote:
Wow. I really didn't think this post would turn into 7 pages. Never been to lick run but it seems like a great place to encroach on another fisherman. :-D

It really is! But, you should give a 2 mile berth because of the length of the stream. :-D :-D