Fingerling stocking on Little Sandy? ( Venango County)

[PennKev]

Sylvaneous wrote:
[ Poaching around the pumphouse is huge, and too many of the people who stock (sorry to say this, but this is my experienced and it left me dumbfounded) are oblivious OR complicit in the poaching. Stocking mature trout begs for poaching and maybe the Fish Commish is avoiding that.
JBeary

Yeah, it doesn't help that there is a long flat stretch that gets a bunch of stockers dumped in it right next to the boundry of the open water. Almost an invitation. But as I said earlier, I still have no trouble catching a decent number of fish on LSC so I'm not too worried about it.

I suspect TU will dump some adult sized fish in but I would rather they not. I would like to see what happens without any adult fish stocked. I think some pretty impressive fish would turn up if we could get a few years with lowered pressure fishing pressure in the FFO area and less appeal to poachers.

 

[RLeeP]

I'm far from an expert on stream improvements, but I'd be of the view that in-stream habitat work on the special regs section of Little Sandy would be of more value to the people doing the work than it would be to the stream, unless there was a commitment to go in and re-do it every few years, which could be pretty pricey for your garden variety TU chapter.

PA freestones in that size class running through a typical valley for the region (somewhat narrow) often don't care about your hard work and devices. They jump around within the confines of the valley and follow the path of least resistance. Sometimes, that will be where you want them to go, right through your devices. Just as often (if not more often..), within a couple years of the work being done, they'll decide to go elsewhere and leave your work high and dry. Its kind of the nature of the beast.

Just a viewpoint...

 

[Gone4Day]

RLeeP wrote:
PA freestones in that size class running through a typical valley for the region (somewhat narrow) often don't care about your hard work and devices. They jump around within the confines of the valley and follow the path of least resistance. Sometimes, that will be where you want them to go, right through your devices. Just as often (if not more often..), within a couple years of the work being done, they'll decide to go elsewhere and leave your work high and dry. Its kind of the nature of the beast.

Just a viewpoint...

Excellent observation RLeeP. Geologists call it an incised valley. Streams naturally meander back and forth across the valley floor. If you actually look at the internal structure of floodplains, they inevitably have buried stream channels in them. The Miss. river for example has an incised valley that's 150 mile wide in places.

 

[TYoung]

Some streams are just not all that suitable for supporting a decent wild trout population. There are some stream sections that are currently flat and featureless and probably always have been flat and featureless. Trying to make any changes to streams like that is probably going to be a waist of time and money. If you try to change the habitat by adding bigger rocks and deflectors, the stream is going to try to return to its original state. Stream habitat projects tend to work best on streams that have been impaired by human activity such as logging and dredging. On these streams, you can plant trees and bushes along the banks to prevent erosion, and you can add rocks in order to rebuild the streams natural pool and riffle pattern.

 

[greenghost]

Gone4Day wrote:

Excellent observation RLeeP. Geologists call it an incised valley. Streams naturally meander back and forth across the valley floor. If you actually look at the internal structure of floodplains, they inevitably have buried stream channels in them. The Miss. river for example has an incised valley that's 150 mile wide in places.

This isn't the case with LS. The stream has pretty much kept its course, with only minor horizontal shifts, in the 30 years I've been fishing it. As PennKev stated the stream bottom and pool structure has changed somewhat, especially over the past few years. Also mentioned -- the primary problem in the featureless shale bottom, flatwater section basically from the pumphouse down to the trestle. Many sections are classic scoured bottom.

At least a couple attempts have been made by OCTU over the last few decades to improve this section, with limited success.

I am a big fan of letting nature do its work, but in this case I honesty think that to improve it for any lasting period of time, serious heavy duty structures must be constructed involving bulldozing, gabions, jackdams, perhaps even concrete structures. (The best holding water is around the train trestle bridge and dam -- built at least 60 or 70 years ago.)

 

[PennKev]

I actually think the trestle is influencing where the upper FFO area flows. Without it, the stream would have to drop about 4 feet or so over that distance. I think the trestle/dam backs it up enough so that it can flow over that bedrock area rather than allowing the stream to find a steeper path. A path with potentially better structure.

Kev

 

[streamerguy]

So we're in the second year of the fingerling stockings on LS. Anyone have any opinions at this point in the program?

I've fished it a handful of times since they since they first started stocking fingerlings and so far I don't really think it's going all that well. The fish seem to be disappearing, and I even talked to someone on another stream earlier this fall and he said he caught some of the fingerlings in Big Sandy.

This fall specifically I fished it twice, well actually three times but the second time I just stopped by to check it out on the way home from another stream and didn't fish. The first time was in September: fished the FFO section and the open water. Didn't catch any fingerlings and spooked maybe 2 or 3 of them(could have been wild, who knows). The second time was right after they stocked it in early Oct. Didn't fish, but I noticed a ton of fish near the pumphouse. The third time was today. I only fished the FFO this time and caught a couple fingerlings, one I think could have been from last fall's batch of fish, though overall they seemed to have stocked bigger ones this year. Saw a lot less fish than when I visited the stream in Oct. Kept an eye out for redds or fish in the shallows but didn't see any.

It would be interesting to see the PFBC's electorfishing results from earlier this fall(assuming they surveyed the stream before this year's stocking).

Instead of making a thread in the general forum and getting everyone's panties in a bunch I'll just do it here......Is this stocked or wild?lol Caught in the middle of the FFO sec. today. It has an un-clipped adipose fin(with red on it), but the right pectoral seems a little bunched up typical of stockies. The pic doesn't do it justice coloration wise. I guess it could be a stockie that swam in from the open water also.

And bikerfish is right about the fingerlings being possible snacks for bigger fish. Ohhh man.....my heart was pounding for a moment this afternoon.....




Feel free to discuss the status of the other streams throughout the state now being stocked with fingerlings...

 

[troutbert]

I think that is a hatchery brown, because of the crinkled pectoral fin.

 

[streamerguy]

You're probably right, though that means the fish had to have swam in from the open regs water as the last time the FFO was stocked with non-fin clipped, adult fish was the spring of 2012. And it had to have been in the stream since March/April(which isn't difficult, they can and do survive the summer there).

 

[Maurice]

I agree in addition to the fin issue because it doesn't have the eyespot and the significant black spotting indicates a fishmeal diet at an early age. Also the white haloing is less prominent than on true wild fish.


But as you can see the fins are clearing and sharpening and overall is establishing the appearance of wild traits/coloration from the change in diet.

I would put that fish as stocked this past spring. Note the opacity of the pects through ventral fin. A wild fish would have translucent and sharper edges to the fins. Also that would be a dandy wild trout for LS.

It could very well be a fingerling stocked brownie from the 2012 (size wise) had the adipose fin been clipped.

 

[pcray1231]

Agree. That's a hatchery brown, probably been in the stream a long while, so perhaps fingerling stocked.

A case where you have mixed indicators. I make no judgement on the scrunched fin, that can happen on wild fish, and they can heal on hatchery fish when in the stream so long.

But you have the red adipose = wild
Fins fairly transparant = wild

But not red, more orange = stocked
No eye spot = stocked
Black spot patterns reminiscent of a stocky.

In this case, stocked fish on a wild diet for a very long time fits all of the above.

I do find Maurice's assertion interesting, about the black spot pattern being from feed at an early age, in this thread as well as in another. I took it to be genetics but the "early age diet" fits just as well, and he probably has more knowledge than I. Generally, while SOME wild fish have spot patterns resembling stockies, I've not found a stockie with a spot pattern resembling wild. i.e. if it has the sparser spot pattern, it's wild. If it has the denser one, find another indicator!

 

[streamerguy]

I think it's settled then, it's a stockie. Though it can't be from the fingerling program since it's adipose isn't clipped, so I agree with Maurice; it probably just wandered in from the open regs water which was stocked with adults back in the spring.

Generally, while SOME wild fish have spot patterns resembling stockies, I've not found a stockie with a spot pattern resembling wild. i.e. if it has the sparser spot pattern, it's wild.

Interesting. Just going through my pics I found a couple stockies that have pretty sparse patterns resembling wild fish, and wilds that have dense black spot patterns resembling hatchery fish, but yeah overall I found that most of the fish that have very sparse spot patterns are indeed wild while most stocked fish have denser spot patterns, and much less red.

 

[PennKev]

streamerguy wrote:

Interesting. Just going through my pics I found a couple stockies that have pretty sparse patterns resembling wild fish, and wilds that have dense black spot patterns resembling hatchery fish, but yeah overall I found that most of the fish that have very sparse spot patterns are indeed wild while most stocked fish have denser spot patterns, and much less red.

I think trying to decipher spot patterns in browns is futile for the most part. Especially in a stream like LSC which has an extensive history of stocking AND natural repro.

As for the fingerling stocking program in LSC I still think it is misguided. The problem is not water temps, or spawning habitat. The problem with that stream, particularly the lower half, and even more specifically from the pump house down to rt 62, is lack of abundant holding water for mature fish. Also the stream is so unnaturally wide in that area, almost immediately above the pumphouse the stream gets significantly more narrow.

Those problems aside I think that the stream is a fine wild trout stream compared to what is normal for this part of the state and it should just be left alone.

Kev