Fishing Pressure?

[tomitrout]

Was reading thru the thread in the Locations forum about Bald Eagle and it's tangent into discussion of the size of the trouts in Spring Creek now vs say 20yrs ago.

Don't want to hijack that thread further, and the question I have also pops into my head while reading other similar discussions. I see a lot of folks posit that one of the reasons the big fish aren't there like they used to be is because of "fishing pressure." More pressure means more stress on the fishes which correlates to potentially shorter lifespans, hence smaller/younger overall fish population, or for whatever the reasons.

My question is, where does the perception of "increased fishing pressure come from"? Because as often as I see the above argument, I'll also run across a thread bemoaning decreased license sales, lack of youth engagement, lack of diversity, declining interest in the outdoors, etc, etc...

So, where is the extra pressure coming from if it's actually there? Compared to say, the mid-90's wave that followed that movie about that river? Is it that these Special Regs areas become such a focal point to draw the pressure from within the shrinking angling community that other waters now go virtually untouched? Have the local communities around these 'focal points' remained relatively steady while the influx of 'tourist' dollars has increased angling pressure? Is the current angling community that much more dedicated that despite fewer numbers, each of us gets out more, keeping the 'angler days' statistics rather consistent?

Tie the two previous together for discussion, and I know I 'travel' a lot more to go fishing now then I did 20yrs ago. So, maybe I'm part off that added pressure to Spring/LJ/Penn's (along with MT, YNP, Tetons, Smokies..) that wasn't previously there, but then that's less time here at home on the Letort/Breeches/Big Spring.....though you'll also sometimes hear how much more pressure those streams see now compared to when...

 

[pete41]

As the caveman spearing fish said to his buddy"you should have been here yesterday."

 

[Dave_W]

This is a topic worth pondering, but getting even a remote consensus on an answer may be a tough effort. Let's discuss anyway...

For what it's worth, I'm convinced that angling pressure across SCPA where I tend to focus on bass in rivers and trout in streams is lower than it was a generation ago. Some of these trout streams do seem to me to have fewer trout or fewer large ones. However, significantly more streams have more wild trout, including some bigger ones, in my experience.

If there's a correlation between fishing pressure and reduced trout size or population (which is plausible) my personal experience does not really bear this out as consistent.

 

[afishinado]

tomitrout wrote:
Was reading thru the thread in the Locations forum about Bald Eagle and it's tangent into discussion of the size of the trouts in Spring Creek now vs say 20yrs ago.

Don't want to hijack that thread further, and the question I have also pops into my head while reading other similar discussions. I see a lot of folks posit that one of the reasons the big fish aren't there like they used to be is because of "fishing pressure." More pressure means more stress on the fishes which correlates to potentially shorter lifespans, hence smaller/younger overall fish population, or for whatever the reasons.

My question is, where does the perception of "increased fishing pressure come from"? Because as often as I see the above argument, I'll also run across a thread bemoaning decreased license sales, lack of youth engagement, lack of diversity, declining interest in the outdoors, etc, etc...

So, where is the extra pressure coming from if it's actually there? Compared to say, the mid-90's wave that followed that movie about that river? Is it that these Special Regs areas become such a focal point to draw the pressure from within the shrinking angling community that other waters now go virtually untouched? Have the local communities around these 'focal points' remained relatively steady while the influx of 'tourist' dollars has increased angling pressure? Is the current angling community that much more dedicated that despite fewer numbers, each of us gets out more, keeping the 'angler days' statistics rather consistent?

Tie the two previous together for discussion, and I know I 'travel' a lot more to go fishing now then I did 20yrs ago. So, maybe I'm part off that added pressure to Spring/LJ/Penn's (along with MT, YNP, Tetons, Smokies..) that wasn't previously there, but then that's less time here at home on the Letort/Breeches/Big Spring.....though you'll also sometimes hear how much more pressure those streams see now compared to when...

^ A lot of good questions.

I think the long and short of it is fishermen tend to travel longer distances to fish and have much better info/intel about conditions, hatches, etc. through the Internet. The word gets out quickly about a hatch or great fishing in the known places and the crowds appear. I remember Tom Rosenberger saying, the word about a good hatch on the river goes around the world in a couple of hours.

If you've ever fished for stripers at the shore during the run, it's simply amazing when a blitz happens and in mere minutes what appears to be a flash mob appears at the beach because of everyone carrying cell phones and receiving text messages.

With all that said, I you choose you spot wisely, there are many places one can fish without seeing much of a crowd at all.

I guess Yogi Berra had it right when he said, "It's so crowded...nobody goes there anymore".

 

[RLeep2]

>>If there's a correlation between fishing pressure and reduced trout size or population (which is plausible) my personal experience does not really bear this out as consistent.>>

In a stream that is either under no-kill or severely limited harvest regs (I see little difference between the two as they both seems to draw almost exclusively anglers who practice no-kill anyway..), I’d agree with Dave. I don’t really have an informed or educated opinion on the situation with average trout size in Spring Creek, but instinctively, I lean towards an answer that is a lot more about too many fish for the habitat than about cumulative handling mortality.

Additionally, I do not see anything contradictory in the idea that some waters see seemingly excessive pressure at a time when we are seeing some decline in the overall number of anglers. Pretty much all the streams that have been discussed here are “destination” fisheries that are heavily exposed/promoted not only by the various components of the industry (from guides to publications and so on), but also by the Commission as well. Additionally, there are many different component communities that make up the overall angling public. Among these, quality-experienced motivated fly/spin anglers are probably among the most mobile and willing to travel significant distances. So, I see no contradiction.

 

[TroutTracker]

I agree with Afishinado While overall fisherman numbers (based on license sales) maybe down, the better known and popular “destination” fisheries are seeing more and more pressure. The famous central PA streams, Cumberland Valley streams, the Upper Delaware, Pine Creek and tribs etc. These streams are all easy to find information on and are known to have good fishing. People are willing to travel for known, good fishing. People are much less willing to travel for potentially good fishing.

A lot of people want to be spoon fed information, if they can’t find a spoon to feed them they are much less likely to drive three hours to fish somewhere. The internet has become the ultimate spoon. Even in the 90s the best resources a traveling angler could have would be a delorme and a couple guide books, it takes a lot more dedication and knowledge to effectively use these vs a smartphone. Today we have hundreds of PA specific blogs and fly fishing websites, Instagram with copious PA fly fishing pics, websites and reports for every fly shop, google maps (there’s no hiding from google maps), the interactive county guide from PFBC and GPS and smartphones to direct you to that magic pulloff. All these resources make finding information and stream access much easier than ever before, thus making people more likely to travel to fish.

So while the number of fisherman maybe falling the available knowledge base concentrates them onto the more well-known waters (the streams people can find the most information on) while local, non-destination fisheries see less pressure. To me it’s more of a redistribution of pressure rather than an increase.

 

[steveo27]

The way I see it is the "popular" places get all the pressure. Most of the post about pressure/decline/ect seem to be on "popular" streams - Penns, Little J, Breeches, Upper D, ect. Ive never fished any of these streams other than the little J once because of how much mention they get [I dont know the first thing about the actual population of the streams so I my be wrong]

I can name countless streams that I feel have good populations of fish that dont get any pressure other than for a week or 2 in April. I fished most of the spring, summer, and fall without bumping into another fisherman here in western PA. I saw more people the one day I fished the little J than I have all year (save for opening day) fishing this year.

A lot of it has to do with what you are fishing for too. Little no name gemmie streams dont get pressure where world famous limestone streams get do. Most people would rather catch a 20" wild brown in Penns over a 4" dink in a trickle coming off of Laurel Ridge.

I think all the pressure is concentrated on "popular" streams which makes it seem like there is actually more pressure in general than there actually is. There may be more pressure on certain streams, but in general Id say there is less overall pressure on non "popular" streams.

EDIT : Most of the posts on here nailed what i was trying to say, but way better.

 

[JeffK]

I think there are less fishermen, but special regulations areas draw large crowds of fishermen, particularly fly fishermen. That is why I like special regs - they concentrate all the fly fishermen in a small area leaving many, many stretches where I may go a year without seeing another fly flinger. There are more uncrowded stretches than years ago IMHO, even though the popular spots are more crowded than ever.

I think there are more fly fishermen, but they still are a small percentage of all anglers. However, I think they fish more making them more apparent.

One class of anglers I see less of are expert bait anglers. Some of those old timers could clean out a stream dead drifting small worms or salmon eggs and did a lot of damage to large browns with salted minnows. Some center pinners are starting to show up who know their business. However, the most common path now is to go to flies as soon as one gets some trout fishing proficiency so less people really learn to bait fish well.

 

[troutbert]

On many of these "destination" wild trout streams the management was changed from stocking to no stocking, and from harvest of 8 trout per day to no or low harvest.

And it worked. The trout populations went way up (doubling to tripling).

So of course they are very popular. People like to fish where there are lots of trout.

Given the choice between fishing a stream with few trout, and one where they know there's a lot of trout, they pick the latter.

 

[krayfish2]

Contrary example..... Big Spring. Pressure increased 1000% but lots of big fish. Thoughts to how this stream would differ from Spring?

 

[SteveG]

I thought the recent Big Spring reports showed a reduction of larger size fish, and with a steady total biomass?
One big difference between BS and Spring, is probably dissolved oxygen levels at night.

 

[ryansheehan]

I have two thoughts, first I think fish size runs in cycles. While I have not fished in PA long enough or often enough to speak on those rivers I can on a few Maryland streams. It seems like a river will be struggling, not many big fish, lots of dinks, then a few years later all you catch is larger fish. Then all the sudden it's like what happened to this place, where did the big fish go? Secondly, I'm a true believer that 10 percent of the fisherman on a river catch 90 percent of the fish that day. So what that means to me is 90 percent of the fishing public really won't know if there are many big fish in a system . The 10 percent who are probably aren't advertising it. Now, I'm certain that there are some real good fisherman on this board who are qualified to speak on this matter but I'm guessing there are some who are not. Just because I'm not catching them doesnt mean they aren't there. I know surveys are done but at least the ones I've seen, big fish are missed or not able to be shocked. Just my thoughts.

 

[Chaz]

If you look at the surveys of the streams, especially limestone streams, they all show a curve where the populations go from having big fish and a fair number of them to a quick drop off at 14 to 15 inches. Usually at about 5 years after regulations have been placed on streams. I believe it's the competition between fish that causes the structural changes in the size of fish.

 

[UncleShorty]

I think the increase in fishing pressure is directly proportional to the explosion of membership in a very selective club of which I am the Pretzeldent.

Don't guffaw, you'll ALL be members of the ORB Club* sooner or later...

*ORB - Old Retired Bastards

 

[3oh4]

I fish some of the same water as Sheehan -

I do agree that streams/rivers go in cycles and a lot of the time weather conditions dictate the success of the spawn. Two years ago the Savage had the best spawn I've witnessed in my 6-7 years fishing it - there were dinks everywhere. How does a tailwater not have a consistent spawn when the flow is controlled???

And I think fishing pressure along with the size of the body of water dictates the consistent size of fish. There is ZERO doubt in my mind that fishing pressure limits the size of fish in the Savage River. That river for its size takes an absolute BEATING. Those fish may not grow large in length because the river is not very big, but those fish are awfully skinny and I believe its because the pressure is insane on every fish. They are just too easy to get to and they NEVER get a break.

The access is very easy and I would bet a large sum of money that every fish in that river sees a "fake fly/bug" every week from March - July with exception of the spillway and the private property section.

I also believe that the success of fish holding over, reproducing and fingerling stockings of the North Branch are driving the wild fish upstream. The rainbows run the bottom 1/3 of the Savage. The MD DNR doesn't believe me and feed me shocking data from sections in the upper 2/3 of the river. I would love to see what they find in the lower 1/3.

I catch fewer browns every year in the lower end and I don't thinks its my ability to fish declining.

How does this correlate to Spring? Spring is like the Savage extremely easy to fish. If you really want to, you can get a drift to about any fish in Spring, Not to mention is a very narrow stream for that large population of fish.

 

[rrt]

I am one of Shorty's ORBs, whatever that means to this topic. I agree with the groups that believes the heavy pressure on the trout in Spring Creek has caused the decrease of size. Before I finally gave up on being able to find a section to fish on Spring Creek during quality fishing time because of the increasing neoprene hatch, I observed a steady, noticeable decline in the size of Spring's trout.

No biologist I, I thought that the increase handling of the fish by increasing #s of anglers was the probable reason for the decline in size, as I thought the increased handling slowly resulted in the deaths of many trout. That others now express this same opinion does not surprise me. Yes, I know this is anecdotal evidence, but it appears to be real. My 2 cents anyhow.

 

[ryansheehan]

3oh4 wrote:
I fish some of the same water as Sheehan -

I do agree that streams/rivers go in cycles and a lot of the time weather conditions dictate the success of the spawn. Two years ago the Savage had the best spawn I've witnessed in my 6-7 years fishing it - there were dinks everywhere. How does a tailwater not have a consistent spawn when the flow is controlled

I also believe that the success of fish holding over, reproducing and fingerling stockings of the North Branch are driving the wild fish upstream. The rainbows run the bottom 1/3 of the Savage. The MD DNR doesn't believe me and feed me shocking data from sections in the upper 2/3 of the river. I would love to see what they find in the lower 1/3.

I catch fewer browns every year in the lower end and I don't thinks its my ability to fish declining.

That spawn from 2 or 3 years ago was heavily impacted by the draining of the res 4 or 5 years ago. The dam repairs killed or moved alot of big fish out of the river. That spawn that came shortly afterwards was pretty amazing, those fish packed that river, now all those fish are 12-15 inches and there are a ton of them. Hopefully in another year or two there will still be a ton of them, except 16-20, fingers crossed. You are definitely right about rainbows running up from the north branch, but a couple things to remember. First, those bows are the most eager to take a fly. They will grab it even on drifts that suck and I've had some **** drifts where I'm amazed at the take. So a bow or two disturbs the water and the browns become a little more cautious. Also, I think those bows are very migratory, sometimes they are there and sometimes not. When I was there last I fished from the bottom bridge down, the water was way up at 350. All the prime lies were loaded with browns. I caught 20 or so browns, 1 rainbow and zero brooks, the browns dominated. A number of years ago there was a high water event on the res, a ton of bows and goldens came over the spillway. The pool at the top that borders the no trespassing signs was loaded with them and they were easy to catch. We would catch so many swinging streamers it got boring, it was every cast. Slowly we caught fewer and fewer bows and the browns and brooks were still there. Now you catch an occasional bow up there but nothing like the past.Remember there is no size limit on the Bows so if you like trout take 2 home.

 

[ryansheehan]

rrt wrote:
I am one of Shorty's ORBs, whatever that means to this topic. I agree with the groups that believes the heavy pressure on the trout in Spring Creek has caused the decrease of size. Before I finally gave up on being able to find a section to fish on Spring Creek during quality fishing time because of the increasing neoprene hatch, I observed a steady, noticeable decline in the size of Spring's trout.

No biologist I, I thought that the increase handling of the fish by increasing #s of anglers was the probable reason for the decline in size, as I thought the increased handling slowly resulted in the deaths of many trout. That others now express this same opinion does not surprise me. Yes, I know this is anecdotal evidence, but it appears to be real. My 2 cents anyhow.

I feel like fewer fish on spring would mean bigger fish, assuming that its not environmental, there is still the same amount of food. More food, less competition should equal bigger fish. Then you will have a great spawn year and the little guys will thrive due to the surplus of food and there is your cycle. If the size of fish is down I feel like it's probably more environmental than pressure, just one fool's opinion.

 

[3oh4]

Sheehan - there will be some 100% Cutthroats running around in there next spring. The Branch was stocked this fall with them.

 

[SteveG]

Fewer fish doesn't guarantee that the ones present will eat more on a river like Spring Creek. There's an abundance of food, that we know with certainty.
But, and I only get to fish Spring a couple times a year so I'm far from a local expert, but I've never seen an abundance of structure that really cuts into the current to provide the kind of prime lies that you find large trout. Spring Creek's flow is so laminar, that food drifting is evenly dispersed throughout the volume of water, so even subpar lies hold fish because food isn't as concentrated into lanes and choke points, with a big old snag of timber and "frog water". So maybe, in a roundabout way, the (inorganic) improvement in water quality and increased food drifting, increased the quality of what was once marginal water.
I liken it to smallmouth fishing (for me). The bass rivers have such an abundance of food, that you can catch fish (albeit dinkers) everywhere. But, if you cover a lot of water and only target the absolute best lies, you get the largest fish. When I began fishing for bass, I followed what I read in magazines and articles about bass crashing schools of baitfish, throwing poppers, changing colors, multiple patterns, etc. My success with bass for two Summers was atrocious. I'm talking flat out embarrassing for someone who has fished their whole life and does well with trout. This Summer I changed things up, and began fishing for them more like trout (by dead drifting more an passing up 75% of the water) and started seeing more success. Thus began my bass fishing evolution. Now, when bass fishing, I only carry two patterns in two colors, on a sz 1/0 hook (so I can bounce smaller fish and greatly reduce eye hooking), and I do exponentially more wading/walking than casting. Although it seems like a lot of work and narrowly focused, I actually get to enjoy seeing more turtles, snakes, birds etc because I'm not so intently focused on all of the water.

Sorry for the rant btw, cabin fever.