Habitat projects

[silverfox]

Actually, my 45 native brookies show that there are more than a few there. I think this adds value to the conversation. Of course, since it goes against your portrayal, I guess it has no value.

That would require that I believe anything you say.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

Frank we are talking population dynamics not species of fish caught.

Your data is useless for the conversation. Sorry this upsets you.
You should go to fishing creek and give them all the valuable golden data

Are you saying that the species of trout caught and living in a stream have nothing to do with population dynamics?

 

[sixfootfenwick]

This comment of yours was in reply to my comment stating: "My fishing statistics ARE very valuable. One member on this site once compared spinner fishing to electroshocking."

I just want to point out that I never said or even implied that my spinner fishing statistics are the SAME (as thorough) as electroshocking.

My fishing statistics are valuable, people have compared them to electro shocking, but I didn't do that and im not implying they are equal to or on par with electroshocking, nope, not at all.
I'm not even sure why I said that then.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

It's cool bro. I see Mike isn't going to white knight this time.
Your statistics are valuable.
Let's go catch some brownies

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

That would require that I believe anything you say.

My experience in life is that radicals never believe anything that goes against their beliefs.

 

[Fish Sticks]

My experience in life is that radicals never believe anything that goes against their beliefs.

The irony in that statement

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Are you saying that the species of trout caught and living in a stream have nothing to do with population dynamics?

No what a goofy question, are you implying that is all it is?

 

[silverfox]

My experience in life is that radicals never believe anything that goes against their beliefs.

I provided scientific research that supports what I'm suggesting may have happened on Bob's Creek. Did you read it? Are you willing to consider I might be right? If not, it might be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

My fishing statistics are valuable, people have compared them to electro shocking, but I didn't do that and im not implying they are equal to or on par with electroshocking, nope, not at all.
I'm not even sure why I said that then.

Some people have poor reading comprehension skills. Not much I can do about it in this case.

 

[Fish Sticks]

The irony in that statement

My experience in life is that radicals never believe anything that goes against their beliefs.

In bells gap thread we asked for one stream Managed for brook trout you could not compromise on a single mile out of 86k. Rest of pa managed for wild invasive browns who is the uncompromising zealot/radical frank, look in the mirror.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Some people have poor reading comprehension skills. Not much I can do about it in this case.

Still cannot supply any evidence for his espoused knowledge of bobs creek’s reference condition or channel morphology. Take a shot for how many times frank dodges this one.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Still cannot supply any evidence for his espoused knowledge of bobs creek’s reference condition or channel morphology. Take a shot for how many times frank dodges this one.

There is a electro shocking survey and some data on Wallacks branch on the EBTJV site I haven't been able to open.

Does it go into that at all?

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

In bells gap thread we asked for one stream Managed for brook trout you could not compromise on a single mile out of 86k. Rest of pa managed for wild invasive browns who is the uncompromising zealot/radical frank, look in the mirror.

So you think native brook trout could live and prosper in 86,000 miles of streams in Pennsylvania? Another example of exaggeration to try to make a point.

 

[Fish Sticks]

There is a electro shocking survey and some data on Wallacks branch on the EBTJV site I haven't been able to open.

Does it go into that at all?

It basically details how defunct those projects were and they had to chainsaw them out to reestablish connectivity

 

[Fish Sticks]

So you think native brook trout could live and prosper in 86,000 miles of streams in Pennsylvania? Another example of exaggeration to try to make a point.

I never said that, i said you could not stand to see one of the 86k miles managed for brook trout. Nice try frank.
Skirted the original question again, take a shot everyone

 

[sixfootfenwick]

It basically details how defunct those projects were and they had to chainsaw them out to reestablish connectivity

Welp.
There is half of what silverfox was saying.

 

[Fish Sticks]

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Frank keep track of how many times the radicals are right.
We are counting on you to keep count, Count Von Count.

 

[silverfox]

Actually, my 45 native brookies show that there are more than a few there. I think this adds value to the conversation. Of course, since it goes against your portrayal, I guess it has no value.

If PFBC told me they sampled 3 reaches on Bob's Creek and captured 45 brook trout, I wouldn't question it or be surprised by it.

If someone said they caught 45 brook trout on Bob's Creek in a day, I would be skeptical of the veracity of the claim, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

Neither of those conditions says anything about the number of brook trout relative to brown trout today, or how that composition might have changed over the past 30 years. Nor does either of those conditions speak to what may have been a cause IF there was a decline in brook trout and an increase in brown trout.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

If PFBC told me they sampled 3 reaches on Bob's Creek and captured 45 brook trout, I wouldn't question it or be surprised by it.

If someone said they caught 45 brook trout on Bob's Creek in a day, I would be skeptical of the veracity of the claim, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

Neither of those conditions says anything about the number of brook trout relative to brown trout today, or how that composition might have changed over the past 30 years. Nor does either of those conditions speak to what may have been a cause IF there was a decline in brook trout and an increase in brown trout.

You mean, like, gulp, population dynamics over time and studying why?!

But my rod told me valuable information! It's paramount!