In my opinion a mix is bad. It only serves to reduce brown trout, which are currently thriving in the J. There is a carrying capacity for every stream, and based on the the number and sizes of fish reported from the 2010 survey, he Little J has reached that point. In fact it would likely benefit from some harvest. No...I do not typically harvest wild trout, but density dependent factors can limit potential of special regulation areas (for example many small fish). Also, there are very few wild rainbow fisheries in PA. Those that occur and are self-sustaining to the point of garnering a directed fishery are in true limestone spring streams. The J is a limestone-INFLUENCED stream and not a true limestomer unlike the Falling Spring or Big Spring. I just think that it is a "pipe dream" to think that bows will establish in the J or other streams in PA that do not already have established populations. When is a great brown trout fishery enough? This is not Montana. I feel that the J is fine without bows; however, this is just my opinion. Good discussions on this thread!
Little J rainbows
- Thread starter jabink84
- Start date
My experience in mixed brown & bow waters like the upper D as well as out-west, is that browns are much more likely to hit streamers than rainbows. The results of your fishing is not surprising.
Very interesting discussion. Bows and browns co-exist in many trout rivers. Since neither is a native fish, I see no problem with it. Bows are more likely to inhabit the faster water, and are more likely to feed during the day. May spread out the availability of fish and fishing opportunities on the J.
Also, Albie made a good point about different spawning times and I'll add different spawning habitat will make for a healthier river overall.
Diversity of [in]vasive species :-o Good thing I guess.
midnightangler
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 782
I don't think there are very many "wild" rainbows in the J - meaning I don't think there is ANY self sustaining reproduction. The ones that are there are the progeny of the spruce creek stockies. Those fish spawn in the fall and produce a huge number of small rainbows. I don't think the rainbows have much of a foothold in the J other than the fact that they are stocked in huge numbers every year. It's a brown trout stream.
nymphingmaniac
Well-known member
I think midnight hit it on the head. Wild-born in the stream, but not self-sustaining without intervention to establish a firm foothold.
The idea of diversifying to guard against events adverse to successful spawning has merit. This past winter and spring people who fish the J regularly (i mean 1-2X a week) were reporting an unusually high number of quality fish (12' or more and robust) and surprisingly fewer small fish (YOY in the 8'-9' category) A lot of theories were discussed, including a banner growth year, but in the end most concluded that the high water flood event in December of 2010 adversely affected the young of the year browns. That flood scoured the bottom of some areas with a high concentration of redds. A year's broad may have been adversely affected. This in turn allowed the previous year's brood to fatten up.
evidence for this could have come from a planned electro shock of the lower river, but that had to be canceled due to warm water. The electroshock study was to have the lower river to the frankstown branch declared a class A fishery. The last designation did not declare the entire lower river class A. Anyone who fished downstream knows it's all class A. I was looking forward to the results too, because more bows are caught in that section- or at least I should say I have caught more in that section.
The idea of diversifying to guard against events adverse to successful spawning has merit. This past winter and spring people who fish the J regularly (i mean 1-2X a week) were reporting an unusually high number of quality fish (12' or more and robust) and surprisingly fewer small fish (YOY in the 8'-9' category) A lot of theories were discussed, including a banner growth year, but in the end most concluded that the high water flood event in December of 2010 adversely affected the young of the year browns. That flood scoured the bottom of some areas with a high concentration of redds. A year's broad may have been adversely affected. This in turn allowed the previous year's brood to fatten up.
evidence for this could have come from a planned electro shock of the lower river, but that had to be canceled due to warm water. The electroshock study was to have the lower river to the frankstown branch declared a class A fishery. The last designation did not declare the entire lower river class A. Anyone who fished downstream knows it's all class A. I was looking forward to the results too, because more bows are caught in that section- or at least I should say I have caught more in that section.
albatross
Well-known member
I fished the gorge today and caught 5 bows and two browns. Some very nice sized and hard fighting rainbows. I'm not complaining...
Wetfly01
Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 227
I fish the J quite often and I too have noticed more rainbows in the last 2 or 3 years. From what I have been told there coming from Spruce Cr. I've noticed that there not just in a specific area they seemed to be well scattered out on the river. Have not caught many rainbows over 14" but I am sure that will happen soon enough just from what I caught and what I am hearing from others. As far as having rainbows in the J. I think the fishery will be able to handle it. There was some talk at one time by the Little Juniata Association about raising rainbows to stock,but I think that was put on the back burner for a while till more studies were done. Well, now that they are in there lets see what happens. I welcome it.
nymphingmaniac
Well-known member
what wetfly wrote is correct that the idea of establishing wild rainbows in the J through introduction was batted around a bit. Before people get too alarmed about the prospect of the LJRA stocking the j, "raising rainbows to stock" isn't quite what some may think it means.
The idea was to obtain wild rainbow eggs and establish a wild rainbow trout nursery in one of tribs to see if they would take hold in the main branch. They were not talking about the PFBC trucks coming to dump a bunch of raceway pigs into the J (wetfly, I know that's not what you meant, but it could be read that way).
The idea was tabled because concerns were raised and the area they would use for culturing the fish is not ready. I suspect they are taking a wait and see approach to the outcome of the obvious increase in bows on the river.
Again, if anyone has constructive opinions or important information about this topic, bring it to the attention of the LJRA on its website or to its monthly meetings.
The idea was to obtain wild rainbow eggs and establish a wild rainbow trout nursery in one of tribs to see if they would take hold in the main branch. They were not talking about the PFBC trucks coming to dump a bunch of raceway pigs into the J (wetfly, I know that's not what you meant, but it could be read that way).
The idea was tabled because concerns were raised and the area they would use for culturing the fish is not ready. I suspect they are taking a wait and see approach to the outcome of the obvious increase in bows on the river.
Again, if anyone has constructive opinions or important information about this topic, bring it to the attention of the LJRA on its website or to its monthly meetings.
In the late 1980s, Marty Marcinko, then head of the PFBC's trout management program, told me this:
In the southern Appalachians, rainbow trout displacement of brook trout is a big problem.
To avoid the possibility of the same thing happening in PA, it is probably not a good idea to spread wild strain rainbow trout around.
I agreed with him then, and still hold the same view today. If you do a little Googling, you can find articles about rainbows displacing brookies in the Smoky Mountains.
The Little J itself does not hold brook trout, but some of its tributaries do. And the more populations of wild rainbows are established in PA, the more likely it becomes that they will be introduced into our freestone streams that support native brookies.
In the southern Appalachians, rainbow trout displacement of brook trout is a big problem.
To avoid the possibility of the same thing happening in PA, it is probably not a good idea to spread wild strain rainbow trout around.
I agreed with him then, and still hold the same view today. If you do a little Googling, you can find articles about rainbows displacing brookies in the Smoky Mountains.
The Little J itself does not hold brook trout, but some of its tributaries do. And the more populations of wild rainbows are established in PA, the more likely it becomes that they will be introduced into our freestone streams that support native brookies.
midnightangler
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 782
This is no joke. Most of the little mountain streams in the south that would hold brookies are full of rainbows.
Not sure how likely it is that this would happen in PA. Seems like so many rainbows have been introduced into PA streams that if they were going to gain a foothold it would have happened already. Certainly we wouldn't want to see PA brook trout displaced in the way the southern brookies have been. It's very extensive.
It has to do with the strains of trout introduced. The PFBC hatchery strain rainbows are a highly domesticated strain, so rarely reproduce.
Where wild rainbow populations exist in PA, it has been because of private stockings of rainbow trout that are closer to wild strain fish.
Chaz
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 8,458
We're seeing rainbows in places we've never seen them before, and at around the time PFBC was importing rainbows from NC hatcheries is when we started seeing more rainbows in places they shouldn't be. Like Cold Run, Solomon Creek and some others, they've reproduced at least once. Hopefully that's it.
tomy way of thinking all stocked fish should be sterile.
As for the LJ PFBC didn't catch any in their survey, but that doesn't mean there' aren't some there. What it means is they are probably moving around from Spruce Creek.
tomy way of thinking all stocked fish should be sterile.
As for the LJ PFBC didn't catch any in their survey, but that doesn't mean there' aren't some there. What it means is they are probably moving around from Spruce Creek.
Wetfly01
Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 227
nymphingmaniac,
Thank for clearing that up about the wild rainbow eggs. That's what I meant in my post about the LJRA establishing a wild bow population on the J. I know that topic was tabled for a while. Has there been anymore talk that it might become a reality? Or are they just going to see what happens to the rainbows that are already in the J?
Thank for clearing that up about the wild rainbow eggs. That's what I meant in my post about the LJRA establishing a wild bow population on the J. I know that topic was tabled for a while. Has there been anymore talk that it might become a reality? Or are they just going to see what happens to the rainbows that are already in the J?
midnightangler
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 782
I believe that there is some truth in this, but I also think that something else must be going on. There have been wild rainbows in the upper D for a long time, but my understanding is that rainbows have not displaced brook trout in smaller catskill streams, certainly not to the extent that they have in the south. Warmer temperatures must give rainbows a competitive edge over brookies, but it is certainly difficult to know for sure how and why these things happen.
From the standpoint of protecting brook trout in PA, it would be nice if cautionary principles were followed. I don't think rainbows will displace the browns, however. Rainbow trout are basically food to browns.
nymphingmaniac
Well-known member
wetfly,
Hasn't been discussed at the meetings or informally for what seems to be a long time (1 year+). In addition to the issues raised in this post, the leaders of the LJRA decided that the following are much greater priorities (not strictly in this order):
1. having it declared class-A and water of high value (or whatever the term is to get addition protections)
2. secure fishing easements to maintain access
3. improving the river by reducing erosion by stream bank stabilization and monitoring practices at bridge and roadwork construction sites
4. working to improve bottom water release from dams during the summer to keep the river cooler.
improving the river takes priority. I agree.
Low water cleanup planned for Saturday Sept 8th. Life member's banquet that evening. LJRA association meeting tuesday the 11th 7pm. All are great opportunities to talk to the leaders of the LJRA about plans for the river and the possibility of introducing wild bows.
Hasn't been discussed at the meetings or informally for what seems to be a long time (1 year+). In addition to the issues raised in this post, the leaders of the LJRA decided that the following are much greater priorities (not strictly in this order):
1. having it declared class-A and water of high value (or whatever the term is to get addition protections)
2. secure fishing easements to maintain access
3. improving the river by reducing erosion by stream bank stabilization and monitoring practices at bridge and roadwork construction sites
4. working to improve bottom water release from dams during the summer to keep the river cooler.
improving the river takes priority. I agree.
Low water cleanup planned for Saturday Sept 8th. Life member's banquet that evening. LJRA association meeting tuesday the 11th 7pm. All are great opportunities to talk to the leaders of the LJRA about plans for the river and the possibility of introducing wild bows.
>>Where wild rainbow populations exist in PA, it has been because of private stockings of rainbow trout that are closer to wild strain fish. >>
The only change I would make to this would be to add the words "or Federal" right after "private" in the sentence. If what the Commission (and ANF) biologists told me long ago is true, whatever strain of RT the Feds were stocking back when they were still doing catchable plants in the National Forest was probably the source of the scattered wild RT pops in the ANF. I think most of these pops are gone now, but back in the 70's and 80's, there were still a number of streams with some (never many) wild RT in the ANF.
I really, really like wild, small stream freestone bows. When hooked, they are hotter than firecrackers. So, I really enjoy fishing for them. But for the sake of the brook trout, I don't suppose I'd want to see them widely established in PA freestones. But I cannot say the notion isn't tempting...🙂
The only change I would make to this would be to add the words "or Federal" right after "private" in the sentence. If what the Commission (and ANF) biologists told me long ago is true, whatever strain of RT the Feds were stocking back when they were still doing catchable plants in the National Forest was probably the source of the scattered wild RT pops in the ANF. I think most of these pops are gone now, but back in the 70's and 80's, there were still a number of streams with some (never many) wild RT in the ANF.
I really, really like wild, small stream freestone bows. When hooked, they are hotter than firecrackers. So, I really enjoy fishing for them. But for the sake of the brook trout, I don't suppose I'd want to see them widely established in PA freestones. But I cannot say the notion isn't tempting...🙂
Just wanted to throw out two possibilities: 1) that whatever rainbows the PFBC caught in their survey might have been assumed to be stocked just because they weren't looking for wild reproduction in the Little J. It's not always easy to tell, especially if that's not really something they were spending time trying to ascertain. So it may not be accuate to say that they didn't net any wild ones. 2) the state was putting a lot of fingerling bows in some unusual places not long ago (Cove Creek in Bedford County comes to mind). Could some of these wild-appearing bows have been planted as fingerlings? (I am aware that the stocking of fingerling browns was recently halted)
Will, I was at the 2010 survey on the J and can say with quite confident that biologists on hand looked for wild versus stocked regardless of the species, and are quite competent in doing so. That being said, trout stocked as fingerlings that survive are virtually impossible to differentiate from wild fish. For example, look at the picture of a wild versus stocked (only determined from the removed adipose fin) trout in the PFBC web report. Anyone who claims to be able to differentiate between the two based on characteristics other than the missing adipose fin (removed by the PFBC prior to stocking) is either a miss informed or bending the truth.
Another possibility is that the homewaters, aka spring ridge, club stocked fingerlings. I have recentlly found fingerling rainbows downstream from another of the evil empire's properties, and if I can somehow prove that src stocked them over a population of wild brown trout, I will immediately contact our local WCO. Anyhow, this is just another possibility, and if the empire did indeed put them in the LJR, the trout there are probably large enough to eat them before they do much damage, just as they helped take care of the fingerlings the PFBC used to stock there.
midnightangler
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 782
Prediction: they won't do anything about it.
Hey Rich,
I may be well off base, but I find it hard to believe the SRC/HW Club would do anything that might benefit them long term, like 3 or 4 years down the road. I just can't see them stocking pee pee trout (Mo's word), letting them disperse into the entire stream, and hope that some will return or remain in 3 or 4 years to be caught by their members.
I would think, if they thought they could get away with it, the SRC/HW Club would more likely want to put fish fences on both ends of their property and load it with fresh lunkers for their sports to have at 'em.
Just a thought.
