New Notice Of Stocking Requirement

[Cznymph]

I came across this new requirement from the PFBC regarding stocking on public or private property. More information can be found here. This will go into effect Jan. 1, 2024.

While I am greatly concerned with what is being stocked into public waters, as a private land owner, I feel this is an overreach on the part of the PFBC. Given the past history of the PFBC being less than transparent in regards to fish health issues from their own facilities, this is a case of “do as I say, not as I do.”

 

[CRB]

Black and White issue.
The rulemaking passed and was approved by the PAF&BC Commissioners little one can do about it.
Comply or take the chance; could be fined $150 .
It is a solid requirement.

 

[nymphingmaniac]

seems like a good idea to me.
PFBC gets a lot of heat on here (and elsewhere) and they are not where I'd like them to be, but I see some positive changes being done over the last couple of years. Sometimes it's a good idea to recognize improvements as this can be very effective at encouraging further changes. Just my two cents

 

[TimMurphy]

I came across this new requirement from the PFBC regarding stocking on public or private property. More information can be found here. This will go into effect Jan. 1, 2024.

While I am greatly concerned with what is being stocked into public waters, as a private land owner, I feel this is an overreach on the part of the PFBC. Given the past history of the PFBC being less than transparent in regards to fish health issues from their own facilities, this is a case of “do as I say, not as I do.”

Dear Cznymph,

What you see as a possible overreach I see as an attempt to get ahead of potential problems. Yes, the Fish Commission has had problems, But passing the buck and allowing other people or entities to introduce other potential problems is not a good thing.

From one fellow landowner to another, none of us have any claim to any of the water in the State of PA. That belongs to the Commonwealth, and in turn, to all of the people. One can own the land underneath the water, but all the water belongs to the common.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

 

[Cznymph]

Dear Cznymph,

What you see as a possible overreach I see as an attempt to get ahead of potential problems. Yes, the Fish Commission has had problems, But passing the buck and allowing other people or entities to introduce other potential problems is not a good thing.

From one fellow landowner to another, none of us have any claim to any of the water in the State of PA. That belongs to the Commonwealth, and in turn, to all of the people. One can own the land underneath the water, but all the water belongs to the common.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

I would believe that I do in fact lay claim to water in my farm pond. The source originates on my property, and there is no outflow.

That aside, I have some serious issues with this. The state has demonstrated that it can’t raise and release fish without a myriad of known pathogens and AIS issues, but all of a sudden , they want to restrict how I see fit to manage my own pond.

It seemed as though the PFBC was willing to sweep the mudsnail issue under the rug until they were pressed on the issue. It’s also known that the PFBC stocked IPN positive fish into the Lake Ontario watershed for a number of years before ceasing a year or two ago. Again, why should I play by the rules when the PFBC has not.

 

[Cznymph]

Black and White issue.
The rulemaking passed and was approved by the PAF&BC Commissioners little one can do about it.
Comply or take the chance; could be fined $150 .
It is a solid requirement.

How long before this simple notification/permit results in a fee and fish health examination?

 

[KeviR]

It looks to me like the requirement is that you have to file a form if you want to stock any water. It doesn't seem to require approval, but there are some restrictions that seem like a good idea anyway. For the most part it just seems like a requirement to provide information. It seems like a good idea to me.

 

[tomgamber]

I would believe that I do in fact lay claim to water in my farm pond. The source originates on my property, and there is no outflow.

That aside, I have some serious issues with this. The state has demonstrated that it can’t raise and release fish without a myriad of known pathogens and AIS issues, but all of a sudden , they want to restrict how I see fit to manage my own pond.

It seemed as though the PFBC was willing to sweep the mudsnail issue under the rug until they were pressed on the issue. It’s also known that the PFBC stocked IPN positive fish into the Lake Ontario watershed for a number of years before ceasing a year or two ago. Again, why should I play by the rules when the PFBC has not.

Unless you're out there slamming H and O molecules together. I'd argue it doesn't "originate on your property ". The law is very clear regarding waterways in PA. I'm no lawyer but I would belive that terminology is important here. Having rights to water may not be the same as having the right to affect water as you choose.

 

[TimMurphy]

I would believe that I do in fact lay claim to water in my farm pond. The source originates on my property, and there is no outflow.

That aside, I have some serious issues with this. The state has demonstrated that it can’t raise and release fish without a myriad of known pathogens and AIS issues, but all of a sudden , they want to restrict how I see fit to manage my own pond.

It seemed as though the PFBC was willing to sweep the mudsnail issue under the rug until they were pressed on the issue. It’s also known that the PFBC stocked IPN positive fish into the Lake Ontario watershed for a number of years before ceasing a year or two ago. Again, why should I play by the rules when the PFBC has not.

Dear Cznymph,

Exactly what part of you don't own the water in this State don't you understand? Be specific because I don't imagine that you have ever created any rainfall.

I admitted that the Fish Commission has made mistakes. Now you are making this about you, and how you are being disenfranchised.

I'll bet you love brook trout too!

Regards,

Tim Murphy

 

[Cznymph]

Unless you're out there slamming H and O molecules together. I'd argue it doesn't "originate on your property ". The law is very clear regarding waterways in PA. I'm no lawyer but I would belive that terminology is important here. Having rights to water may not be the same as having the right to affect water as you choose.

Does a farm pond entirely contained within the property meet the definition of a waterway?

I’m not a lawyer either, but I’d challenge someone to come try to take some of my pond water. I think the result may prove that although no one can claim legal ownership of the water itself, for all intents and purposes the water is mine.

Again, I fully support responsible fish stocking. I’d like to see nothing but disease free fish stocked in PA waters. However, as I’ve posted in the past, PA stocks fish with diseases that have caused entire hatcheries in other states to be entirely depopulated.

Now every time I’d like to dump out my crappie minnow bucket in my farm pond, I have to notify the PFBC or risk a fine, meanwhile they continue to stock some really unhealthy fish at will. Who is overseeing the overseers?

 

[Cznymph]

Dear Cznymph,

Exactly what part of you don't own the water in this State don't you understand? Be specific because I don't imagine that you have ever created any rainfall.

I admitted that the Fish Commission has made mistakes. Now you are making this about you, and how you are being disenfranchised.

I'll bet you love brook trout too!

Regards,

Tim Murphy

I really don’t have much of an opinion on brook trout. I grew up with them present in every ditch and trickle. They were a large part of my summer entertainment as a youngster. They don’t do much for me now, and quite frankly trout taste like garbage, so I don’t spend much time chasing them. I prefer fish that are best accompanied by batter and cocktail sauce.

As I stated in a previous post, I understand the semantics of “owning”’water, and I’ll gladly send you my address if you’d like to try to come get a jar of that water. Let’s be realistic here, you can’t legally access it in any way, shape, or form. It’s mine, through and through.

 

[tomgamber]

Does a farm pond entirely contained within the property meet the definition of a waterway?

I’m not a lawyer either, but I’d challenge someone to come try to take some of my pond water. I think the result may prove that although no one can claim legal ownership of the water itself, for all intents and purposes the water is mine.

Again, I fully support responsible fish stocking. I’d like to see nothing but disease free fish stocked in PA waters. However, as I’ve posted in the past, PA stocks fish with diseases that have caused entire hatcheries in other states to be entirely depopulated.

Now every time I’d like to dump out my crappie minnow bucket in my farm pond, I have to notify the PFBC or risk a fine, meanwhile they continue to stock some really unhealthy fish at will. Who is overseeing the overseers?

All good questions

 

[TimMurphy]

I really don’t have much of an opinion on brook trout. I grew up with them present in every ditch and trickle. They were a large part of my summer entertainment as a youngster. They don’t do much for me now, and quite frankly trout taste like garbage, so I don’t spend much time chasing them. I prefer fish that are best accompanied by batter and cocktail sauce.

As I stated in a previous post, I understand the semantics of “owning”’water, and I’ll gladly send you my address if you’d like to try to come get a jar of that water. Let’s be realistic here, you can’t legally access it in any way, shape, or form. It’s mine, through and through.

Dear Cznymph,

Pulll-eeezzze!

You have 35 posts, most all of them complaints.

Learn to troll better dude.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

 

[Cznymph]

Dear Cznymph,

Pulll-eeezzze!

You have 35 posts, most all of them complaints.

Learn to troll better dude.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

So because I don’t jump for joy on brook trout posts or make frequent references to “A River Runs Through It”, I’m a troll? I admit, I do troll a fair amount, again I enjoy those fish that taste good. It’s one of the most effective ways to put walleye in the box. I will work on my post count for you. The internet really doesn’t consume my day, and is more of an wintertime or after dark activity.

I joined this site because believe it or not, it’s one of the more active PA centric fishing forums still in existence. Due to my background in environmental studies and ecology, over the years I’ve taken a interest in just what goes on with our states resource management agencies. When I heard about possible NZM issues with the states hatcheries, it caused me to want to dig deeper. I have some real concerns about the environmental impacts associated with the state hatchery system. This seems like a fair place to address them, considering how this is the conservation forum.

I’d like to get back on topic for the time being, water ownership aside, you are ok with an agency wanting to know when I dump my leftover fatheads in the pond after a day of crappie fishing, all the while the agency that is tasked with protecting our waters continues to pollute and release diseased fish? This is like having to call a group of arsonists to get their approval when I want to have a campfire.

 

[Swattie87]

Though seemingly captured by this, I struggle to think the pond farm owner tossing in some Bluegills or LMB into their acre farm pond was the target here.

This is a good thing, as it will more closely regulate what Sportsman’s clubs can and do stock, and where. Which is important for managing native and wild fish populations, and avoid introducing further species into area they shouldn’t be.

I agree with and support your ability to stock what you want into your farm pond on your land that doesn’t discharge into downstream waters. Just fill out the form now. It’s a net win.

 

[Cznymph]

This is a good thing, as it will more closely regulate what Sportsman’s clubs can and do stock, and where. Which is important for managing native and wild fish populations, and avoid introducing further species into area they shouldn’t be.

The PFBC admitted that they “couldn’t guarantee” that NZM wouldn’t be moved from its affected hatcheries and into stocked waters. Would it serve the PFBC better to have more of a concern about what they themself are stocking? I mean what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. Sportsman’s clubs are already required to report all Co-op fish stocked and any rainbow and brook trout are required to verified free of gill lice. Meanwhile the PFBC supplied IPN positive co-op fish to a nursery that later released them into the Lake Ontario watershed. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission does not permit the release of IPN positive fish into the Great Lakes.

I’d invite everyone to read this report from the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission, and take notice of the number of diseases and pathogens at PFBC hatcheries versus states like NY and MN. As I stated before, many of the disease and pathogen issues currently present in PFBC hatcheries have led to total depopulations in other states.

 

[Cznymph]

Though seemingly captured by this, I struggle to think the pond farm owner tossing in some Bluegills or LMB into their acre farm pond was the target here.

They cared enough about farm ponds to include specific language about them.

 

[troutbert]

I wonder what actual changes to stocking will result from this.

Requiring stocking reporting is one thing. CHANGING what waters can be stocked, what species can be stocked etc. is another thing.

 

[Swattie87]

They cared enough about farm ponds to include specific language about them.

Yeah, not looking for an argument. I agree with you for the most part. My point was I don’t think farm ponds (though included with this) were the primary target. Many farm ponds are “off channel” for the main stem on a stream, but do discharge into it. Yours is unique in that regard.

And yes, the PFBC has lots more work to do with their stocking regs, but, this is a step in the direction. Albeit a relatively baby one.

 

[wildtrout2]

Though seemingly captured by this, I struggle to think the pond farm owner tossing in some Bluegills or LMB into their acre farm pond was the target here.

This is a good thing, as it will more closely regulate what Sportsman’s clubs can and do stock, and where. Which is important for managing native and wild fish populations, and avoid introducing further species into area they shouldn’t be.

I agree with and support your ability to stock what you want into your farm pond on your land that doesn’t discharge into downstream waters. Just fill out the form now. It’s a net win.

Like I said, level-headed.