New Penns Creek Information

"pcray the area he said they shocked is not even great water thru there ill take those numbers. Ive caught monsters in there i know whats there"

Second that, I would not go to the TT section if I were hunting for hogs on Penns. They get lot of fish through there, but there are other sections where there is less abundance, but more 17"+ browns. IMO, the TT section (out of all the class A water below Coburn) has the smallest average fish size, and recent shock data supports this.
 
PCRAY.... in those survey reports, was there any info in there about the numbers of fish over 14" in the C&R.

Or did you just pull those off the PFBC website/biologist reports page? I don't think they have any Section 4/C&R area results in those reports.
 
I just pulled them off of the PFBC website. At least it's a comparison of the same stretch, though as I said, this years numbers were not complete. I'm assuming Ingleby's numbers were rounded, as well as being a small subset of the sampling that was done. It was just to get an idea of what to expect, I don't claim it to be fully accurate. The PFBC will publish the sampling numbers in due time, I'm sure.

As far as the C&R stretch, in another thread, Mike clearly explained why it's an error to directly compare the numbers or size in different sampling sites. It's not apple's to apples, they're different sampling sites with different habitat. In this case, the C&R is bigger, deeper water, so you'd expect it to harbor a better size range even if it were under the exact same regulations. That makes it difficult to discern which differences can be attributed to management and which can be attributed to habitat.
 
Yes, past biologist reports DO show the number of fish over 14" in the TT section. The TT regs went into effect in 1995. Here are the numbers of 14" and above fish in the surveys since then.

1997: 48 fish/mile
1999: 82 fish/mile
2001: 222 fish/mile
2005: 381 fish/mile
2007: 251 fish/mile
2012: We don't know yet, but initial reports look positive, my back of the envelope calculation on a sub-sample was in the 350's.
 
I totally agree...I know there are fish over 20 in there....its one of the best stretches on this stream to fish. Great dry fly action. Best set of rapids for nymphing above and below the parking lot. I hope they keep it the same. No reason to fix something that is not broke!!!!
 
How can we consistently be warned not to fish in warm water yet they are allowed to shock 400 fish to the surface during high temps? Surely, fish were killed due to this. Maybe I'll just start fishing wherever and whenever I want.....
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the reason fish died when caught in warm water conditions was that after the fight they cannot absorb enough oxygen from the water to flush the lactic acid out of their system. I would assume that shocking the water does not exaust the fish like catching it on the fly, so it won't kill them.

That's just what someone told me,...sounds reasonable, but anyone know for sure?
 
I want to see the survey databefore I comment.
 
I dont know the exact temperature but I remember it was a chilly wet morning the first day they were there, in fact they had to wait for the thunderstorms to past befor they began, and several of us watching had jackets and sweatshirts on. It was June 25th and 26th the days that they shocked and then they were back that Friday for a 3rd count. Im sure its on a site somewhere what the temps were those days. The shocking did absolutley no damage to the fish. From the time the fish were dipped, put in the holding nets, measured, clipped and put back into the water I personally did not see any fish float or seem unhealthy. It really an amazing process that I would love to see again.
 
25th and 26th were Ok. Looks like State College hit 97 on that Friday. Not ideal but probably didn't kill many fish considering temps were relatively cool prior to the heatwave.
 
The PA TU Trout Management Committee decided to take no action at this time on this issue,
"3. Penn’s Creek: It has been proposed to change the TT section of Penn’s Creek to CR. Some of the TMC membership attended the public meeting on this proposal and reported significant opposition from the landowners. Since all access to this area is on private land and the rule change could increase angler use, it is clear that public access is the most important issue for this section of Penn’s Creek. "
There is general agreement among the Committee that the regs are good the way they currently are.
 
Guys you are talking about high summer temperatures, ie, sir temps vs water temps, they are 2 very different things. PFBC shocks streams during the summer, the sections PFBC shocked is cold water, not highly impacted by high water temperatures. There is little risk to the fish as long as the temps are below 70. The sir temps can be as high as 100° while the water temp is in the 60'S.
I'm not saying those are the temps just using an illustration.
 

There are some trout way over 20" They don't gewt big from being dumb.
 

Again as I stated this area where the water they shocked in my opinion is not water that would hold alot of big trout so the numbers on the size doesnt really matter to me. There are hog trout but you gotta work for them there there in other areas people dont want to walk and work to fish.
 
Your right Hook_Jaw... however that is one of my favorite places to fish because its right there and I have caught more fish in that area than I could ever count, but I wish I had a dollar for every mile i've walked up and down from were Old Mingle below the tressel up to Coburn!
 

I fully unserstand Ingleby when the water was up I caught some decent size trout in the hole in front of Wingards and down below your camp to where the train bridge is out
 

thats a good point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages
Wayward Trading”/> </center> </div> </div> </div> <div class=


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top