Not to mess up a stream report...but

[troutbert]

salmonoid wrote:

troutbert wrote:

HopBack wrote:
I would rather the PFBC stock the stream so that the water stays open. I think that the wild browns are doing just fine with the current stocking situation. If it was marginal and the population was suffering do to stocking then it would be a different story.

But see where that leads to:

1) If the wild trout population is low, keep stocking.

2) If the wild trout population is high, keep stocking.

3) Regardless of the wild population, stop stocking and lose access.

Pick your poison - some stocked fish, and a healthy wild population that you can fish for. Or wild fish and a private invitation only access situation. Or worse, a fishing club springs up and stocked even bigger pelletheads over a good wild population. And reserves the whole stretch for themselves and their paying friends.

Do you know that these landowners would post if stocking ended? They might. But there are also many landowners who have unstocked wild trout streams flowing through or by their land that allow access for fishing.

I've seen situations where a stream was stocked, and there was scattered posting here and there. And when stocking ended, many of those people quit posting. They were clearly posting because of all the litter and even property damage caused by the opening day crowds. But the occasional fishermen who is respectful doesn't bother them.

 

[troutbert]

moon1284 wrote:
I'd bet yb is in the top 3 streams in the state in terms of angler density on opening day. Lots of tradition there. Tough sell to end stocking. I side with the pick your battles crowd.

Which wild trout streams should we select to try to get stocking ended on? Which battles could be won in regard to this?

 

[tomitrout]

I honestly think the stocked fish are in some ways beneficial to the wild trouts in certain regards, at least on highly trafficked/popular streams like the Breeches. Folks stomp up and down the stream from honey hole to hole, spooking those wild fish into hiding in the process while limiting out on stockies for dinner and then they go home. Then things calm down until the next stocking date and the wild fish continue on doing their thing until that next time. Sure, it's added stress for the wild fish, but without the 'cover' of the stocked trout, pretty good chance that that population of wild fish could be wiped out pretty quick.

If you were to end stocking on the Breeches, you'd also have to incorporate a major change in the harvest regulations at the same time, good luck with that. Otherwise that head of wild fish will just be harvested even more so in the years following the cessation of stocking.

To follow on Troutbert's query, I think a good experiment/first step would be to cease stocking on already existing special regs sections. Don't stock the C&R areas at all, cut back on allocations to Delayed Harvest zones and then see what the effects are in 3-5yrs and expand from there if warranted. Or more regulated areas with slot limits like they're trying out on Penn's...

 

[Mike]

Ahh, in so many ways this could be characterized as a pragmatism vs idealism argument. Carry on.

 

[salmonoid]

troutbert wrote:

salmonoid wrote:


3) Regardless of the wild population, stop stocking and lose access.

Pick your poison - some stocked fish, and a healthy wild population that you can fish for. Or wild fish and a private invitation only access situation. Or worse, a fishing club springs up and stocked even bigger pelletheads over a good wild population. And reserves the whole stretch for themselves and their paying friends.

Do you know that these landowners would post if stocking ended? They might. But there are also many landowners who have unstocked wild trout streams flowing through or by their land that allow access for fishing.

I've seen situations where a stream was stocked, and there was scattered posting here and there. And when stocking ended, many of those people quit posting. They were clearly posting because of all the litter and even property damage caused by the opening day crowds. But the occasional fishermen who is respectful doesn't bother them.

No I don't know what all the landowners would do. Sometimes the landowners do post because of anglers littering and being disrespectful. Sometimes the landowners don't post because the stream is stocked and their kids like to camp out the night before opening day and then spend the day catching fish with their friends. Sometimes PFBC personnel have secured a quasi-access agreement - they'll stock because the landowner has agreed not to post the land and provide access. Yellow Breeches is a stream that I do not think would emerge unscathed with respect to access if there was a cessation of stocking.

There are three ideologies with respect to trout.

1) Stock any and all streams.
2) Stock no streams - its wild trout or no trout.
3) Pick your battles - there's room for both camps.

1 and 2, being opposite ends of the spectrum, are bad, in my opinion. 3 is good and 3 is even better if biologists would be able to dictate which streams options 1 and 2 are applied to, based on the presence of fish and habitat. And the PFBC would get more bang for their stocked trout buck if they would follow a biologist directed #3.

 

[krayfish2]

I'll try this argument.....

What if the Keystone Select coupled with PFBC woes result in this:

More concentrated stocking in 'marginal' waters
+
Reduced stocking numbers in our streams that hold wild fish


Might actually work out in the favor of wild fish. Ya never know.

 

[troutbert]

salmonoid wrote:

There are three ideologies with respect to trout.

1) Stock any and all streams.
2) Stock no streams - its wild trout or no trout.
3) Pick your battles - there's room for both camps.

Here's another view, and one that is widely held. Much more widely held in PA than #2.

4) Don't stock wild trout streams. Stock the hatchery trout in other waters instead.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

Kray beat me to it. I don’t think this is an all-or-nothing argument.

Delayed harvest streams, assuming they get dangerously warm after June, seem like reasonable targets for stocking, especially fewer, larger trout. For example, Tunckhannock Creek behind Keystone College worked out well last year. It was not chocked with fish, but certain holes had some really nice trout that were fun to catch.

A stocking warm-water lake, while somewhat wasteful, seems relatively benign and may enhance the warm-water fisheries a bit.

As far as the impact of stocking hatchery trout over decent wild populations, here are my non-experimental, non-peer reviewed points of impact (in no particular order):

1. Direct displacement of wild trout by hatchery trout off of better lies

2. Consumption of food by hatchery trout that may have been available to wild trout

3. Harvest of wild trout by anglers who are after hatchery trout

4. Disruption of riparian buffers that may cause increase siltation

5. Disruption of benthic zone by hordes of wading anglers that may cause death of fry, death of macroinvertebrates, and increase siltation.

Add to this the decisions by PAFBC on how best to allocate their limited resources and, IMHO, we have a situation where we should change the paradigm towards significant reduction of stocking over Class A & B streams then reallocate those hatchery fish to more marginal waters to accommodate the opening day crowd.

Remember, all traditions had to start sometime. The current traditions are mostly a few generations old. We should be working on winning the hearts and minds of younger anglers to educate them about the value of self-sustaining cold-water fisheries. That should help soften the traditions and allow new traditions to take hold.

 

[afishinado]

Mike wrote:
Ahh, in so many ways this could be characterized as a pragmatism vs idealism argument. Carry on.

Some say "won't happen".....others say "won't happen overnight"....

I see attitudes changing slowly in PA. The trout gangs are still pretty hardcore about stocking and harvest but more and more anglers C&R than ever before.

Take a look at bass fishing. Back in the day just about everyone harvested fish. You'd see stringers hanging from oar locks of boats and from the belts of nearly every wading angler. Now look at the Susky or Delaware and most big river anglers fishing for SMB.....most anglers C&R.

From a practical standpoint, there is no way the FBC can sustain stocking trout at the current level with the current revenue stream. Even with small incremental revenue increases, the program in it's current form cannot be sustained.

Tough decisions must be made. Stocking fish in streams that already have a fishable populations of trout and cutting stocking in places that have no fish at all is illogical and unsustainable.

Nothing is black and white and this won't happen overnight, but it will happen. I'm sure the PFBC will work with anglers to come up with a workable solution that actually improves angling going forward. More with less, if you will.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

Are there any long stretches of YB that are posted and are not stocked? Not sure there are but i don't get over there too much.
The wild fish should be thriving in an area like that if it has right habitat.
My experience: there is a good amount of small wild fish but I never caught any big ones that weren't stocked. Is that typical of a stream with wild fish that gets heavily stocked?

We fished it from the meadows way up top and on down past hatchery to mill area when I was a little kid (60s 70s) and I don't remember seeing any wild trout up there.

 

[tomitrout]

Not sure what you would define as a 'long stretch', but there is some posted private property that isn't stocked up along Pine Rd. I'm friends with one of the fellas and I should probably hit him up to get on that beat just to check it out again. Haven't fished that stretch for probably close to 15yrs. But, most of the posted stretches are easily infiltrated by the stocked fish as a lot of them are only the length of someone's backyard or a few neighbor's worth at most...

And like most all trout streams with wild fish in PA, you probably won't find the 'big fish' in the upper reaches, you'd do better targeting the lower marginal transitional trout water for the wild bigguns. When the water gets low in the summer time, the habitat just isn't there to hold big fish year round in the upper reaches, regardless of stocking.