Opening Day - Wild trout in ATWs. What Did You see?

[Dave_W]

For those of you who fished in a non-special reg ATW on opening day, did you see or catch wild trout? What about other anglers?

I fished Yellow Breeches (outside the reg water) during the afternoon and another popular local ATW that is heavily stocked in the morning. . . and on both stream sections I caught more wild trout than stockies. I was mainly using a tandem nymph rig with an egg fly or sucker spawn and a small nymph as a dropper. All the wild fish took the nymph (this is typical) and all the stockies, with one exception, took the egg or junk fly (also typical).

All the fish I saw caught by other anglers appeared to be stockies.

If you were out on stocked water, what did you see with respect to wild trout?

 

[Maurice]

I caught 7, 1 wild brown, 1 stocked brown and 5 bows. I lost a few as well assuming stockies at the end of the drift. It is my experience that when a wild brown hits a swinging bugger he don;t come unbuttoned like stockies do. so I will say 1 wild trout.

The guy I was with caught two wildies out of four. He fished ahead of me by a few yards the whole time, indicating that the wild trouts were more aggressive than the stockies.

 

[salmonoid]

I fished a water formerly known as ATW (now Stocked Water, or whatever the heck they are). Expecting a three ring circus, I did not encounter another angler until 11:30. My first eight fish were all wild browns and one large fish of unknown origin that immediately ripped me off. Actually, my very first fish was a chunky smallmouth, which I thought was quite ironic.

My first stocker was a 20" rainbow, then a handful of normal 'bows and a stocked brown. I got one more wild brown on the way back downstream, in the same stretch where I fished in the morning.

Fished the same stream in the fall and caught wild Browns throughout the whole stretch I fished yesterday, with a handful of holdover browns and 'bows. Total unique anglers observed yesterday? Nine. With the exception of the two guys I first encountered, all the creeled trout were too far gone to tell what their origin was (you know, when they get that mottled light/dark death coloration). I ran into the two guys I first encountered when I was heading out. They fished downstream just a bit and had creeled a rainbow and brown; rainbow was obviously stocked and the brown appeared to be too. I did witness a teen catch a wild brown on a spinner in the middle of where fish were definitely stocked and was happy to see him release the fish.

Conclusions?

Where there was some foot traffic, in generally lower water conditions, the wild browns were mostly hiding. Where no one had fished, it was all wild fish feeding. Cause unknown, weather was different (cold steady rain in the morning turning sunny in the afternoon), angling pressure was different. The two lightning trout I saw (one roped, the other darting around a big pool, spooked out of his mind) did not appear to be wild ;-)

Control stream I fished late afternoon produced all wild fish, but not surpringly, it was not stocked. I do not believe anyone else fished it either, given the lack of boot tracks and the good number of fish I caught.

Maybe i'll take a day off mid-week, in a few weeks, and repeat the experiment.

 

[afishinado]

Wild trout in PA appear to be thriving; expanding in both numbers and range. One would think this would be the salvation for the PFBC, since they struggle to keep up with the ever increasing cost of stocking.

Instead, they are under fire both from the anglers that want them to cease stocking in the burgeoning wild trout streams, and the anglers that want to continue or expand stocking in those streams.

In the long-run, given the ever-increasing costs of stocking and running hatcheries, I believe the FBC will be forced to cut stocking at an accelerated rate. The most logical and most conversation friendly way to do so would be to no longer stock streams with a fishable population of wild trout.

The one thing we must guard against is private groups or individuals being allowed to stock wild trout streams on their own, without approval or supervision from the commission.

The Commission now officially approves of stocking Class A trout streams, the highest classification of wild trout stream in the State, which opens a new can of worms. I would like to see the commission go back to a strict policy of no stocking allowed in Class A's. If that policy was maintained, the discussion would be only about stocking the lesser trout streams.

Further, the mission of the coldwater conservation would be, after preserving the Class A's, to enhance, rehabilitate and elevate the lower class streams to Class A status, with brook trout conservation and enhancement the first priority.

I'm not one that believes PA could ever be another Montana with 100% wild fish. I do believe the state can be the premier wild trout fishing state in the east, boasting many thousands of miles of wild trout streams to fish.

 

[Nymph-wristed]

A question about the the question of stocking over class A populations: Is it possible that stocking keeps the landowners happy and gives them fish to harvest? What I mean is, if a class A stream is on private land, and the PFBC stops stocking, does that mean the whole place can be posted and therefore closed?

 

[salmonoid]

Nymph-wristed wrote:
A question about the the question of stocking over class A populations: Is it possible that stocking keeps the landowners happy and gives them fish to harvest? What I mean is, if a class A stream is on private land, and the PFBC stops stocking, does that mean the whole place can be posted and therefore closed?

It is certainly a possibility that if stocking ceases, landowners post their land. If it meant choosing one or the other, I would rather have streams reach their natural carrying capacity and lose some access if a private landowner chose to post, than have stocked fish planted over a wild population. PA has a lot of public, open land with good trout waters on them, so losing a little access for the sake of some fish would not be the end of angling.

 

[Maurice]

Nymph-wristed wrote:
A question about the the question of stocking over class A populations: Is it possible that stocking keeps the landowners happy and gives them fish to harvest? What I mean is, if a class A stream is on private land, and the PFBC stops stocking, does that mean the whole place can be posted and therefore closed?

Yes if thats what he wants.

But the new rule for future class A referrals which were previously stocked is to stock a reduced number preseason only.

 

[Nymph-wristed]

Maurice wrote:

Nymph-wristed wrote:
A question about the the question of stocking over class A populations: Is it possible that stocking keeps the landowners happy and gives them fish to harvest? What I mean is, if a class A stream is on private land, and the PFBC stops stocking, does that mean the whole place can be posted and therefore closed?

Yes if thats what he wants.

But the new rule for future class A referrals which were previously stocked is to stock a reduced number preseason only.

I just wonder if this goes into the PFBC thinking, nothing about my preference intended in the question.

It also seems that a choice is made to stock rainbows or brookies not browns over wild browns if a former ATW is found to have a class A population.

Lancaster County is a prime example of a county with great streams that have little or no public access, especially the ones in the limestone belt.

 

[salmonoid]

Nymph-wristed wrote:

Lancaster County is a prime example of a county with great streams that have little or no public access, especially the ones in the limestone belt.

Can you expand on this? I have lived in Lancaster county all my life and there are no great limestone streams here. Perhaps formerly great, but they are all heavily impaired and degraded by agriculture and in more recent years development. There are a fair amount of streams with trout in them on public land but perhaps you are only referring to ATW?

 

[Nymph-wristed]

salmonoid wrote:

Nymph-wristed wrote:

Lancaster County is a prime example of a county with great streams that have little or no public access, especially the ones in the limestone belt.

Can you expand on this? I have lived in Lancaster county all my life and there are no great limestone streams here. Perhaps formerly great, but they are all heavily impaired and degraded by agriculture and in more recent years development. There are a fair amount of streams with trout in them on public land but perhaps you are only referring to ATW?

I guess to be fair, I am talking about the potential of the many little limestone creeks (and the former glory, as you referenced). If fishermen and not farmers had access to them, there is a chance that those creeks could be shown the love they need.

 

[krayfish2]

Salmonoid wrote:

The two lightning trout I saw (one roped, the other darting around a big pool, spooked out of his mind) did not appear to be wild

Are you sure? Club stocked fish have the adipose fin clipped and state stocked fish should have both pectoral fins clipped. I can only assume that you were unable to get a good look at the fish due to its seizure like movements. Lol

 

[Jessed]

http://i359.photobucket.com/albums/oo39/jessedavis47/B080370E-CF2E-46E2-A295-2473641321EF_zpshkmh1gar.jpg
Can anyone tell me why this brown is so skinny?

 

[Swattie87]

That fish doesn't look terribly skinny to me. That being said...

Typically skinny fish are either usually very old (in the case of wild fish), or are not effective in terms of finding a lie that is calorie efficient from a food consumed to energy expended standpoint (stocked fish). Most stocked Trout come from the hatcheries pretty fat and well fed. A lot of times holdover fish look very skinny by the Fall though.

Wild Trout generally have a slightly skinnier, more streamlined look to start with, but they consistently have that look. They only get that emaciated skinny look when they are very old.

 

[Jessed]

Thank you. It looked like a female right after laying her eggs but it's not the fall! Strange

 

[Chaz]

salmonoid wrote:

Nymph-wristed wrote:

Lancaster County is a prime example of a county with great streams that have little or no public access, especially the ones in the limestone belt.

Can you expand on this? I have lived in Lancaster county all my life and there are no great limestone streams here. Perhaps formerly great, but they are all heavily impaired and degraded by agriculture and in more recent years development. There are a fair amount of streams with trout in them on public land but perhaps you are only referring to ATW?

For reference see Joe Armstrong's Book "Limestone Streams of PA."

 

[Nymph-wristed]

Chaz wrote:

salmonoid wrote:

Nymph-wristed wrote:

Lancaster County is a prime example of a county with great streams that have little or no public access, especially the ones in the limestone belt.

Can you expand on this? I have lived in Lancaster county all my life and there are no great limestone streams here. Perhaps formerly great, but they are all heavily impaired and degraded by agriculture and in more recent years development. There are a fair amount of streams with trout in them on public land but perhaps you are only referring to ATW?

For reference see Joe Armstrong's Book "Limestone Streams of PA."

That's the one, Chaz. Thanks.

 

[Mike]

Jessed,
In the photo that I see, that fish does not look particularly skinny to me either, and I tend to have an eye for such things since. For a fish of that size, it often tells me something about the summer water temps. Even if a thin fish from the previous summer survives the winter, it is sometimes still a bit thin in spring. So when during the year a thin fish is caught is also an important bit of info in providing a clue as to what might be happening.
Mike

 

[Wildbrowntrout]

Fished Hay in the afternoon of the opener and caught a 3" brownie. Had to have been wild, unless they would stock something that little and I'm missing something...? Also went back on Sunday afternoon and saw a trout rising to some sort of medium sized black/grey mayfly. Couldn't get any pictures.

 

[Jessed]

If it was 3' I'm positive it was wild. It's ashame how many wild fish are kept in hay creek. And are you sure they weren't stoneflies?

 

[Dave_W]

This afternoon on Breeches it was two wilds and five stocked rainbows.

The other stream I hit this afternoon, a very popular and very heavily fished ATW on South Mountain, is actually one where I typically expect to catch more wild fish. Surprisingly, all I got were stockies, even in the riffles where I expect to catch wild fish.

Just random luck of the draw I suppose - I wouldn't read too much into it. The next day could be the reverse (I do generally expect to catch more wild fish after a week or so of trout season passes).

Nevertheless, it is interesting for what it's worth to count wild trout caught in stocked ATWs, even this early in the season when the streams are being pounded by traditional anglers.