I should have been more clear. Only talking about what I have seen. I’ve never seen any large woody debris projects be negative other than the new kind, dropping trees in creeks in the middle of the mountains that are already Class A. The kind where they drop a tree every 10 or 15 feet. For miles…..The current hot new trend of woody debris practice in Pa. In all seriousness how are we gonna get 300 year old shade trees back to the creek banks, if we cut them all down all the bank trees at 50 years old? And many of the trees that are cut for these projects are hemlocks and alive. I repeat Hemlock and alive. So hemlock Wolly Adelgid is a major trout threat? But now we have stream improvement programs that do the exact same thing? To improve the stream? Kill the mature shade hemlocks?
@lycoflyfisher Sounds like you should attend the streams where this has been implemented and learn why this destroys the future of the stream. They are a nightmare. It’s like the logging days all over again. Less mature trees in the future. Less shade in the future. And a nearly unfishable stream for 20 years, full of Heron fishing docks. Just to hopefully create an artificially high biomass of trout temporarily? That will plunge wild populations in the long run. How is stocking log’s different than stocking trout? If it’s bad for the environment and bad for the fishery in the long run. How can any short term impact justify it? And why on 5 Mile long Class A brook trout streams are we doing this for multiple miles of water? On multiple streams? In the same county? Just a few miles apart?
