Pa Wild Trout Summit (Recap/Commentary)

[krayfish2]

Frank,

There's a group headed up that way at the end of the month. I'm sure you could join in, borrow a fly rod from one of the guys and hit slate with them. Nice group of guys too. Maybe you make a few friends or learn that you like fly fishing. Maybe

 

[ryansheehan]

I was just denied access to a public highway because I didn't have anyone else in the car with me. Those privileged people with kids in the back got to ride the HOV, what the hell?

 

[foxtrapper1972]

Frank-I have rifle hunted deer for years. I see archery season is many weeks long with the opportunity to hunt the prime rut period. I can either buy a bow or just keep rifle hunting. People tell me it is a unique experience to take a deer with a bow. I choose not to do it at this time. Is archery only a "management tool? I don't really know. Does it provide a unique hunt for a priviliged group?

Since you are clearly a trout enthusiast you may want to consider trying the fly rod. The thing with trout is not really the big fight but it is the "take". The visual thing of seeing the fish slowly come to the surface for a dry or the savage surge of a big one attacking a streamer is a real thrill. I've tried spinners over the years and it is fun but for me nothing near the thrill of fooling them with a fly. You might seriously want to consider it. Those small mountain creeks you like are a blast throwing a size 12 Adams or picking along dropping a nymph in likely places.

I know....as we get older it's hard to change....but change is sometimes good.

One thing I noticed recently. When my young grandson uses a spinning rod he has a look of grim determination on his face, even when reeling in a trout. When he catches one on a dry fly he always laughs.

 

[rrt]

I went back and re-read the first four pages of this discussion. I found the guys' points and counterpoints, esp. regarding Big Fishing Creek, to be pretty thought-provoking -- ideas that could be applied to various PA waters.

I also wondered about Mike's comment that there were 11 trout/mile harvested on wild trout waters. I PM'd him about whether that included "incidental" kill of returned trout, but he didn't have time to respond to me (or figured I was a crank trying to cause trouble).

Anyhow, managing trout in PA, both for stressing the health of wild trout populations and for the use of stocked trout for various reasons, including "social" reasons, is a real minefield for the PFBC and its biologists. I admire the PFBC for its concern and consideration for wild trout, esp. since the inception of Operation FUTURE in 1982, and have seen wild trout populations expand in appropriate waters. I also believe the placement of stocked trout in appropriate streams is something the FBC needs to do.

Perhaps the moderators could divide this thread into two portions: the first half and then the second. That way, perhaps, meaningful posts about the original thread could continue to be made.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

CRB wrote:
Frank do you want to learn how to fly fish?

With respect, no, I'm not interested in fly fishing.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

outsider wrote:
I don't know if this applies to the topic, or if I am off-base. There is a localized economy value to special regulated waters. Case in point: in the 70's and 80's I fished the special regs. area of the Beaverkill river in NY along with a dozen other fisherman mostly members of the Berks County Chapter of Trout Unlimited. We stayed in the local hotels for a week, ate there, etc. We fished there because we knew the water was protected, and there would be ample fish to catch.

The same could be said for many Pa streams, both on public waters and private waters. How many anglers are drawn to the opportunity to fish Slate Run and Pine Creek where there are "special regs", which is a boost to the local economy. I fish there, spend money at the Hotel Manor and the local fly shops. The same could be said for Potter County when deer ran rampant in those woods. The Game Commission chose to reduce the deer herds there. The result was an economic impact to many people and businesses in Potter County.

The same could be said for the Tulpehocken Creek DH area. I have shared many times my observations there with Mike. People from SE PA, Central PA, NJ, and DE. Does not have the same economic impact as streams in rural areas, but it does help. Face it, without special regs, people would not drive this far to fish the Tully. I live 1/2 mil from TCO Fly Shop in West Lawn, and always stop there about twice a week. Usually fly fishermen there who fish the Tully and make a purchase. They typically donate to the fund to stock fingerlings in the Tully. Don't hear of any "other tackle" fisherman who donate. The Tully is located on "public land", depending on your definition of public land. Part is owned by the Corp of Engineers, the remainder by the Berks County Parks Department.

Whether the fishing on the special regs. areas is better than anywhere else in the immediate area may be a matter of perception, but it certainly exists.

I agree that there is a localized economic value to having special regulation areas. Keep in mind, though, that people generally have only so much disposable income, so if they spend that money in an area where there are special fishing regulations, likely that amount of money won't be spent back home. But I agree, there's no doubt that the special regulation areas on Pine Creek and Slate Run/Francis Branch bring in money to the local rural economy there (and that's a good thing).

I highly doubt, however, that this is part of the mission of the PFBC (or the PGC when it comes to hunting), though they probably do consider it to some extent.

With this in mind, and considering the special regulations on Pine Creek are Catch-and-Release All Tackle, just think, in particular, how much LESS economic value there would be to that area if the special regulations area on Pine Creek was limited to Fly Fishing Only, and how much MORE economic value there might be to the area if the current regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch weren't so restrictive. I can't speak for other anglers, but the restrictive regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch deter me from going to the area at least once or twice per year.

Would Catch-and-Release All Tackle regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch deter fly anglers from fishing there? Remember, it would still be "special regulations," so it would still have the perception that the fishing is better there to many people. What would stop the fly anglers from going there just like they do now?

As to your comment about never hearing about non-fly-fishermen donating to the fund for stocking fingerlings on Tulpehocken Creek at the TCO Fly Shop in West Lawn, I wouldn't expect to hear about it either since it is a fly shop and likely virtually all of their clientele would be fly anglers.

 

[OldLefty]

So, by choice, you either become a member of a "privileged" segment or become a part of an excluded segment of the angling community. Interesting...merely a matter of choice one "cannot", or is "unable" to engage. This whole hijacked discussion - and I do believe this thread has been hijacked since angling preference doesn't really relate to management of wild trout - needs to end.

There have been a lot of parallels presented here, some of them being really far out and some of them being not so: example, the perception of bait fishers complaining they "can't" fish specially regulated stream sections prohibiting the use of bait.

How 'bout this thread be closed by the mods and, if someone chooses (there's that word again) opens a new thread regarding wild trout management?

 

[ryansheehan]

OldLefty wrote:
So, by choice, you either become a member of a "privileged" segment or become a part of an excluded segment of the angling community. Interesting...merely a matter of choice one "cannot", or is "unable" to engage.

He was born that way.

 

[Maurice]

I am man just happy that there are just a small few places that do not permit folks with spinners to face rake 100 trout per day, 100 days per year....that's what really we are talking about here. Let's be honest.

Yes, I did go there.

 

[outsider]

With this in mind, and considering the special regulations on Pine Creek are Catch-and-Release All Tackle, just think, in particular, how much LESS economic value there would be to that area if the special regulations area on Pine Creek was limited to Fly Fishing Only, and how much MORE economic value there might be to the area if the current regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch weren't so restrictive.

How much More economic value? I hope you are not serious about this comment.

 

[ryansheehan]

outsider wrote:
With this in mind, and considering the special regulations on Pine Creek are Catch-and-Release All Tackle, just think, in particular, how much LESS economic value there would be to that area if the special regulations area on Pine Creek was limited to Fly Fishing Only, and how much MORE economic value there might be to the area if the current regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch weren't so restrictive.

How much More economic value? I hope you are not serious about this comment.

The guy equates special regs to private property for the privileged, why would this comment suprise you? Outsider, stop using logic in your thought process and you will realize Frank makes perfect sense.

I stopped reading this thread right before Frank hopped in, I was shocked to see 10 pages. I don't know what's funnier, Frank or the one's trying to reason with him, keep up the good work gentleman.

 

[outsider]

"As to your comment about never hearing about non-fly-fishermen donating to the fund for stocking fingerlings on Tulpehocken Creek at the TCO Fly Shop in West Lawn, I wouldn't expect to hear about it either since it is a fly shop and likely virtually all of their clientele would be fly anglers."

I live 15 minutes from the Tulpehocken Creek. Fish it several times a week. I like to talk to all anglers there, regardless of their choice of tackle. And I DO tell them that TCO does stock the stream, and any donation is appreciated. Please don't post "information" if you are not properly informed, or don't have any experience there. In addition to fishing there, my wife and I walk the path on a regular basis. Again, I chat with anglers to understand their fishing experience there. I certainly have no issue with people who spin fish there.

 

[outsider]

I will add one more thing to further qualify my last comment: I've known Tony Gehman, owner of TCO since before he opened his shop in West Lawn. I live within walking distance of his fly shop. Typically there a few times a week. They all know me there. Don't believe that, just ask them who Kirk is. If I don't stop by for a week or so, it's "where have you been?". I am an inquisitive person by nature. I try to keep a pulse on what is going on regarding the Tully. We trade information. I am MUCH more informed regarding the Tully than you are Frank. Me and a handful of others formed the Berks County Chapter of TU in the 70's. Before it was special regulated waters, we raised trout with a co-op nursery to stock the Tully. Our expense, open to anyone.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

Maurice wrote:
I am man just happy that there are just a small few places that do not permit folks with spinners to face rake 100 trout per day, 100 days per year....that's what really we are talking about here. Let's be honest.

Yes, I did go there.

*mic drop*

 

[DriftingDunn]

I agree that this topic should be closed or deleted, but not because of what rrt said in Post #145 or what OldLefty said in Post #148. The reason it should be closed is because of the personal attacks directed at Frank by rrt and OldLefty (among others), both of whom clearly didn’t comprehend Frank’s original question in Post #58 – and still don’t.

Frank raised an interesting, thought-provoking question. It certainly changed my mind of how I view the FFO waters that I enjoy fishing. If it were up for consideration, I’d vote in favor of changing the regulations to Catch-and-Release All Tackle on the nearly nine miles of Slate Run and lower Francis Branch out of justice for all anglers.

 

[ryansheehan]

DriftingDunn wrote:
I agree that this topic should be closed or deleted, but not because of what rrt said in Post #145 or what OldLefty said in Post #148. The reason it should be closed is because of the personal attacks directed at Frank by rrt and OldLefty (among others), both of whom clearly didn’t comprehend Frank’s original question in Post #58 – and still don’t.

Frank raised an interesting, thought-provoking question. It certainly changed my mind of how I view the FFO waters that I enjoy fishing. If it were up for consideration, I’d vote in favor of changing the regulations to Catch-and-Release All Tackle on the nearly nine miles of Slate Run and lower Francis Branch out of justice for all anglers.

I'm not in favor of FFO sections either but Frank's posts are just trolling on a fly fishing chat board. If you do things like say you're privileged to fly fish you will get called on it, as it should be.

 

[rrt]

FYI -- Mike's figure of 11 trout/mile creeled on wild trout streams means just that: creeled. It does not include the incidental kill of released fish.

Thank you, Mike.

 

[afishinado]

I agree, this thread was intended to be about the the Wild Trout Summit, but was sent off the rails by FrankTroutAngler complaining about a fly fishing only section on this fly fishing site.

Too bad this site is not more like the special regulation, Fly-fishing only. And guys that admit they have no interest in, and have never fly-fished would have no business (except trolling) posting on here.

To me anyway, PAFF should be all about fly-fishing. That's our interest and passion. As well, Mo very eloquently expressed his view as only Mo can.

But since the can of worms is open....I'll add this as an FYI:

I found an article posted in PA Angler Magazine in 1938 about Slate Run and the special regulation.

Here is a link to the entire issue. The whole thing is fascinating to read. I pulled out the piece on page 22 about Slate Run and the "new" regulation.

Back-in-the-day, when everyone was creeling trout, our grandparents and great grandparents saw Slate Run as a special place, and thought it worthy of special treatment: 6 trout / day and only 36 /year plus barbless hooks only or artificial flies. Not much protection by today's standards, but like I said, at least they recognized the some restrictions were a good thing to conserve the stream. The season was short, mid April through the end of july, plus they actually designated "nursery waters" that were closed to fishing!


SPECIAL REGULATIONS
APPLY TO SLATE RUN
During the 1934 fishing season Slate Run,
Lycoming county, was posted under certain
rules and regulations. The experiment met
with such success that later Cedar Run and
the Right Branch of Young Woman's Creek
were placed under similar restrictions.

Fishing will be permitted on these
streams only from April 15th to July 31st,
inclusive, and between the hours of 4 A. M.
and 9 P. M. Standard Time.

All fishing limited to artificial fly, or bait
with barbless hook.

Number of trout taken in one day limited
to six.

Number of trout per man per season,
thirty-six.

Legal minimum size limit nine inches.
All tributaries closed to fishing at all
times.

SLATE RUN (Lycoming County)
Section open to Fishing—From the junction
of Cushman and Francis Branches
down to its mouth at Big Pine Creek, approximately
8 miles.

Closed Section—Partly in Potter, Tioga
and Lycoming Counties—both Head Forks,
the Cushman and Francis Branches, and all
other tributaries closed as nursery waters.
CEDAR RUN (Tioga and Lycoming Counties)

Section Open to Fishing—From junction
of Buck Run, one mile above Letonia down
to the mouth at Big Pine Creek, a distance
of approximately 7% miles.

Closed Section—Cedar Run above the
junction of Buck Run, and all tributaries
closed as nursery waters.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

rrt wrote:
FYI -- Mike's figure of 11 trout/mile creeled on wild trout streams means just that: creeled. It does not include the incidental kill of released fish.

Thank you, Mike.

Rich, your inference here seems to be that hooking mortality from trout caught and released on spinning tackle (spinners and bait) would severely impact the trout population and that this is a fisheries-based reason for keeping the regulations Catch-and-Release Fly Fishing Only on nearly nine miles of Slate Run/Francis Branch.

Did Mike happen to mention whether he felt hooking mortality would have a negative impact noticeable to anglers if the regulations on Slate Run/Francis Branch were changed from Catch-and-Release Fly Fishing Only to Catch-and-Release All Tackle?

The reason I ask is because I fish many Class A streams similar in size and location to Slate Run/Francis Branch that are open under general fishing regulations, where even five trout can be creeled every single day, and they continue to have robust wild trout populations year after year. Did Mike happen to mention if Slate Run/Francis Branch would be any different, and if so, why?

I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this, as well as Mike’s thoughts directly if he would be so kind as to reply.

 

[troutbert]

If you continue to allow thread-jacking on paflyfish, then you will continue to get thread-jacking.

Leaving it up, rather than deleting it, is giving it tacit approval.

Post #58 was an off topic, thread-jacking post. But it was left up.

As soon as the thread-jacking was noticed, it could have been deleted, from post #58 forward. But it was decided to leave it up, allowing the thread-jacker to win, and the PA wild trout discussion to be blown out of the water.

I don't really think there is anything wrong with starting a discussion about flyfishing regs vs other regs. But that should be in a separate thread because it is a separate topic.

Blatant thread-jacking of a discussion of PA wild trout should simply not be permitted. If someone tries that, just delete it. Lay down the law.