Penns Creek CRALO Proposed Regulations

S

semperfly

New member
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Messages
9
Link for comment.

http://www.fishandboat.com/Regulations/Pages/ProposedRecentRegulations.aspx
 
Posted my FOR vote, thanks for the link.
 
Yes, Please provide comments. There is significant opposition against this change. Protect the wild trout of Penns.
 
Why does it need to be artificial lures? That's all I use (artificials) but it's been proven over and over that the impact is so limited to just allowing anyone to fish. Why the state continues with these restrictive regulations is puzzling. Just make it catch and release be done with it. If someone wants to drift a worm then so be it. It's not going to make a difference in any of our fishing success. I guess it just makes everyone feel better though.
 
Thank you for providing the link. Posted my FOR vote along with supporting comments. I live 10 minutes away from Penns, and only want the best for this gem of a fishery.
 
Zak wrote:
Why does it need to be artificial lures? That's all I use (artificials) but it's been proven over and over that the impact is so limited to just allowing anyone to fish. Why the state continues with these restrictive regulations is puzzling. Just make it catch and release be done with it. If someone wants to drift a worm then so be it. It's not going to make a difference in any of our fishing success. I guess it just makes everyone feel better though.
Click to expand...

I agree. I said in my comment that support the change but would also consider a restricted bag limit/slot size. I also commented that we should keep it open to all anglers. I think the biggest victory here is the cessation of stocking.
 
i wonder how the wild trout would vote?
 
semperfly wrote:
i wonder how the wild trout would vote?
Click to expand...

If they had the cognitive capacity to weigh in I'm guessing that they would vote for a closed season all of the time and try to ban angling, especially the gruesome habit of keeping and eating a fish. Disgusting. Just my thoughts though, I can't speak for the trout.
 
Posted my FOR vote as well. Love this section of Penns and have caught plenty a big beautiful wild brown in it.
 
It's been a long long time, but it is a special place.
 
“Why does it need to be artificial lures? That's all I use (artificials) but it's been proven over and over that the impact is so limited to just allowing anyone to fish. Why the state continues with these restrictive regulations is puzzling. Just make it catch and release be done with it. If someone wants to drift a worm then so be it. It's not going to make a difference in any of our fishing success. I guess it just makes everyone feel better though.”

Catch and release all tackle from Coburn to Weikert is something to think about. Removes suggestion PFBC discriminates against non-fly, non-lure anglers.
 
Hey lots of traction on the Sunbury Daily Item regarding this subject...opinion of the vocal minority, counter point by an actual landowner, and response by PFBC. Also there are multiple articles in other media including PA Outdoor News. Read them, form your own opinion and communicate it to the PFBC and local Representatives. Lots of misinformation being thrown around from those in opposition to the proposed rule change. If you truly believe in catch and release regs, let those making the decision ions know!
 
more info

https://www.fishandboat.com/AboutUs/Documents/PennsCkSec05-Feb2018.pdf
 
Zak and Penzz,
it is permissible to make such suggestions in your comments to the Commission.
 
That PDF/slide show was actually a whole lot better than I was expecting. Why did it take the PFBC 40 years to re-examine a section of a fantastic trout stream when we knew the trout populations were on the up and up throughout the state?

All in all the statistics show that the population has swelled (even though they only sampled one site in '77) and that most everyone wants to C&R ALO regs. That will make it easy for people to understand since you are just extending and basically lengthening section 04 regs.
 
"Zak and Penzz,
it is permissible to make such suggestions in your comments to the Commission."

Certainly, in fact I made that suggestion directly to PFBF via online feedback. For others here, Mark Nale seems to be making a similar case in his most recent article in Outdoor News.

https://www.outdoornews.com/2018/08/08/who-should-control-trout-stream-classification-and-fishing-regulations-in-pennsylvania/

In the end though, access is about to get more difficult. if any of you have driven out Weikert Road lately you will have noticed the Soper property (upper boundary of Section 05), Swinging Bridge property, Buick Blvd, property behind AFWEO, last property at the bottom of new Section 05, the large Kissinger property - all have been posted. If Goehring posts the large Little Mountain property, it won't matter much what the regulations are.
 
nymphingmaniac wrote:
more info

https://www.fishandboat.com/AboutUs/Documents/PennsCkSec05-Feb2018.pdf
Click to expand...

Dear nymphingmaniac,

I just want to say thank you for posting the documentation referenced above. I've had a hard time negotiating the PFBC new web page and was reluctant to comment on the proposal because I didn't know what was being proposed? Your efforts eliminated that problem!

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)
 
Bill Goehring has always had signs on his property at Little Mountain saying please release the fish...I believe he was also a pretty big advocate to changing the regulations on Section 5 as well...not sure if he'll post the property, but I don't imagine him doing so in the future. Bill has always been more than happy to let people fish his property and I've enjoyed staying at Little Mountain a handful of times. Never have seen anyone really disrespect that land either (trash, etc.), so I wouldn't expect him to post it.
 
Someone above posted about how the regs need to consider keeping the stretch open to "all anglers". I also read Mark Nales article in PA Outdoor News and he alludes to the same thing.

Even if the new Regs consider C&R ALO, anyone can still fish that stretch, they just need to chose their terminal tackle appropriately and fish accordingly. Fly Fisherman and spin fisherman can still fish this stretch.

The Regulations and tackle restriction is meant to protect the trout. It still allows for "any angler" to fish. If the change was to C&R FFO, then I can see the argument and discrimination against spin fisherman.

I get people like to fish bait, no issue there. But, how about trying a different method of fishing with your spinning rod?

If these changes go through this will open up more "trout water" on Penns Creek and provide greater protection to wild trout resource. I have a hard time understanding who would be against this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top