Penns

I often fished Penns from the mid-1960’s to 2000, but then fished it infrequently until 2018 during which I spent the summers in Montana. I have begun fishing it more during the past half dozen years. I fished it mostly from the trestle just upstream of Poe Paddy to a couple miles below the tunnel.

Based on my observations of fishing that section of Penns, there seems to be more trout there now than I recall from several or more decades ago, and (don’t hold me to it, as my memory isn’t completely certain) I believe there were a couple years, probably in the early 1970’s, when that entire stretch of water was opened to regular fishing, with no special regulations. During that period of time, I saw guys keeping stringers of nice trout, and there seemed to be some larger fish being caught.

Probably the best fish I ever saw taken there (and killed) was (I estimated at the time) a brown that was all of 20”+ and 4#, caught on #16 Adam’s dry late in the evening. My friend caught a brown above the trestle at dark one night that was about 20”. Both of these fish were in the late 1960’s or early 1970’s.

For a couple years during the early 1970’s I used to run into an old guy from time to time who owned property adjacent to the Poe Paddy campground on Tunnel Road. He and his wife sometimes camped on his property or in the Poe Paddy campground, and we often met them at our campfire in the campground in the evening when we also camped there.

He said his father had once owned the camp along the railroad tracks just beyond the end of the tunnel, and rode the train from their home near Lewisburg to their camp. That could have been in the 1920’s, or maybe the 1930’s. He said the train would stop right at their camp to let them off, and later to pick them up when they returned home. There’s no way to prove it, but he said he once caught a 30” brown at the lower end of Broad Water.

I can’t say for sure or not that during the 60 years that I’ve fished Penns whether the trout have gotten smaller, but there have always been plenty of nice trout to make fishing a wonderful experience. On the other hand, there certainly seems to be more fisherman fishing there than there than there used to be, more of whom are much less respectful when fishing near others. (But that’s a subject for another day).
 
Last edited:
Very good attention to detail, jifigz.

Yes, going back to Wisconsin’s evaluation of all of its wild trout stream data, the higher the wild trout densities the smaller were the avg lengths. This was true for BT populations and ST populations.
I understood what he said. And as I said there are plenty of big fish in Penns. Thinning occurs naturally as I have seen may Eagles, Osprey, Mink, Otters, Herons, Mergansers, etc take their fair share plus other natural mortality reason. Leave Penns alone and let her do her thing. IMO, it was a silly comment.
 
IMO Penns has lots of “good” fish, but I agree, high teens and 20”+ fish aren’t common there. I don’t know exactly why. At Penns I catch A LOT of low teens fish, with a fair number up to about 16 or 17”. If Penns is fishing well that day I can usually count on getting into a couple fish in the 15-17” range. Those are darn good fish, and plenty of fun. I don’t catch many dinks, and I’d venture to say the most common size fish I catch on Penns is in the 12-14” range.

Of the “Big 4”, that’s bigger than most of the fish I catch on the Little J, and nearly all of the fish I catch on Spring, though I agree on both of those you do have a better chance of catching the rogue high teens or bigger fish than you do on Penns. IMO certain stretches of BFC have the biggest fish in it of those four streams.
 
In my humble opinion Penns is loaded with lots of humongous trout. However, I've fished Penns 4 times and I am yet to rid the schneid!
 
The best place to catch "Big Fish and Lots of Them" is on unexploited (largely unfished) waters.

This is true of all types of trout streams, whether it's brook trout in mountain streams or wild browns in big streams.

Which proves that trout populations do not need to be thinned out by angler harvest to thrive.
 
You think you have a better chance of catching a 20" trout on a mountain stream over the West Branch of the Delaware? I disagree.
 
I agree with troutbert. The problem with anglers thinning out a population of fish is they're going to keep the biggest fish they catch. So instead of thinning numbers of small to medium size fish, the harvest just ends up cropping off the top end fish from the population.
 
I understood what he said. And as I said there are plenty of big fish in Penns. Thinning occurs naturally as I have seen may Eagles, Osprey, Mink, Otters, Herons, Mergansers, etc take their fair share plus other natural mortality reason. Leave Penns alone and let her do her thing. IMO, it was a silly comment.
What is a "big fish?" Of course, it all depends on what species we are talking about, but in my opinion, brown trout are "big" after surpassing about 15". Now, if we agree that a 15" fish is "big," then I will agree and say that Penns has a lot of big fish.

To those of you speaking about population thinning and acting as if it is universally applicable to all streams is just nonsense. When you mention that natural mortality thins the population enough, then what is our limiting factor for a lack of truly big fish on Penns? When I say truly big, I am talking 20" plus. I think we all agree that there are not all that many 20" fish in Penns. Are there some? Certainly, but not a lot. Is the limiting factor food? Unlikely. How about water temps? It could be that too many big fish succumb to high water temps in July and August. Big fish are older fish, so maybe they cannot handle stress as easily as younger fish. I dunno.

I know this for a fact: I catch more large wild brown trout out of streams that get hit hard by "your average Joe." You know, guys slinging worms, spinners, powerbait, Rapalas, etc, etc. These dudes are often going home with a stringer full of fish, often times with a few wild fish on the stringer. I also catch more large trout out of those marginal streams that support fish, but conditions aren't ideal, but there are enough fish to make it fun to fish, etc. These streams don't have trout under every rock like Penns does, but they often have larger fish lurking.

Does the Little J produce quality fish on the higher side than Penns? Is it brimming with 20" plus fish? In my opinion, no. It is very comparable in water quality, structure, fish size, pressure, and regulations. But, from my experiences fishing there, the "big fish" tend to start topping out at about the same size as they do in Penns.

Not every stream could benefit from a population thinning. Maybe Penns wouldn't even benefit from it. Who knows? Some streams have the right food structure, the right number of fish, the right holding water, the right water chemistry, etc to just produce truly monstrous fish. Yes, anglers will often keep the largest fish they catch, but anglers do not catch all large fish from a stream. We are not going to go in and catch every large brown trout lurking in a stream. It just ain't gonna happen.

We are all entitled to our opinions, and Mike is an older dude who, obviously, has his own biases and views on this world and our fisheries. Along with that bias, however, is a lot of field work, knowledge, and a scientific perspective from years of generating and collecting data that many of us just can't compete with. Hey, I'd fancy myself a pretty damn good angler. I think the guys on this board that have fished with me would vouch for that, too. I think I have a lot of great knowledge regarding a lot of stuff, but I don't think it really compares with Mike's knowledge because he has seen things from a much different perspective. When you spent years doing electroshock surveys and putting together the puzzles and noticing trends among fisheries, etc, I wouldn't just discount a comment as silly.

Sorry for the rant.
 
We are all entitled to our opinions, and Mike is an older dude who, obviously, has his own biases and views on this world and our fisheries. Along with that bias, however, is a lot of field work, knowledge, and a scientific perspective from years of generating and collecting data that many of us just can't compete with. Hey,

I think I have a lot of great knowledge regarding a lot of stuff, but I don't think it really compares with Mike's knowledge because he has seen things from a much different perspective. When you spent years doing electroshock surveys and putting together the puzzles and noticing trends among fisheries, etc, I wouldn't just discount a comment as silly.
With all due respect to forum members, I put more stock in what Mike has to say on most fishing related subjects, than I do anybody else.
 
With all due respect to forum members, I put more stock in what Mike has to say on most fishing related subjects, than I do anybody else.
I couldn't agree more. We all come to our opinions through observations, life experiences, etc, and the fact of the matter is, Mike has more field work in studying fish populations through a scientific lens than anyone else on this board. The dude has good info, insight, and knowledge.
 
I will agree with what jifigz and swattie have said here. I have caught many "big" fish from both Penns and the Little J. "Big" fish for me in PA are 16-18". I can say that before I used my net to measure a few fish in this class, I may or may not have told friends they were around 20". 20" is really a LARGE trout. I have fished both of these streams many times in the past 5 years and while I can expect to run into a few fish in this range, I have never caught or seen from one of my friends a fish above a real 20" in either. 8-14" fish are then norm for me and my friends. BFC follows about the same range, although I think I have seen larger fish chase streamers. To me, an 18" fish is big, and can certainly appear it if a picture is taken at the right angle. Of the big 4, my average fish size would rank Penns, Little J, BFC, and then Spring by a significant margin. I will say that I have landed bigger fish in Valley Creek than any I have ever caught in the big 4. If Valley can produce fish of that size, it amazes me that more people have not caught bigger fish out of Penns or the Little J if fishing pressure is the major concern. It may just be that I am more willing to fish a small stream like Valley when the conditions are right. By far, the highest % of really big (18"+) trout I have caught come from streams that do not have high numbers of trout.

I would be more than willing to support a slot limit where anglers are required to kill a certain number of fish from 8-14" on a certain stream just to see what happens. I live on a 3/4 acre pond where I had never caught or seen a bass much over a pound for 10 years until I read about pond management for larger bass. Standard protocol is to harvest a certain amount of bass in a specific slot range per acre each year. The past few years I have kept many fish in the 12-14" range. The average fish size has exploded and now I can regularly catch fish in the 2-3 lb range and above. From a fishing perspective, it doesn't seem like there are significantly less bass in the pond, but many big fish I never thought would be possible now live in the pond. The fish have been getting bigger every summer and I expect to catch a 5 pounder soon. There have always been plenty or herons, eagles, turtles, minks, etc. around to prey on the bass, but nothing has had the impact that angler intervention has.

Obviously trout are not bass, but in a pond managed and fished 100% by myself, culling out fish has certainly lead to an extreme improvement in size and general health (better overall size and weight to length) of the bass population. I think it would certainly be worth a shot on a trout stream if the desired goal is bigger trout. I don't think anyone would argue that any of the big 4 have plenty of food available for trout, but IMO, there are too many trout that compete for that food to produce truly large trout.

Lots of food + few fish = big fish.
 
Big fish-(trout anyway)

15 plus is a large fish (pic from Penns, sulpher )

18 plus very large (pic from Penns
, streamer)

20 is 20

25 plus are behemoth

Have interest in cicadas, this was the only one I didn’t fish 16 years ago (with one season to go).
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5770.jpeg
    IMG_5770.jpeg
    341.8 KB · Views: 58
  • ACD2218E-BFEA-45FE-98AF-4351EED696DE_L0_001.jpeg
    ACD2218E-BFEA-45FE-98AF-4351EED696DE_L0_001.jpeg
    556.5 KB · Views: 58
The best place to catch "Big Fish and Lots of Them" is on unexploited (largely unfished) waters.

This is true of all types of trout streams, whether it's brook trout in mountain streams or wild browns in big streams.

Which proves that trout populations do not need to be thinned out by angler harvest to thrive.
what you are implying is that anglers need to be thinned out 🙂
 
In that regard (warm temps) the special reg zone could probably use some population thinning in order to temporarily produce bigger fish on avg in the near future. There are a few limestone or limestone influenced special reg areas populations like that, but not all of them are subject to stressful temps.
Mike,

This might be an old wives tale but somewhere along the way in the past 50 years I heard that “a trout caught 7 times has a high probably of dying”. Whether it’s stress from the fight, unable to remove the hook timely, taking too long to snap a photo, hooking it deep in the gills, ….etc

Is there any truth to that and if so, does that count get set back to 0 if the trout survives to the next March? That only takes into account the mortality brought about by anglers.
 
Mike,

This might be an old wives tale but somewhere along the way in the past 50 years I heard that “a trout caught 7 times has a high probably of dying”. Whether it’s stress from the fight, unable to remove the hook timely, taking too long to snap a photo, hooking it deep in the gills, ….etc

Is there any truth to that and if so, does that count get set back to 0 if the trout survives to the next March? That only takes into account the mortality brought about by anglers.
Think it’s more likely that with every time it’s caught, there’s higher probability of mortality from getting hooked in a way that damages it irreparably, handled poorly or in adverse conditions. I would bet it’s more of a percentages chart where (again on average) it’s something like:

Caught. %mortality
1x…………… 5
2x……………10
3x……………20
4x…………… 30
5x……………..50
6x……………..75
7x……………..95

This might all be within a calendar year or over a lifetime. Frankly, a fish that’s caught that many times within a year is probably pretty dumb so it’s not the worst thing in the world to remove its genes from the population 😂
 
Think it’s more likely that with every time it’s caught, there’s higher probability of mortality from getting hooked in a way that damages it irreparably, handled poorly or in adverse conditions. I would bet it’s more of a percentages chart where (again on average) it’s something like:

Caught. %mortality
1x…………… 5
2x……………10
3x……………20
4x…………… 30
5x……………..50
6x……………..75
7x……………..95

This might all be within a calendar year or over a lifetime. Frankly, a fish that’s caught that many times within a year is probably pretty dumb so it’s not the worst thing in the world to remove its genes from the population 😂
I agree, pretty dumb, or one hell of an appetite. Also, could just be a glutton for punishment.
 
Think it’s more likely that with every time it’s caught, there’s higher probability of mortality from getting hooked in a way that damages it irreparably, handled poorly or in adverse conditions. I would bet it’s more of a percentages chart where (again on average) it’s something like:

Caught. %mortality
1x…………… 5
2x……………10
3x……………20
4x…………… 30
5x……………..50
6x……………..75
7x……………..95

This might all be within a calendar year or over a lifetime. Frankly, a fish that’s caught that many times within a year is probably pretty dumb so it’s not the worst thing in the world to remove its genes from the population 😂

I could not agree more! I don't know how realistic those numbers are but I have a feeling that the real numbers stacked against huge fish making it in our most popular streams.
 
I would be more than willing to support a slot limit where anglers are required to kill a certain number of fish from 8-14" on a certain stream just to see what happens.
You can't require anyone to kill fish. You can have a slot limit open to harvest, and a stretch of Penns already has that.

Then you have to take a place like Penns (a holy fly fishing water, no doubt) that is frequented by multitudes of fly fishermen who embrace the catch & release lifestyle (for good reason, mostly) and have them deride you, make comments, and harass you about how stupid you are for harvesting wild browns, and we must protect these fish, and blah blah blah.

Have you ever seen anyone harvest a brown on Penns? Yeah, me neither. I am going to this fall, however. I am going to take my bicycle, go to a remote section of stream, have my ingredients needed to cook a beautiful brown in cast iron on a fire, and enjoy a delicious trout dinner.
 
Back
Top