Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission looks to create premium trout fishing opportunities

obamastock
 
^
That one is catchy!
 
What a shame. "250 trout/mile from 14"-20" is comparible to wild trout biomass". "This will draw anglers from across the country".

Sounds like somebody wished they had Montana. If only there was way? Oh wait there is, but it's not this plan.
 
Brookiechaser, while I admire your optimism, Montana cannot be compared to PA in this way. These 250 trout per mile over 15 inches streams don't exist or are extremely rare in PA even with the best combination of regulations. The only way this can be replicated without millions if not billions of stream enhancements in PA is through the planting of hatchery raised trout. I could be wrong, but few if any of our greatest streams reach this level at this point no matter the regulations or relative fertility.
 
The wild trout biomass quote was from their article pushing the giant pellethead project.

I don't have biomass numbers off the top of my head. I'd venture a guess Penns exceeds that, and that is just one example. Spring would exceed that in numbers but would be comprised of the smaller end of that scale.
 
salmonoid wrote:
Don't they already do this in the Lake Erie tribs? :-D
Click to expand...

They "did" but not now. The steelhead fishing is a pittance of what it used to be. And I imagine they will enact this scheme in a similar vane without being sensitive to increased foot traffic through adjacent stream owners property.
 
Put the big ones in local swimming pools before Memorial Day and charge admission plus a fee per pound of fish caught. Bank Yank crowd won't have to walk far, parking won't be an issue, and you could open up the concession stand to boost the local economies of the lucky town recipients while listening to Beyoncé and Katy Perry on the pools sound system. Do a travelling road show format every year to different locations around the state. It would also keep the stream side littering down. Instant gratifications and actual profit for the PAFBC.
 
I'll just look for the parade of Ugly-Stik toting lawnchair beasts and steer myself in the complete opposite direction
 
BrookieChaser wrote:
The wild trout biomass quote was from their article pushing the giant pellethead project.

I don't have biomass numbers off the top of my head. I'd venture a guess Penns exceeds that, and that is just one example. Spring would exceed that in numbers but would be comprised of the smaller end of that scale.
Click to expand...

And those are two of our BEST streams along with a handful of others.

You can have good fishing for wild trout here in PA, but the baseline for what is "good" is far lower than that of western states. Here you can have lots of fish, or big fish, but seldom both. Even in those rare cases, the comparison to Montana is a stretch.
 
As I said, I'm ignorant, but I doubt even Penns or Spring have 250 15"+ trout per mile.
 
JackM wrote:
As I said, I'm ignorant, but I doubt even Penns or Spring have 250 15"+ trout per mile.
Click to expand...

The most recent surveys for Penns in '05 and '07 turned up 143 and 114 trout in the 15" range and a decent number of fish bigger than 15" also, so that is not too far off from the 250 @ 15" or bigger mark.

But still, that is one of our best. Penn's is not typical or representative of trout streams in PA. Neither is Spring, or LJR, or Fishing.

I think any number of smaller and lesser known Class A's or even Class B's should be representative of what we want to achieve with our wild trout management.

Stocking on the other hand should have other goals. IMO it should be to provide reliable, relatively high catch rates in streams without significant wild trout populations, and secondly to get the most recreational use out of the fish stocked. I think the proposed lunker stocking achieves these goals while realistically increasing the chances of the average angler of catching big fish.

This new program is not my cup of tea, but the PAFBC could have really mucked things up in trying to provide an opportunity to catch large stocked fish. So far, that has not been the case, so I see no need to bash or discredit the idea. The program does nothing to hinder the wild trout cause IMO. If you enjoy catching big stocked fish, go for it, if you don't, this change doesn't affect you.
 
I was stating how I thought it was ironic they're trying to create a destination "wild trout" fishing state (as per the wording I paraphrased from the release) by furthering the actions that are suppressing what could actually make them a real wild trout destination state.

As long as the pellethead parks don't affect a single wild trout, have at it. Maybe they can sell special stamps to fund it? Maybe even put a couple golden tickets in Hershey bars?
 
so, other than hating on the Commission, which seems to be the popular thing to do, what's the big deal about this program?

All they're doing is reallocating hatchery fish that are already being raised and planting them in a handful of already established special reg areas. If it creates increased interest and sells a few more licenses and stamps, great. I keep reading how the commission is broke and needs more funds, so what's the big deal about them shuffling the distribution of stockies to try to drum up business?
 
It further fosters the "PA trout fishing" mindset.
 
A friend of mine was talking to Bob at Neshannock Creek fly shop this past weekend. He said that the Neshannock was selected as one of the streams for this program. I tried to search online to find results, but couldn't get anything. Can anyone confirm if the streams have already been selected?
 
BrookieChaser wrote:
It further fosters the "PA trout fishing" mindset.
Click to expand...

How so? What Pa trout Fishing Mindset are you speaking of.

-This program promises to make no more fish than before, just realocating them to specific areas.

- Those areas will be Special Reg areas that have tackle restrictions. Surely not to please the Traditional Angler.

I would expect your quoted phrase to mean yank em bank em but thats not whats happening here if I am reading this correctly.

So expand on that quoted phrase if you like, I am curious.
 
Maurice, it's the "white truck" mentality I'm speaking of. The idea that trout fishing is only supplied by the PFBC. As long as this "suckling of the teet" is supported, and nurtured, PA will never know (or be allowed to see) its full potential that would be available through drastically reduced trout stocking.



 
Stockies are pretty neat around here, untill the summer hits and they all pod up next to a feeder creek gasping for clean water.
and stocking trout in a creek that supports wild trout often seems insane.
the answer. stock bass in the creeks that will never again support a wild trout populations.
bass are just as easy to catch,
fight like crazy,
and they are simpler to filet.
:)
 
BrookieChaser wrote:
Maurice, it's the "white truck" mentality I'm speaking of. The idea that trout fishing is only supplied by the PFBC. As long as this "suckling of the teet" is supported, and nurtured, PA will never know (or be allowed to see) its full potential that would be available through drastically reduced trout stocking.
Click to expand...

To use your metaphor of "suckling of the teet" Weening or reduced stocking and trout production have been occurring over the last 10 years at a rate that has begun to tip the scales in favor of wild trout where wild trout can thrive. It will continue to occur with budget cuts, stagnant revenue, pension burdens. This doesn't change that.

It may not be at the rate that pleases wild trout enthusiasts but look around and watch the progress as the wild trout fishing gets better while the stocking opportunities decrease.

PA is slowly boiling the stocked trout angler into a "frog soup" that should please anyone interested in wild trout fishing. Where wild trout can flourish, they will through attrition. where they cannot and where use is great enough, the stocking will continue.

I am trying to be patient and allow the soup to simmer, as long as it is going in the right direction, I don't care if they throw in a little more flavor as long as it don't blow the budget.
 
Maurice, when public opinion is flat out ignored and known Class A streams are stocked, despite the documented wild trout population, the decrease in stocking is happenstance, it is not a management theme.

I agree with your second paragraph. Which should be all the more reason to drasticly reduce stocking. Not push people, especially those using Special Regulation areas (those with more sporting tendencies in the grand scheme (I'm just generalizing, I couldn't think of a better way to put it)) back to the white trucks.
 
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