Pennsylvania's Best Brook Trout Waters?

But who is stocking brook trout in Big Spring? I thought the PFBC said they were going to totally quit raising and stocking brook trout.
The PFBC is still stocking brookies (ST) in Big Spring - for better or worse.

Generally, I'm in the camp that feels that PA should still stock adult STs, just due to tradition and they're our state fish. I also tend to believe that stocked STs are more likely to quickly be caught by anglers and are FAR less likely to hold over than RTs or BTs. In my neck of the woods, there are a couple popular streams that used to be stocked exclusively with STs that have been transitioned to RT/BTs. Since the transition a couple years ago, I see many more stocked trout, including as recently as last month. Back when they were stocked with STs this was rare and I almost never saw stocked fish in the fall. I fish both these streams year round and both have good numbers of wild ST and the presence of so many large stockies into the fall, especially in larger pools, is something I have mixed feelings about (I know, they shouldn't be stocked at all- that's a tired debate for a different thread). Sometimes I wish they'd put the STs back so they'd all get fished out in springtime.

Regarding the abatement of ST propagation/stocking by PFBC due to gill lice. . . apparently it's a more complicated picture. Some friends and colleagues who are involved with coop hatcheries have told me that PFBC will not provide STs for their clubs anymore. On the other hand, the PFBC still lists STs as being exclusively stocked in some of my local waters, such as Waynesboro Lake, that have always rec'd them. For whatever reason, PFBC seems to be staying the course on some of these waters, Big Spring included.

Over the summer, I walked the raceways at Huntsdale fish hatchery and saw no STs being raised. Maybe they'd already been stocked? So. . . I dunno (scratching head). I think PFBC wants to keep their options open at this stage. Institutionally, I'm sympathetic to that mindset.
 
Last edited:
The PFBC is still stocking brookies (ST) in Big Spring - for better or worse.

Generally, I'm in the camp that feels that PA should still stock adult STs, just due to tradition and they're our state fish. I also tend to believe that stocked STs are more likely to quickly be caught by anglers and are FAR less likely to hold over than RTs or BTs. In my neck of the woods, there are a couple popular streams that used to be stocked exclusively with STs that have been transitioned to RT/BTs. Since the transition a couple years ago, I see many more stocked trout, including as recently as last month. Back when they were stocked with STs this was rare and I almost never saw stocked fish in the fall. I fish both these streams year round and both have good numbers of wild ST and the presence of so many large stockies into the fall, especially in larger pools, is something I have mixed feelings about (I know, they shouldn't be stocked at all- that's a tired debate for a different thread). Sometimes I wish they'd put the STs back so they'd all get fished out in springtime.

Regarding the abatement of ST propagation/stocking by PFBC due to gill lice. . . apparently it's a more complicated picture. Some friends and colleagues who are involved with coop hatcheries have told me that PFBC will not provide STs for their clubs anymore. On the other hand, the PFBC still lists STs has being exclusively stocked in some of my local waters, such as Waynesboro Lake, that have always rec'd them. For whatever reason, PFBC seems to be staying the course on some of these waters, Big Spring included.

Over the summer, I walked the raceways at Hunstdale fish hatchery and saw no STs being raised. Maybe they'd already been stocked? Who knows? I think PFBC wants to keep their options open at this stage. Institutionally, I'm sympathetic to that mindset.
I think you touched on a very important point. Location. That colorful stocked brook trout with the big heron gash on its side was caught in central PA in a limestone influenced stream on September 26th 2020 at the height of one of the worst droughts I've ever seen.

This is a freestoner about 13 miles from where the brook trout was caught a bit earlier that year. (note that even this dry stream has limestone sinks and upwellings, and about 2 miles downstream of where this picture was taken the stream reemerged out of the earth at 55 degrees and was full of trout).
dry_stream.jpg


I think the same issue could be pointed out with Big Spring. I simply can't get on board with the idea that the 3,000 brook trout stocked between Nealy Rd and 641 are expected to die or be caught. There's absolutely no environmental reason stocked brook trout couldn't survive in Big Spring for years after being stocked. The only disadvantage a stocked brook trout has in Big Spring is predation by avian or bipedal predators due to their lack of survival traits.

There's a similar issue in some freestoners near where I live. I've caught "holdover" brook trout in February that were in all likelihood stocked in March of the prior year. There are wild native brook trout in the streams they're stocking with brook trout. If wild native brook trout can survive in the stream, why wouldn't a stocked brook trout? Again, aside from their lack of innate survival skills when it comes to predation from wildlife or anglers, the species is the same.

As a case in point, here's a stocked brook trout caught on December 16th 2019 on a small freestone stream high on the Allegheny front. The latest stocking was on 5/5 that year. This is a Class C stream and is entirely freestone. This stream gets fished heavily during trout season. There is a lot of inaccessible water there, though, and I've found that quite a few stocked brook trout find those laurel tangles and hide.
20181222_095701-e1547077745552-293696340-1547146122435 Large.jpeg


Does this same thing happen in the suburbs of Philadelphia? No. Does it happen in some frogwater stream in southeastern PA? No. So, where we live and what we see in our backyard matters here.
 
Yes the upper pic features of the dorsal fins are of characters that tune me in to determining whether a fish, BT or ST, has stocked origins. I combine that feature with others, though I believe I once placed more weight on that one until I saw a few wild BT with that deformity. I think it’s a pretty good character of a stocked fish, however, and certainly one that should make an angler or biologist look further re an individual fish’s other features.
 
What I said in #308 above, “no surprise there,” would also apply to PFBC adult stocked ST in my experience, that being poor suspected survival plus definitely poor residency. That’s why they are best stocked “under the rod” inseason, rather than preseason so they are most available to be caught. Exceptions are lakes. Limestoners are not exceptions based on trout residency work.

“ fin clip surveys revealed few of the fingerlings survived”​

No surprise there.
 
The PFBC is still stocking brookies (ST) in Big Spring - for better or worse.

Generally, I'm in the camp that feels that PA should still stock adult STs, just due to tradition and they're our state fish. I also tend to believe that stocked STs are more likely to quickly be caught by anglers and are FAR less likely to hold over than RTs or BTs. In my neck of the woods, there are a couple popular streams that used to be stocked exclusively with STs that have been transitioned to RT/BTs. Since the transition a couple years ago, I see many more stocked trout, including as recently as last month. Back when they were stocked with STs this was rare and I almost never saw stocked fish in the fall. I fish both these streams year round and both have good numbers of wild ST and the presence of so many large stockies into the fall, especially in larger pools, is something I have mixed feelings about (I know, they shouldn't be stocked at all- that's a tired debate for a different thread). Sometimes I wish they'd put the STs back so they'd all get fished out in springtime.

Regarding the abatement of ST propagation/stocking by PFBC due to gill lice. . . apparently it's a more complicated picture. Some friends and colleagues who are involved with coop hatcheries have told me that PFBC will not provide STs for their clubs anymore. On the other hand, the PFBC still lists STs as being exclusively stocked in some of my local waters, such as Waynesboro Lake, that have always rec'd them. For whatever reason, PFBC seems to be staying the course on some of these waters, Big Spring included.

Over the summer, I walked the raceways at Huntsdale fish hatchery and saw no STs being raised. Maybe they'd already been stocked? So. . . I dunno (scratching head). I think PFBC wants to keep their options open at this stage. Institutionally, I'm sympathetic to that mindset.
I would have to agree that the cutting back on native brook trout is WAY more complicated than gill lice.

Native brook trout conservation is simply part of the larger movement to conserve species biodiversity/richness during a historic bio diversity crisis/current mass extinction event.

So no matter if your talking native brook trout, Florida Panthers, or Red Panda’s we are in a point in time during human history where scientists are realizing relying on demographic data alone without genetics, as we have done with trout, is not a good way to manage/protect/restore ect. the population your working with.

“Broadly defined, demography is the study of the characteristics of populations. It provides a mathematical description of how those characteristics change over time. Demographics can include any statistical factors that influence population growth or decline, but several parameters are particularly important: population size, density, age structure, fecundity (birth rates), mortality (death rates), and sex ratio (Dodge 2006). We introduce each of these in turn.”

Enter the field of conservation genetics, the future of native brook trout conservation, as well as many other species. By looking at how genetically healthy a population is and pairing that WITH demographic data your no longer managing blind and just assigning an arbitrary class A to a stream section because it had a lot of trout in it. You can see which populations have been polluted with hatchery genes, which populations have rare genes that should be saved in a “portfolio” of genes useful for brook trout evolution. You can see which populations are incredibly genetically diverse and equipped to adapt at a higher rate already and prioritize them and use them as a source stock for conservation hatcheries, genetic rescues, and reintroductions to bolster populations experiencing inbreeding depression about to blink out.

With the entire community of species conservation moving to conservation genetics even PA fish and boat will have a hard time living down stocking hatchery brook trout that could potentially outbreed wild native brook trout genes that took since the last glaciation to evolve and genetically sabotaging the entire species.

When I have heard the average angler use the word “genetics” it’s usually inaccurately related to how a fish looks which is not always true. How something looks is phenotype not genotype. Your average angler has NO idea that conservation genetics is SO important and we are in a monumental shift in understanding how we can better conserve species through understanding their survivability and adaptability through genetics instead of simply counting fish and pointing fingers at solely issues with the stream. Not many are really largely aware in my experience of how critical the genes in the animal that code for tools used to survive in the wild are. So when they hear genetic pollution or introgression it sounds to esoteric or fancy to be a real threat like the almighty general stream temperature or habitat we collectively have tunnel vision on. Pa fish and boat goes to multiple fisheries science conferences, they hear the same articles i post here presented by the authors in many cases, and they know better in almost every case they chose not to do the right thing.

Thats a really long winded way of saying people underestimate how dangerous stocking hatchery brook trout over wild brook trout is and its something so bad even PA fish and boat can’t avoid it (as mentioned in above document provided by silver fox that no one in the general public will ever see to get educated unless you already know enough to go looking for it).

This all comes back to lack of education and awareness and again instead of using the below mediums for public education they it in obscure PDF hidden on website. Their not trying hard to “reach anyone” on this topic but at the same time will cite “strong public resistance” to many stocking reforms that would benefit native brook trout without softening up or educating the angling public at all.

Instead would be free to little cost to use any of these to teach about why its dangerous to stock hatchery brook teout over native brook trout.

Social media

License purchase surveys

Reg book

Youtube videos(currently made for palaminos)

Signage

Podcast appearances(done in other states)

Press releases
 
I would have to agree that the cutting back on native brook trout is WAY more complicated than gill lice.

Native brook trout conservation is simply part of the larger movement to conserve species biodiversity/richness during a historic bio diversity crisis/current mass extinction event.

So no matter if your talking native brook trout, Florida Panthers, or Red Panda’s we are in a point in time during human history where scientists are realizing relying on demographic data alone without genetics, as we have done with trout, is not a good way to manage/protect/restore ect. the population your working with.

“Broadly defined, demography is the study of the characteristics of populations. It provides a mathematical description of how those characteristics change over time. Demographics can include any statistical factors that influence population growth or decline, but several parameters are particularly important: population size, density, age structure, fecundity (birth rates), mortality (death rates), and sex ratio (Dodge 2006). We introduce each of these in turn.”

Enter the field of conservation genetics, the future of native brook trout conservation, as well as many other species. By looking at how genetically healthy a population is and pairing that WITH demographic data your no longer managing blind and just assigning an arbitrary class A to a stream section because it had a lot of trout in it. You can see which populations have been polluted with hatchery genes, which populations have rare genes that should be saved in a “portfolio” of genes useful for brook trout evolution. You can see which populations are incredibly genetically diverse and equipped to adapt at a higher rate already and prioritize them and use them as a source stock for conservation hatcheries, genetic rescues, and reintroductions to bolster populations experiencing inbreeding depression about to blink out.

With the entire community of species conservation moving to conservation genetics even PA fish and boat will have a hard time living down stocking hatchery brook trout that could potentially outbreed wild native brook trout genes that took since the last glaciation to evolve and genetically sabotaging the entire species.

When I have heard the average angler use the word “genetics” it’s usually inaccurately related to how a fish looks which is not always true. How something looks is phenotype not genotype. Your average angler has NO idea that conservation genetics is SO important and we are in a monumental shift in understanding how we can better conserve species through understanding their survivability and adaptability through genetics instead of simply counting fish and pointing fingers at solely issues with the stream. Not many are really largely aware in my experience of how critical the genes in the animal that code for tools used to survive in the wild are. So when they hear genetic pollution or introgression it sounds to esoteric or fancy to be a real threat like the almighty general stream temperature or habitat we collectively have tunnel vision on. Pa fish and boat goes to multiple fisheries science conferences, they hear the same articles i post here presented by the authors in many cases, and they know better in almost every case they chose not to do the right thing.

Thats a really long winded way of saying people underestimate how dangerous stocking hatchery brook trout over wild brook trout is and its something so bad even PA fish and boat can’t avoid it (as mentioned in above document provided by silver fox that no one in the general public will ever see to get educated unless you already know enough to go looking for it).

This all comes back to lack of education and awareness and again instead of using the below mediums for public education they it in obscure PDF hidden on website. Their not trying hard to “reach anyone” on this topic but at the same time will cite “strong public resistance” to many stocking reforms that would benefit native brook trout without softening up or educating the angling public at all.

Instead would be free to little cost to use any of these to teach about why its dangerous to stock hatchery brook teout over native brook trout.

Social media

License purchase surveys

Reg book

Youtube videos(currently made for palaminos)

Signage

Podcast appearances(done in other states)

Press releases
As far as genetics are concerned, I'm really curious what the composition of fish in Big Spring is. I'm convinced that they're all from hatchery origins at this point. So what does that mean for the long-term survival of the species there? What is the constant addition of stocked brook trout doing to the pool? Where do these translocated fish factor in? Is anyone even looking at genetics at Big Spring? Does anyone care?

More broadly, I agree. It seems very rudimentary to survey a stream and determine that X number of fish found on Y date within this section of stream = a carrying capacity for the section and that's it. If it scores low, stock it. If it scores high, don't. That treats streams, and riverscapes, as aquariums divided by imaginary lines. This notion of what happens in one small stretch of a stream somewhere is completely isolated from the rest of the watershed, even if no barriers are present seems awfully short-sighted.

Like the Cub Run example I brought up earlier. That stream sampled as Class A one year, and then later sampled as Class D. So they dropped the classification to continue stocking it. Shouldn't that tell you something is going on there? It was able to achieve Class A, and rather than err on the side of caution and treat it like a wild native brook trout stream (or mixed pop), it sampled poorly and immediately gets stocked again.

The bar for removal from the stocking program seems much higher than the bar to remain within it. Again, all of this assumes that these classifications of 3/4 of a mile of stream represent the entirety of the story for the population of fish that inhabits the entire watershed. It assumes that the fish in some first-order tributary means nothing to the rest of the watershed.

Brook trout seem to be the sacrificial lamb in this state in order to support any other form of management.
 
Char video

Damn thats a sweet video, yea I am going to try to cut some time to go down there and trophy chase in one of their special brook trout management areas. Have seen a decent amount of 17” wild appearing native brook trout in TU magazines/online. If I had enoigh time to trophy hunt the 3 states with those management zones if hit rose/rapidan in VA red and otter in WV and savage in MD. And i can post that all on here because its so much miles of water state knows its ok to advertise their trophy or high quality native brook trout fisheries. When they five em 200+ Contiguous miles and their protected and full of larger fish its just like telling people about the little J as a whole here in Pa.
 
Damn thats a sweet video, yea I am going to try to cut some time to go down there and trophy chase in one of their special brook trout management areas. Have seen a decent amount of 17” wild appearing native brook trout in TU magazines/online. If I had enoigh time to trophy hunt the 3 states with those management zones if hit rose/rapidan in VA red and otter in WV and savage in MD. And i can post that all on here because its so much miles of water state knows its ok to advertise their trophy or high quality native brook trout fisheries. When they five em 200+ Contiguous miles and their protected and full of larger fish its just like telling people about the little J as a whole here in Pa.
I highly recommend you do.
Not all their waters are created equal but WV had some very good mileage for larger wild brook trout
 
Damn thats a sweet video, yea I am going to try to cut some time to go down there and trophy chase in one of their special brook trout management areas. Have seen a decent amount of 17” wild appearing native brook trout in TU magazines/online. If I had enoigh time to trophy hunt the 3 states with those management zones if hit rose/rapidan in VA red and otter in WV and savage in MD. And i can post that all on here because its so much miles of water state knows its ok to advertise their trophy or high quality native brook trout fisheries. When they five em 200+ Contiguous miles and their protected and full of larger fish its just like telling people about the little J as a whole here in Pa.
After reading about the Savage, I want to explore the brook trout streams in the upper Savage at some point as well.
 
After reading about the Savage, I want to explore the brook trout streams in the upper Savage at some point as well.
I have been to the upper savage and the amount of high quality fly fishing experience it can provide to a multitude of anglers who want to spread out and bot really see many if any folks is incredible. I think its over 100miles managed for native brook trout in the upper.
 
Not sure because I didn't watch the video. Hopefully, it's brook trout poison.

Edit:. I did watch it and I believe it's a flotant called hot air made by NFC
Smooth
 
Top