Pennsylvania's Biggest Fishery Blunders

sixfootfenwick

sixfootfenwick

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2022
Messages
1,330
City
Pennsylvania
Afish posted this in another thread:

“The story of Big Spring Creek is one of legend. In the 1920’s through (the) 50’s the stream was so famous that the English sporting media regularly sent reporters over to do stories on this American spring creek, which was comparable to the best English Chalkstreams. Its native strain of brook trout were like no other that anyone could find.” As written by Jim Chestney in an article entitled The Saga of Big Spring Creek, some of the earliest conservation measures that were adopted in the United States in fact may have originated on this stream back in 1850 when a creel limit was established of 50 trout per day with the river enjoying a glorious background in the annals of American trout fshing. Dr. John Black, in a column written in the forum section for Fly Fisherman magazine, mentions such angling legends as Charlie Foxa nd Ernest Schwiebert fishing at Big Spring. Dr. Black describes that for a stretch of Big Springs before 1955 – regardless of day or season of the year --hundreds of rising trout could be seen. You get the drift: this was one fabulous trout fishing river. And then come the hatcheries."

https://forloveofwater.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/ACaseStudy-BigSpringCreek-PA-copy.pdf

Got me thinking, what are some of the biggest Pennsylvania fishery blunders of all-time?
This one is my vote.
Anyone got another?
 
I'll give another which would be number 2 on my list. Not caused by fisheries mismanagement from the PFBC but rather life and progress. Shad.

Pennsylvania's Shad runs are well documented through history. Would have been an anglers paradise.

Here is a unique piece of history about the Pennsylvania Shad run many don't know. Pretty entertaining read. In the end of it, the PFBC tried to help the Shad but they were doomed to fail considering all the factors against them.

goschenhoppen.org

RW Fish Wars on the Schuylkill • The Goschenhoppen Historians

Fish Wars on the Schuylkill Robert Wood From the earliest times the Schuylkill and its tributaries were noted for their abundance of fish. Fresh fish from local creeks would have been a welcome addition to the diets of early settlers in the region. In addition to the resident populations of...
goschenhoppen.org goschenhoppen.org
 
There is one going on today that I just find infuriating. The addition of Mosquito Creek to the PFBC stocking list.

Seriously, why?
 
Going back to Big Spring:

www.bayjournal.com

Pennsylvania ‘megahatchery’ fouling stream and Chesapeake

The April Bay Journal contains a seriously flawed representation of the facts by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission concerning hatchery problems, including Big Spring Creek near Newville, PA.
www.bayjournal.com www.bayjournal.com

Anyone remember Eugene Macri? He did post here for a bit. Interesting fellow, really smart and dead right about Big Spring.
I always highly valued his efforts to help the creek .
 
JeffP said:
I remember reading about Babb's back in the day. Is the issue that the brook trout would be fine without stocking? I probably shouldn't have to ask.
Click to expand...
I think what makes me think blunder is the potential this project had. This was a chance for setting up the blue print for future projects on amd “dead” streams and a brook trout comeback.

It was a place where you could have done brown trout removal. No one would have cared. You could do habit improvements. No one would have cared. You could make it catch and release for brook trout. No one would have cared. You could have made it so it couldn’t be stocked by local clubs. Not a lot would have cared. You could have really played around with liming and ph levels and tributary impact and improvements. No one would have cared. You could have studied macro reintroduction attempts. Brook trout movement within a system. Etc. etc. etc.

It was the perfect place to experiment with a stream and brook trout recovery side by side. Without removing a popular thriving brown trout population. A chance to have something different. Study something different. Truly learn if a brook trout restoration on an entire water shed in PA was possible.

But now it’s stocked and the native brook trout are small. It isn’t just stocked with trout. I don’t think the largemouth bass, bluegill, bullheads and channel catfish it is also constantly stocked with help anything.

So yeah, improve water quality to have a potentially fully intact brook trout system. Instead it’s stocked with trout and warm water gamefish.

Blunder in my opinion

~5footfenwick
 
5footfenwick said:
I think what makes me think blunder is the potential this project had. This was a chance for setting up the blue print for future projects on amd “dead” streams and a brook trout comeback.

It was a place where you could have done brown trout removal. No one would have cared. You could do habit improvements. No one would have cared. You could make it catch and release for brook trout. No one would have cared. You could have made it so it couldn’t be stocked by local clubs. Not a lot would have cared. You could have really played around with liming and ph levels and tributary impact and improvements. No one would have cared. You could have studied macro reintroduction attempts. Brook trout movement within a system. Etc. etc. etc.

It was the perfect place to experiment with a stream and brook trout recovery side by side. Without removing a popular thriving brown trout population. A chance to have something different. Study something different. Truly learn if a brook trout restoration on an entire water shed in PA was possible.

But now it’s stocked and the native brook trout are small. It isn’t just stocked with trout. I don’t think the largemouth bass, bluegill, bullheads and channel catfish it is also constantly stocked with help anything.

So yeah, improve water quality to have a potentially fully intact brook trout system. Instead it’s stocked with trout and warm water gamefish.

Blunder in my opinion

~5footfenwick
Click to expand...
I feel that man. You should ask yourself why, after many possibilities, this has never been done
 
sixfootfenwick said:
Going back to Big Spring:

www.bayjournal.com

Pennsylvania ‘megahatchery’ fouling stream and Chesapeake

The April Bay Journal contains a seriously flawed representation of the facts by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission concerning hatchery problems, including Big Spring Creek near Newville, PA.
www.bayjournal.com www.bayjournal.com

Anyone remember Eugene Macri? He did post here for a bit. Interesting fellow, really smart and dead right about Big Spring.
I always highly valued his efforts to help the creek .
Click to expand...
I do. I think Black posted here as well or maybe I am thinking of Macri talking about Black.
 
5footfenwick said:
I think what makes me think blunder is the potential this project had. This was a chance for setting up the blue print for future projects on amd “dead” streams and a brook trout comeback.

It was a place where you could have done brown trout removal. No one would have cared. You could do habit improvements. No one would have cared. You could make it catch and release for brook trout. No one would have cared. You could have made it so it couldn’t be stocked by local clubs. Not a lot would have cared. You could have really played around with liming and ph levels and tributary impact and improvements. No one would have cared. You could have studied macro reintroduction attempts. Brook trout movement within a system. Etc. etc. etc.

It was the perfect place to experiment with a stream and brook trout recovery side by side. Without removing a popular thriving brown trout population. A chance to have something different. Study something different. Truly learn if a brook trout restoration on an entire water shed in PA was possible.

But now it’s stocked and the native brook trout are small. It isn’t just stocked with trout. I don’t think the largemouth bass, bluegill, bullheads and channel catfish it is also constantly stocked with help anything.

So yeah, improve water quality to have a potentially fully intact brook trout system. Instead it’s stocked with trout and warm water gamefish.

Blunder in my opinion

~5footfenwick
Click to expand...
It is stocked with warm-fish?? I always thought it was a small brookie stream. Obviously I have never fished it.
 
sixfootfenwick said:
I'll give another which would be number 2 on my list. Not caused by fisheries mismanagement from the PFBC but rather life and progress. Shad.

Pennsylvania's Shad runs are well documented through history. Would have been an anglers paradise.

Here is a unique piece of history about the Pennsylvania Shad run many don't know. Pretty entertaining read. In the end of it, the PFBC tried to help the Shad but they were doomed to fail considering all the factors against them.

goschenhoppen.org

RW Fish Wars on the Schuylkill • The Goschenhoppen Historians

Fish Wars on the Schuylkill Robert Wood From the earliest times the Schuylkill and its tributaries were noted for their abundance of fish. Fresh fish from local creeks would have been a welcome addition to the diets of early settlers in the region. In addition to the resident populations of...
goschenhoppen.org goschenhoppen.org
Click to expand...
I would think the coal mining period would have put a nail in the coffin of shad on the Schuylkill regardless of what happened prior.

As the lumber period did in central PA to native fish populations. My grandfather told me how the Susquehanna at Lock Haven was so full of hemlock trees getting ready to raft down you could walk across the river on the logs. The river was reddish brown as far south as Sunbury from the tannic acid.

We can criticize the PFBC but if we were born 100 to 125 years ago there would be far fewer places to fish.
 
Tabasco-Joe said:
I would think the coal mining period would have put a nail in the coffin of shad on the Schuylkill regardless of what happened prior.

As the lumber period did in central PA to native fish populations. My grandfather told me how the Susquehanna at Lock Haven was so full of hemlock trees getting ready to raft down you could walk across the river on the logs. The river was reddish brown as far south as Sunbury from the tannic acid.

We can criticize the PFBC but if we were born 100 to 125 years ago there would be far fewer places to fish.
Click to expand...
Actually I don't criticize the PFBC over shad at all.
In fact it was dams mostly that destroyed them.

They are still in the Schuylkill just like brook trout are still in central PA. Just far less of them.

It's why I said life and progress not PFBC mismanagement.

However, I don't think pointing out mismanagement is a bad thing, we should remember history rather than repeat it. Not everything the PFBC does is good.
Shall we ignore it because something something about less places to fish 100 years ago?

But in the case of Shad the PFBC deserve no criticism at all. As much as we should acknowledge the blunders we should also acknowledge the victories.
M

Thread 'Schuylkill R American Shad'

The Fairmount Fishway opened in 1979. From that time forward it allowed some American Shad and over 30 other resident species, some in high numbers, to ascend Fairmount Dam, which is located at the head-of-tide, about 6-8 miles upstream from the Delaware R confluence. The natural head-of-tide on the Schuylkill would be upstream a few miles at the Falls Bridge, where you can still see the inundated large boulders that were once part of the substantial rapids known as "the falls."

Numbers of American Shad ascending the dam increased with PFBC fry stockings starting in the 1980's and...
  • Like
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages
Wayward Trading”/> </center> </div> </div> </div> <div class=


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top