PFBC Meeting

[Mike]

CRB,
The exception is catching fish into July on one of those waters, the one that I most frequently fish. I have seen water temps more frequently end the fishing there by the end of the first week in June and then only pick up for a day or two after a cooling, high water event. That's when I go a little farther to find cooler waters.

I have no problem as an angler or biologist with other anglers thinning out stocked trout populations from cool streams. I also encourage it on streams that will be too warm to support anywhere near the number of trout stocked come sometime in summer. That includes DH Areas. They will never harvest all of them and the pressure in late spring and summer is not likely to be enough to harvest most of them if the harvest was not started back in April. So fishing will still be good in my view for C&R anglers in DH Areas whether harvest starts in mid-June or late May.

 

[PennKev]

Mike wrote:
Streamer guy,
I don't see that the harvest that concerns you will in reality diminish the quality of your late May-early June surface fishing. I fish non-DH stocked trout streams in urban and suburban areas with great frequency. Those streams see harvest all spring long, yet when late May and June roll around the dry fly fishing is quite good. By late May and June the fish are well educated and suddenly appear from nowhere when the hatches occur. Additionally, pressure greatly diminishes by May 10 in many if not most stocked trout streams. It may pick up a for couple of days following a stocking, but it dies back pretty rapidly. I don't find it difficult to locate fish and I am not impressed that one must have artificially maintained high numbers of stocked trout in order to have good fishing, especially toward the end of May and in June.

I will add that there there are two fairly famous limestone special reg areas within 5-7 miles of my home and I pass within a mile or two of another on the way to the office. I have Electrofished each of those special reg areas, so I have a good idea of what the populations are like. I am not even tempted to fish those waters since the fishing on stocked trout streams even closer to my home is so good throughout the spring and in some years into early July as dictated by water temps.

Yeah the fishing pressure normally dies down late in the season.....


BUT THE PROPOSAL IS INTENDED TO CHANGE THAT!

The idea is to get more people fishing and keeping fish during this wonderful late spring time period, no?

You are either dense or trolling the #$%&# out of us.

 

[PennKev]

And one more thing...

Virtually every DHALO area near me receives additional stocking from the local TU's or sportsman's clubs, or even private sources.

I hope that the PAFBC values the contributions from these sources and took them into consideration when concocting this idea.

I have my doubts the PAFBC even thought about why TU (and others) spends it's time and money on these areas...

 

[AndyP]

Reading between the positioning of Mikes answers and I'm speculating here, but it sounds like a done deal........Is it Mike ?

 

[streamerguy]

Mike wrote:
Streamer guy,
I don't see that the harvest that concerns you will in reality diminish the quality of your late May-early June surface fishing. I fish non-DH stocked trout streams in urban and suburban areas with great frequency. Those streams see harvest all spring long, yet when late May and June roll around the dry fly fishing is quite good. By late May and June the fish are well educated and suddenly appear from nowhere when the hatches occur. Additionally, pressure greatly diminishes by May 10 in many if not most stocked trout streams. It may pick up a for couple of days following a stocking, but it dies back pretty rapidly. I don't find it difficult to locate fish and I am not impressed that one must have artificially maintained high numbers of stocked trout in order to have good fishing, especially toward the end of May and in June.

If the numbers of stocked fish in non-DH streams are still good in late May, June, etc... then why can't people just continue to harvest fish from those streams and leave the DHALOs as is?

I share some of the same experiences, but each stream is different and it varies year to year. High spring flows(saves fish from getting kept) and cool water temps definitely are factors. On average DHALOs still contain more fish.......I just don't see why we need to risk hurting those populations.

There's this one little ATW I always fish on opening day ever since I was really young. Last year on opening weekend my brother and I racked up the numbers very easily. The stream was loaded with fish, they were everywhere........and leaving very fast on stringers. Went back a few weeks later and struggled to catch a few fish. The powerbait guys said it was fished out but I managed to catch a few on small nymphs and dries away from the popular holes. Barely even saw any left and I covered a lot of water. I visit it twice in June and worked my butt off for one trout. One of those evenings I fished a nearby DHALO and caught 10 very easily.

That's just one scenario. Simple mathematics.......you can't catch fish that aren't there

I realize not all ATWs get fished out easily. In fact I had a couple pretty good days on one this past August! But the vast majority(at least in the areas I fish) do get fished out pretty quick. The DHALOs still contain many more fish than "most" regular ATWs. I'd hate to possibly lose DHALO sections as another late season option. The more good opportunities there are at catching trout, the more people will fish(especially kids). The PFBC wants to create more opportunities. Why RISK hurting those opportunities??

 

[streamerguy]

PennKev wrote:

Yeah the fishing pressure normally dies down late in the season.....


BUT THE PROPOSAL IS INTENDED TO CHANGE THAT!

Virtually every DHALO area near me receives additional stocking from the local TU's or sportsman's clubs, or even private sources.

I hope that the PAFBC values the contributions from these sources and took them into consideration when concocting this idea.

I have my doubts the PAFBC even thought about why TU (and others) spends it's time and money on these areas...

Yep

 

[Mike]

AndyP,
No, the deal is done when the Commissioners vote and I do not invest any time in trying to predict those outcomes.

 

[CRB]

"Changing existing regulations, Promoting harvest of the costly fish, Providing fewer stocked trout to the streams of the state, and lowering of fishing licenses 1$ does little to give me confidence the current Executive Director, Commissioners and Staff know what they are doing."

my quote
crb

 

[SteveG]

If they're going to keep promoting costly put and take fishing, there should be separate licenses for those who harvest and those who release. Its a joke that people who actually want to conserve streams and provide more "utilization" have to pay the same license fee as someone who wants to subsist off of poor tasting expensive to raise hatchery trout.

How hilarious that someone compares the quality of fishing between a natural population of trout, and one that gets flooded with biomass it could never support. No crap the fishing is "great" right after its stocked.

 

[TimRobinsin]

Voice your opinions and be heard.

I am beginning to see why some older folk around here believe it is futile, especially given Mike's responses.

keep up the effort, maybe they will actually consider future generations and not just imaginary short term profit gains.

 

[Mike]

SteveG: You'll need to take up the subject of high density trout stockings and the quality of fishing that they priovide with a number of your fellow anglers here who are strong supporters of DH areas and their present management. After all, the DH areas receive high stocking rates too and are stocked at higher rates than the predominant class of streams in the statewide ATW stocking program. Plus in the DH areas the high densities are maintained through C&R fishing (minus natural mortality and delayed fishing mortality)and then stocked again.

For my part I was primarily speaking about the quality of late spring and early summer fishing in the heavily fished and harvested urban and suburban streams that I fish close to home. I make no particular effort to fish close to the stocking dates. Perhaps I diverted too far from that with a comment about earlier spring, but my response was largely aimed at a suggestion that dry fly fishing in DH areas in late May and early June would be diminished by harvest. I was pointing I out in comparison that dry fly fishing is still good at that time in heavily harvested streams in high population areas despite the high pressure, 5 fish creel limit, and a protracted harvest period.

Tim Robinson, see my comment in #107 in response to #104.

 

[DaveKile]

Just a as TimRobinsin has suggested - voice your opinions and be heard.

The proposed rule making is the wrong direction and decreases opportunity for us to fly fish. We may not agree about a lot of things on this site, but 89% of us agree this is not what we want.

You may hear it's okay, don't worry. I am worried and it is not okay. You should aware what this about and you should take action. I welcome new angling opportunities, but shouldn’t come at the expense of others.

You should mail a written letter to the Director of the PFBC here:

Mr. John Arway
Executive Director
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission
P.O. Box 67000
Harrisburg, PA 17106-7000

Please let him know your views on the proposed rule changes regarding the DHALO streams.

You should write your State Representatives. Written letters are best and Representatives can be found at the Pennsylvania House of Representatives website.

You help fund the PFBC with when you purchase a fishing license and have a right to make your voice heard.

 

[streamerguy]

Finally got around to writing my hand-written version to John Arway regarding DHALOs and other stuff. Going in the mail tomorrow morning...

 

[foxtrapper1972]

If it ain't broke don't fix it. The Delayed Harvest Artificials areas are providing great opportunities throughout the seasons. I believe they also are a kind of stepping stone from bait fishing to lures and flies (which arguably are more ethical forms of fishing). Knowing about the good fishing these areas provide, the bait angler (of any age) will be enticed to learn the skills to fish with flies and lures. That is a good thing.

 

[SteveG]

Mike, I understand what you were trying to communicate now after reading about late spring and not truck chasing.

I appreciate your position as a fisheries biologist. But as a business owner, I think many of the recent decisions made by the PFBC are terrible and self destructive. As I understand, PFBC funding only comes from license sales and fines, so its a business in my eyes. I know they are concerned with dwindling license sales, especially to younger folks. But in a market like that you don't discount your product, you add value to it or rebrand it. Because its more expensive to raise fish, and therefore more costly to provide "opportunities", you could add value by providing more c&r water. Lastly, you don't alienate your loyal customer base by devaluing a current product (dhalo water).

 

[TimRobinsin]

Mike - I saw it already, thank you.

I was commenting on what is a misguided agenda by PFBC staff and administration. Judged by some of your responses over the last several years I have been on here.

Everyone understands the pickle you guys are in. And most of us want to lend a helping hand and turn these bad numbers around so we can have a strong, stable, and independent Fish Commission. But what SteveG just said is very true. This is a slap in the face to a devout (albeit small) group of loyal customers. It seems like you guys are saying "just shut up and deal with it" because you know we will keep buying license's.

Perhaps that is why the PFBC came out with multi year licenses before these new reg changes? minimize the impact of a possible backlash from the committed minority? but I digress.

It also appears the PFBC staff's apparent attitude towards practices and regulations that could promote wild reproduction is ripe with contempt. I know I'm not the only one that see's that.

The truth is we could work out a plan to promote and expand wild trout habitat while creating year round fishing opportunities and increasing the availability and exposure of fishing to the younger generations. But it ain't gonna happen by creating looser, "one size fits all", blanket regulations. I understand that it makes it easier to enforce, but it doesn't put your two most valuable resources first: the fish & the angler.

I know you are trying to educate us on how you believe these fisheries should be managed, I appreciate that and frankly I really can understand and agree with *some* of what you suggest. But this is not purely about scientific evidence.

for what it's worth.

 

[McSneek]

Mike - your post from yesterday seems to suggest these DHALO sections are overstocked and the lack of harvest only compounds that. I've fished plenty of stocked special reg. streams and have often encountered what seems to be far too many trout. I haven't been to Clarks Creek for a couple years but it used to be jammed with fish after stocking.

The PFBC determines how many fish to stock. Why not simply stock fewer and keep the special regs as is? Take the "extras" and put them into open, put and take water. The kids can use bait to fish for them there. Adults who want to harvest can go there instead of depleting the fish out of regulated stretches earlier in the season.

 

[Chaz]

The wheeled that kids need bait to be able to fish is trout poop, it's the lazy ssaa fathers that don't want to take the time to learn to actually fish and want in on the perceived best waters that are the problem. They want to do everything from baiting the hook to casting except reeling in fish, that will allow them to fish, the DH areas.
Hello PFBC, it's never about the kids.

 

[Chaz]

afishinado wrote:

troutbert wrote:
Understanding the political realities of how things work does not lead to the Do Nothing position.

Understanding the political realities helps us understand what we need to do to be more effective.

Since legislators are very influential, that means we have to take our message to the legislators, in addition to PFBC staff and commissioners.

The other side does contact their legislators, and have been effective in this way.

True. Just an observation. I believe the most effective way to move forward an agenda when there are many groups pushing in different directions is to take the "half a loaf" and "give and take" philosophy.

In this instance, my guess is the "fisheries" guys came up with a compromise proposal minimizing the impact of Class A stocking. While ideally, I would like to see no stocking at all; I supported the compromise (taking "half a loaf") as the best course of action, rather than the vehement stand of supporting no stocking at all.

Now we are faced with the repeal of the entire policy of no stocking, which now leaves out there the possibility of any Class A stream to be stocked...the baby with the bathwater.

While I do not think the above will happen, it leaves open that possibility with pressure from certain groups and politicians.

The problem is that the original proposal was a compromise, so we now end up without the compromise and any Class A stream may now be stocked.

 

[Chaz]

for brook trout that is still 5 times more trout mortality than with artificial, and since there is virtually no mortality of brown trout when using artificial that an infinite difference in mortality. The statistics lie.