KeviR
Active member
I got an email from someone who attended the PATU executive committee meeting recently. Apparently the PFBC Commissioners are considering rolling back restrictions to stocking Class A trout waters to allow stocking of trout.
I got an email from someone who attended the PATU executive committee meeting recently. Apparently the PFBC Commissioners are considering rolling back restrictions to stocking Class A trout waters to allow stocking of trout.
I think the 7/9/2024 Fisheries and Hatcheries Committee meeting recording that you’ve linked would be of interest here, as there is a presentation and discussion related to permitted stocking exceptions in Class A’s.Quite frankly I doubt the PFBC has the resources or $$$ to add a gazillion trout stream sections to the Stocked Trout Waters list...
My guess is IF the rumor is true, it might be a few commissioners with grumblings in their regions considering additions to the existing (and morally reprehensible) "Stocked Trout Waters/Class A List."
Regardless, I'd take Gangreen's contact suggestion and peruse the minutes from any recent "Commissioner's Meetings."
![]()
Minutes and Agendas
www.fishandboat.com
How does one contact the commissioners?Since I don't know your source, I'd probably send an email to one of the commissioners (or all of them) and ask if this is true. Then I'd follow up with good reasoning why it should never be allowed.
Yeah, and I listened to the presentation, and that's what they're talking about.. But I'm not sure if the thing Bam posted is exactly the same as what Kevin is talking about..didn't listen, but the screen shot say CONTINUED stocking...meaning status quo on these streams. Streams like Kish and Bald Eagle, among others
Just a friendly reminder that the only way for us to contact our commissioners is to send that correspondence to the PFBC first and they pinky promise that they’ll get it to the commissioners.I'm the SE Reg VP for PATU. Yes...this was discussed extensively at the PATU Ex-Com meeting last weekend. It appears a few commissioners would like to increase the number of Class A Streams eligible for stocking and also stocking other Class As altogether. For starters when this "continued stocking" program on select Class A waters was rolled out it was just to be "for those select waters" and not to be expanded. Well...guess what..they want to expand it. So how far will this go? Sets a bad precedent. Secondly, this goes against all science and prior achievements by the PFBC regarding wild trout population. Third, this makes no economical sense (and maybe the only thing preventing this from happening). More info to come on this matter, but if you are opposed to this, I'd write your commissioners.
That's it. That's logical.. Thanks, Chris, for now making me a supporter of this initiative.Maybe they had an overrun of those new signs with a full color brown trout I am starting to see all over?
They are just trying not to waste your license fees 🙄
I have definitely heard and almost accepted the merit in the continued access argument (or new access that you are thinking wistfully about?).Perhaps a reg. change is needed either reduction in creel number or perhaps a change to catch and release.
Or, if the stream sections are Private owners perhaps they want it or the posted signs will come out. Always another side of the story.
Just my 2 cents.