PFBC to allow stocking of Class A streams?

[GANGGREEN]

I see all of this as a slippery slope and that's the way the "stock over the Class A streams guys" want it to be. Cowley Run should never be stocked, nor should any of the other Class A streams in this state (not to mention a fair number of streams that are NOT Class A and still support very fine populations of trout). It would be different if the PFBC had no data on some of these streams and it was simply thought that they were good wild trout streams, but in most cases, the PFBC knows damn well that these are good wild trout streams that not only don't need any additional trout dumped in, but which are being hurt by that practice. Stop it already!

Not to disagree too vehemently with Roofin' Trouter or anyone else here, but I absolutely DO think there should be certain lines in the sand which are never crossed and stocking over a current Class A is one of those lines (and I know that they've been doing it for years, but that's not a good enough reason to turn a blind eye).

 

[troutbert]

It would be different if the PFBC had no data on some of these streams and it was simply thought that they were good wild trout streams, but in most cases, the PFBC knows damn well that these are good wild trout streams that not only don't need any additional trout dumped in, but which are being hurt by that practice. Stop it already!

The PFBC has survey data on all stocked sections.

This has been explained many times on here, but it's still probably good to make sure everyone knows:

The PFBC biologists are not the deciders on any of this stuff. They have not been given that power. They only make recommendations.

The deciders are the Commissioners, most of whom have no fisheries biology background. They are very heavily influenced by the sportsmans clubs, many of which run coop hatcheries.

 

[bringthepain]

They do this and I’ll never buy another PA license. And I don’t plan to stop fishing. 🖕🏻

I like this idea

 

[jifigz]

The PFBC biologists are not the deciders on any of this stuff. They have not been given that power. They only make recommendations.

The deciders are the Commissioners, most of whom have no fisheries biology background. They are very heavily influenced by the sportsmans clubs, many of which run coop hatcheries.

Yes, everyone needs to remember this. It's important.

 

[afishinado]

C'mon guys!!!

Every one of you have been here for a long time and know political posts or threads are not allowed.

Please don't thumb your nose at Dave Kile.

For me, I'm tired of political ads everywhere you look, and love to have a place to just relax and talk about fishing (or even just about frying pans).

 

[Eric Hussar]

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.

I would recommend sending an email and or a letter(send to Harrisburg office address to Commissioner)to each individual Commissioner. Or calling individual Commissioners. Your voices and input is important. Finally, attending the Quarterly Meeting in Harrisburg and speaking at public comment portion of meeting is highly recommended.

 

[Cznymph]

I would recommend sending an email and or a letter(send to Harrisburg office address to Commissioner)to each individual Commissioner. Or calling individual Commissioners. Your voices and input is important. Finally, attending the Quarterly Meeting in Harrisburg and speaking at public comment portion of meeting is highly recommended.

Why can’t we just contact you and the other commissioners directly? Where does one find the commissioners phone numbers?

You’re given state email addresses. Why isn’t that information public?

Having to forward our concerns to the commissioners first through the PFBC administration seems like a conflict of interest, does it not?

Why does the PFBC not hold some of the commission meetings on a Saturday when more people would be able to attend?

 

[BrookieChaser]

I remember when the PFBC solicited public input for the initial stocking of class a streams. I wrote my objections. It was included in the 90+ % of input that opposed the measure.
But the board approved it anyway, proving that public input is useless. The board of commissioners run the show and answer to no one but the governor/political pressure. Science and public opinion be damned.

What's the saying about history repeating itself? Or maybe it's "fool me once...".

 

[troutbert]

I remember when the PFBC solicited public input for the initial stocking of class a streams. I wrote my objections. It was included in the 90+ % of input that opposed the measure.
But the board approved it anyway, proving that public input is useless. The board of commissioners run the show and answer to no one but the governor/political pressure. Science and public opinion be damned.

Over the years certain legislators, under the influence of sportsmens clubs, have influenced trout fisheries management.

But I doubt that the governor has any interest or involvement in this. Is there any evidence that he does?

 

[Bamboozle]

The stupidity of any expansion or continuation of the "Stream Sections That Are Designated as Both Stocked Trout Waters and Class A Wild Trout Streams" is best illustrated by taking a look at the geography with the most streams falling under this ridiculous regulation; Lehigh & Northampton Counties.

I fish most often in this region and we have a whopping 5 stream sections in the program that includes:

Little Lehigh Creek, Section 4, 7​

Martins Creek, Section 1​

Monocacy Creek, Sections 8, 9​

So lets suppose and hope for a moment that the commissioners decided to do the right thing, stop caving to local pressure and instead they REMOVED these 5 sections from the stocking list...

As a local Lehigh/Northampton County angler who prefers fishing for stockers, you would STILL have the following 31 stream sections (and 2 lakes) on the Stocked Trout Waters List:

Bushkill Creek, Sections 2, 5, 7​

Cedar Creek, Section 3​

Coplay Creek, Section 2​

Hokendauqua Creek, Sections 4, 5​

Indian Creek, Section 2​

Jacoby Creek, Section 2​

Jordan Creek, Sections 2, 3, 4, 6​

Kistler Creek, Section 2​

Laurel Run, Section 2​

Leaser Lake​

Lehigh Canal, Sections 5, 8​

Little Bushkill Creek, Sections 2, 4​

Little Lehigh Creek, Sections 2, 5, 9​

Martin’s Creek, Section 3​

Minsi Lake​

Monocasy Creek, Sections 3, 5​

Ontelaunee Creek, Sections 2, 4​

Saucon Creek, Section 4​

Swabia Creek, Section 2​

Switzer Creek, Section 2​

Trout Creek, Section 2​

​

And this isn't even counting nearby streams in Berks, Bucks & Montgomery Counties!!​

Isn't this ENOUGH opportunities for trout anglers in this region withOUT stocking over 5 Class A Sections??

Not to mention that a cessation of stocking in these 5 sections doesn't eliminate the trout fishing opportunity, it just changes it from a partial artificial fishery to a 100% wild fishery...

I'm sorry, but stocking an additional 5 Class A stream sections in a region that already has 31 stocked is just plain stupid, wrong and a waste of money & resources.

I just don't get what is so hard about doing the right thing, especially in my backyard... 😉

 

[jifigz]

Isn't this ENOUGH opportunities for trout anglers in this region withOUT stocking over 5 Class A Sections??

Apparently not.

 

[BrookieChaser]

Over the years certain legislators, under the influence of sportsmens clubs, have influenced trout fisheries management.

But I doubt that the governor has any interest or involvement in this. Is there any evidence that he does?

Since my post disappeared, yet the question was allowed up, I'll answer again.

The point that was missed in the original post, or twisted, was that the commissioners (both PFBC and PGC) are appointed by the sitting governor. They serve at the pleasure of the sitting governor. Therefore that's the only entity to which they are held accountable.

 

[LehighRegular]

Why can’t we just contact you and the other commissioners directly? Where does one find the commissioners phone numbers?

You’re given state email addresses. Why isn’t that information public?

Having to forward our concerns to the commissioners first through the PFBC administration seems like a conflict of interest, does it not?

Why does the PFBC not hold some of the commission meetings on a Saturday when more people would be able to attend?

The PFBC use to have contact information, but that looks like it has been removed.

https://www.fishandboat.com/About-Us/AgencyOverview/Commissioners/Pages/default.aspx

I guess you need to send to the general email box

 

[Cznymph]

The PFBC use to have contact information, but that looks like it has been removed.

https://www.fishandboat.com/About-Us/AgencyOverview/Commissioners/Pages/default.aspx

I guess you need to send to the general email box

The PFBC has never made the commissioner’s information public, and I’m well aware of that. My asking of the question to Commissioner Husar was rhetorical, and as I expected……crickets.

 

[troutbert]

The PFBC has never made the commissioner’s information public, and I’m well aware of that. My asking of the question to Commissioner Husar was rhetorical, and as I expected……crickets.

As LehighRegular said, they did make the commissioner's information public in the past. But not now.

They should have an email tool on the commissioners page and a mailing address.

 

[Cznymph]

As LehighRegular said, they did make the commissioner's information public in the past. But not now.

They should have an email tool on the commissioners page and a mailing address.

As long as I’ve been concerned with contacting the commissioners, that information has never been available.

Could you show me where and when it was public?

Edited to add: using the wayback machine I was able to locate a saved copy of the PFBC website from 2017. There is no mention of commissioner’s contact information there either.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170719070632/http://www.fishandboat.com/AboutUs/Pages/CommissionerFifthDistrict.aspx

 

[Mike]

The PFBC has never made the commissioner’s information public, and I’m well aware of that. My asking of the question to Commissioner Husar was rhetorical, and as I expected……crickets.

Rhetorical questions aren’t meant to be answered. That’s the whole point.

 

[Cznymph]

Rhetorical questions aren’t meant to be answered. That’s the whole point.

Well I guess that makes us even for your unsolicited answer via private message the other day.

 

[Mike]

When individuals ask questions on this forum, I assume they are sincere in seeking a response unless the context of the question clearly indicates that the question is rhetorical.

 

[Cznymph]

When individuals ask questions on this forum, I assume they are sincere in seeking a response unless the context of the question clearly indicates that the question is rhetorical.

You know what they say about assuming.