Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

[Acristickid]

Got this from Penns Creek Angler on Facebook.

Attn: Penn's Creek Anglers.
This is the letter I received from the PFBC. Section 5 of Penn's Creek starts where the Catch and Release ends (below Cherry Run) to the Weikert Bridge at the shop. This is great water that I fish regularly. It seems the PFBC wants to make changes to the regulations. Please educate yourself on how any change will impact you. It could be changed to Catch and Release, Class A Wild Trout, Slot Limit or Delayed Harvest. Each of these designations are different and will impact the fishery in their own way. Please attend the meeting your input is necessary.

Public meeting at Mifflinburg Area High School Feb 26th 6:30-8.

 

[tomitrout]

Bit of confusion/clarification please:

Is "Class A Wild Trout" a regulation or a designation? I haven't seen this section listed as being up for designation as a Class A recently. Here's the list of the current candidates: http://www.fishandboat.com/Regulations/Documents/noticesDocs/2018-02-06-April2018ClassA.pdf

Looks like Penn's official Class A water ends with the C&R water/Section 4 at Cherry Run.

 

[bradtheflyfisherman]

Talked to Bruce about this last time I was in Penns Creek Angler. Would be great for that section of the stream to get some sort of designation/regulation as it gets quite a bit of pressure from spin fisherman using bait, spinners, etc. I fish the little mountain section quite a bit, but have never seen anyone with stringers of fish, hopefully, most are C&R their fish anyways. Looking forward to hearing the outcome of those meetings.

 

[SmoothOperator]

So the " Lawn Area" where the cabins are isn't still considered class A and C&R water ( it runs about 1/4 -1/2 mile below Cherry Run ? I've spent many a late April - June fishing the evening hatches there.......

 

[tomitrout]

So the " Lawn Area" where the cabins are isn't still considered class A and C&R water ( it runs about 1/4 -1/2 mile below Cherry Run ? I've spent many a late April - June fishing the evening hatches there.......

Maybe, maybe not....guess I should've said 'in the vicinity of Cherry Run.' Section 4 doesn't end at Cherry Run proper if you dig into the fine print...

 

[Trico3]

That area is in the C & R section. The sign along the road when you are driving towards Cherry run bridge marks the lower boundary of the C & R area.

 

[Maurice]

Class A wild trout is a designation.

C&R, DHALO and “Slot Limit” would be harvest Regulations.

The two may not be mutually exclusive but if it’s Class A WTW, DHALO would not be typically appropriate as DHALOs are typically stocked and intended to be harvested due to poor carry over temperatures. Class A would indicate there are carry over or residency in summer.

Slot Limit is a new one on me in PA. Perhaps they mean trophy trout? Several Class A sections are TT waters

C &R would fit Class A WTW.

The peculiar issue here is it is already under general regulations, and is stocked. So the available choices indicates that of reduced harvest.

My question is who is proposing the change. Seems like it’s coming from the FF community? How would UCSA feel about this? Reduced harvest over their coop fish.

We all know it warms during harsh summers. It’s also broad water meaning harvest has to be minimal.

A very curious proposal indeed.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Trico3 wrote:
That area is in the C & R section. The sign along the road when you are driving towards Cherry run bridge marks the lower boundary of the C & R area.

. I know the sign your talking about it's on the right hand side of the road going towards Cherry Run......If you park there and walk straight down to Penns your still at least 1 mile below Cherry Run and 1/4 mile below where the Cabins ( lawns ) start........Seems confusing , maybe they want to add -on to the C&R area ??????

 

[troutbert]

Maurice wrote:
Class A wild trout is a designation.

C&R, DHALO and “Slot Limit” would be harvest Regulations.

The two may not be mutually exclusive but if it’s Class A WTW, DHALO would not be typically appropriate as DHALOs are typically stocked and intended to be harvested due to poor carry over temperatures. Class A would indicate there are carry over or residency in summer.

Slot Limit is a new one on me in PA. Perhaps they mean trophy trout? Several Class A sections are TT waters

C &R would fit Class A WTW.

The peculiar issue here is it is already under general regulations, and is stocked. So the available choices indicates that of reduced harvest.

My question is who is proposing the change. Seems like it’s coming from the FF community? How would UCSA feel about this? Reduced harvest over their coop fish.

We all know it warms during harsh summers. It’s also broad water meaning harvest has to be minimal.

A very curious proposal indeed.

There is a slot limit on Penns Creek from Coburn down to the upper end of the C&R area, with no stocking of hatchery trout. That seems to be working pretty well, both in terms of the trout population and landowner and local fishermen acceptance.

So maybe the PFBC thinks the same things will also work well from the C&R area down to the Weikert bridge. IMHO, it probably would work well.

There are decent numbers of wild browns in that section right now. But there is probably an opportunity to improve the population with a change in management.

 

[717BrownTown]

My concern with that section going C&R is loss of access. That section is mostly private and I believe stocking is the only reason the land owners keep it open.
Some say this is because the Fish Commission wants to reduce stocking number and with all the talk about stocking over wild trout it makes sense to stop stocking that section if it has the number to be class A.

I have also heard a petition by fisherman was started to change it and PAFB is exploring the idea.

I believe that water gets pretty warm in the summer and the fish seek refuge up stream in the C&R section.

A delayed harvest regulation maybe the best option for that section.

I don't fish it much that section much but I cant remember seeing a trout on a stringer and if they are being kept it I never felt like it was fished out.

 

[Maurice]

troutbert wrote:

Maurice wrote:
Class A wild trout is a designation.

C&R, DHALO and “Slot Limit” would be harvest Regulations.

The two may not be mutually exclusive but if it’s Class A WTW, DHALO would not be typically appropriate as DHALOs are typically stocked and intended to be harvested due to poor carry over temperatures. Class A would indicate there are carry over or residency in summer.

Slot Limit is a new one on me in PA. Perhaps they mean trophy trout? Several Class A sections are TT waters

C &R would fit Class A WTW.

The peculiar issue here is it is already under general regulations, and is stocked. So the available choices indicates that of reduced harvest.

My question is who is proposing the change. Seems like it’s coming from the FF community? How would UCSA feel about this? Reduced harvest over their coop fish.

We all know it warms during harsh summers. It’s also broad water meaning harvest has to be minimal.

A very curious proposal indeed.

There is a slot limit on Penns Creek from Coburn down to the upper end of the C&R area, with no stocking of hatchery trout. That seems to be working pretty well, both in terms of the trout population and landowner and local fishermen acceptance.

So maybe the PFBC thinks the same things will also work well from the C&R area down to the Weikert bridge. IMHO, it probably would work well.

There are decent numbers of wild browns in that section right now. But there is probably an opportunity to improve the population with a change in management.

hmmm, I thought that section below Coburn was Trophy Trout. (+14"). Goes to show how well I remember things that don;t impact me being a C&R guy.

So it seems this is being presented by the PF&BC, meaning a drift from general regulations to a restricted harvest. I cannot imagine the local trout harvest and stocking contingent being on board with this.

Perhaps attending the meeting would be best but I am curious what the management goals are?

 

[Maurice]

717BrownTown wrote:
My concern with that section going C&R is loss of access. That section is mostly private and I believe stocking is the only reason the land owners keep it open.
Some say this is because the Fish Commission wants to reduce stocking number and with all the talk about stocking over wild trout it makes sense to stop stocking that section if it has the number to be class A.

I have also heard a petition by fisherman was started to change it and PAFB is exploring the idea.

I believe that water gets pretty warm in the summer and the fish seek refuge up stream in the C&R section.

A delayed harvest regulation maybe the best option for that section.

I don't fish it much that section much but I cant remember seeing a trout on a stringer and if they are being kept it I never felt like it was fished out.

I agree 717, however, DHALO would be a tackle restriction. Perhaps a DHAT.

But again, whats the end game for the F&BC?

What are they trying to accomplish?

 

[troutbert]

Maurice wrote:

hmmm, I thought that section below Coburn was Trophy Trout. (+14").

It used to be TT. Many believed that the TT regs resulted in the cropping off of trout 14 inches and up. (Probably true IMHO).

So it was decided to try a slot limit. For the first time in PA, I think.

 

[afishinado]

Maurice wrote:

717BrownTown wrote:
My concern with that section going C&R is loss of access. That section is mostly private and I believe stocking is the only reason the land owners keep it open.
Some say this is because the Fish Commission wants to reduce stocking number and with all the talk about stocking over wild trout it makes sense to stop stocking that section if it has the number to be class A.

I have also heard a petition by fisherman was started to change it and PAFB is exploring the idea.

I believe that water gets pretty warm in the summer and the fish seek refuge up stream in the C&R section.

A delayed harvest regulation maybe the best option for that section.

I don't fish it much that section much but I cant remember seeing a trout on a stringer and if they are being kept it I never felt like it was fished out.

I agree 717, however, DHALO would be a tackle restriction. Perhaps a DHAT.

But again, whats the end game for the F&BC?

What are they trying to accomplish?

^Not stocking over a Class A population of trout.

FYI Section 2 of Penns > Spring Mills to Coburn is a Class A that's stocked.

Also, I believe that the Poe Paddy > Cherry Run section is CRALO.

Penns Creek - Section # 4
3.60 Miles from 600M DNSTRM SWIFT RN downstream to 500M DNSTRM CHERRY RN

Catch and Release, Artificial Lures Only

 

[TJones]

I think that stretch would be class A numbers 9 or 10 months out of the year most years... catch and release regs would be great!

 

[mtnbum]

"My concern with that section going C&R is loss of access. That section is mostly private and I believe stocking is the only reason the land owners keep it open."

The land owners along that section drafted and circulated the petition. They want it to be C & R.

 

[troutbert]

mtnbum, can you tell us more information about all this?

Are those petitioning also asking for stocking to be ended?

Has a Class A population been found in PFBC surveys? Or close?

 

[Fredrick]

Found this

 

[Trico3]

I also think a lot of access will be lost. Some areas are only open because they are stocked. Landowners in favor of current policy, not C&R or a slot limit may post or close roads.
Best option may be slot limit to allow all types of fishing to include all landowner's preferences.
Not my first choice, but for maintaining access may be best option here.

 

[Hook_Jaw]

Access will for sure be lost if they stop stocking that section I know several cabin owners who stated that to me.