Potential consequences for the private stocking

[Acristickid]

Sunday, January 30, 2011
By John Hayes, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Public water. Then it was restricted private water. Then it was public again and ground zero in a landmark Pennsylvania decision codifying, for practical purposes, a key legal definition used in granting public assess to waterways.

Now that same stretch of the Little Juniata River in Huntingdon County, at the juncture of Spruce Creek in the town that bears its name, is making news again after the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission voted last week to change its designation to "wild trout stream." Such a rating will end the state stocking of trout fingerlings and could have potential consequences for the private stocking of Spruce Creek, which empties into the newly designated stream section.

In 2003, the Fish and Boat Commission, state Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and a Spruce Creek fishing guide sued the upscale Spring Ridge Club and its owner Donny Beaver for advertising a 1.3-mile section of the Little J starting at the mouth of Spruce Creek as a private reserve, and denying non-club members recreational access to the water.

The state won its case in 2006, proving the river was "navigable," which is legally defined as having been used historically as a public highway. In 2008, Beaver dropped his appeal against the state agencies, and the river has since been open to the public to the high water mark near the club's campus of log cabin lodges, storage facilities and administrative buildings.

The club's trout hatchery is several miles upstream on Spruce Creek, a trout stream that winds through Central Pennsylvania farm country and was famously fished by Presidents Carter and Eisenhower. Spruce Creek is almost entirely private, stocked by private clubs and landowners with lunker trout.

Following extensive research on the Little J, including electro-shock surveys in 2010, the PFBC voted to extend the river's upstream "wild trout stream" designation by an additional 19.7 miles downstream, from the Bellwood Sewage Treatment Plant to the Barree Road Bridge.

Kris Kuhn, a biologist and PFBC area fisheries manager, performed the sampling after concerns developed about mortality rates among fingerling trout planted by the agency in the Little J since 1978. Starting in 2007, the agency has monitored Little J stream temperatures at 15-minute intervals, and increased stocking to 30,000 fingerlings annually.

"What we found were low returns of our stocked fingerlings and a high abundance of wild [trout] in that area," said Kuhn. "For years, we believed we were supporting the fishery with the stocking of fingerlings. It's hard to say at this time where [the fingerlings] are going, but likely there is some predation by the wild trout, which are quite voracious."

Kuhn said the privately stocked Spruce Creek lunkers "could be having an impact," on the stocked fingerlings. Migration of the small fish is also possible. "It's a big river with a lot of suitable areas for fish to go," he said.

Prior to last year, the Little Juniata did not rate "wild trout stream" status. The discovery of the large numbers of wild trout in adjacent stream sections led to the commissioners' redesignation of the water.

Kuhn said the PFBC board will propose in April to extend the "wild trout stream" designation to the mouth of the Little J at the Frankstown Branch of the Juniata River.

John Hayes: jhayes@post-gazette.com


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11030/1121474-358.stm#ixzz1CiXylqQG

 

[jayL]

Awesome. Run the bastards out of town on a pike.

 

[JackM]

I suspect those of us happy with this development have the Commonwealth agencies and the Little J River Association to thank. Thanks Bill!

 

[TUNA]

Awesome, finally. I love to see stuff like this. One step at a time.

 

[troutbert]

Sunday, January 30, 2011
By John Hayes, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Now that same stretch of the Little Juniata River in Huntingdon County, at the juncture of Spruce Creek in the town that bears its name, is making news again after the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission voted last week to change its designation to "wild trout stream." Such a rating will end the state stocking of trout fingerlings and could have potential consequences for the private stocking of Spruce Creek, which empties into the newly designated stream section.

The article is accurate, overall.

But he is just completely speculating about:

"could have potential consequences for the private stocking of Spruce Creek, which empties into the newly designated stream section."

He doesn't provide any reason to believe that that will happen.

 

[Maurice]

Yes troutbert is right...Spruce is Class A already and was long, long before the F&BC finally admitted to the Little J truth.....if the F&BC was serious about stocking over class A pops it could shut it down like a steel mill in Pittsburgh....but alas.....ho hum.

 

[TUNA]

I've spoken to local WCO's about the stocking of Class A streams, and always get the same response. It is not permitted, but aside from the WCO's being there in person while the stocking is going on, there is no real way to enforce it. All the landowner or in DB's case, the person leasing the land, has to do is say that they did not put the fish in. I guess its really hard to enforce, but most places, once told to quit stocking, do quit stocking. Its a shame that some places/people still feel the need to stock Class A streams. Oh well.

 

[jayL]

Wouldn't advertising that the section is stocked be an admission of guilt?

 

[TUNA]

I thought that too, jay, but no one has been able to do anything with it. I think its because the time involved in issuing citations and courtroom visits and such is just too much. Blair County could use a few more WCO's, I'm guessing if that would happen it may offer them a better chance at ending the stocking activities the private club does on the Little J, and other Class A streams.

 

[franklin]

The article mentions that the club, presumable SRC, has a hatchery on Spruce. I guess it just has a lot of "escapees"?

 

[JackM]

I posted something like this some time ago and I don't think the regulations have changed:

These two regulations, taken together, may prohibit the stocking of fish privately into Class A waters, but it isn't crystal clear:

58 Pa. Code Recreation

§ 57.8a. Class A wild trout streams.
It is the policy of the Commission to manage self-sustaining Class A wild trout populations as a renewable natural resource to conserve that resource and the angling it provides. Class A wild trout populations represent the best of this Commonwealth’s naturally reproducing trout fisheries. These stream sections are managed solely for the perpetuation of the wild trout fishery with no stocking.


§ 71.4. Stocking of designated waters.
It is unlawful to place fish in waters that have been designated by the Commission as catch and release, wilderness trout or wild trout management waters except with the express written consent of the Executive Director or his designee. This section does not prohibit a person from returning fish unharmed to the waters from which they were caught or taken.

If Class A waters constitute waters "designated by the Commission" as "wild trout management waters" and there was not express written permission granted, then private stocking could be prohibited by the PFBC. But I am unaware of anything that suggests that Class A designation is the equivalent of "wild trout management" waters.

 

[TUNA]

I was basically told the same thing, too Jack. A person or group can have charges brought against them, if there is enough substantial evidence to warrant doing so. It almost happend with one club here, in Blair County. The WCO stopped several times and spoke to the club Pres., telling him he could no longer stock the stream, since it was considered a Class A Wild Trout Stream. The club Pres. did not listen, at first, but after several more visits from the WCO, and a few letters from concerned citizens he changed his mind. Now, for the past 5-6 years this club has not stocked any fish into the Class A stream. I know that there is no way to stop all stocking on every single Class A stream, but I can dream, and write letters and make phone calls.

 

[Chaz]

I talked to a WCO about the stocking of Cold Run and the answer I got was it will always be stocked, it's a polical decision.

 

[Chaz]

I presume that was taken from the trout management plan? If so that is only policy it is not law. However, if they have a permit they are within their right providing that the permit allows them to stock the LJ.
Many of the Clubs that have hatcheries stock Class A Waters, it's a major issue. Many of the hatcheries are on Class A water.

 

[tomgamber]

Says its from the Pa Code which is law, no?

 

[Chaz]

TG, not exactly, h?*! PFBC doesn't even foloow it. They've been stocking Class A streams for years, of course some have been purposely left off the Class A list so that PFBC may continue stocking.

 

[TUNA]

First of all, I've called several different WCO's about stocking Class A streams in the past. It is against the law to stock a Class A stream (It is a policy backed by laws that lead to fines and other penalties). However, it is extremly hard to get the stocking shut down. Usually if someone is fined/cited for stocking a Class A the fines and everything aren't very harsh, from what I've been told (I'm working on finding out the actual penalties). If a WCO were to see someone stocking a Class A stream in person, they can be fined and may even be arrested. One of the biggest problems is that our WCO's don't have the time to sit around and watch every Class A stream. I personally know of at least 3 clubs/organizations in my area that were fined and/or shutdown for stocking Class A streams.

There are hatcheries located along Class A streams, run by the PAFBC. Look at Spring Creek, for example. Just because the hatchery is located a long a Class A stream does not mean that the fish will be put in the Class A stream. Sure, there are hatchery escapees, but thats what happens when someone builds a large hatchery along a stream. I don't like the fact that fish can "escape" from the hatcheries, but as long as they're located along said Class A streams it is inevitable.

Last, when is stream is going throught the process of being named Class A, people can vote against it. It takes more than one person to get the rulings/changes overturned, but it does and will continue to happen. I doubt the PAFBC would "purposely" leave a stream of the list so they could stock it. After all, not stocking a stream is a lot cheaper than stocking it, right?

 

[gfen]

TUNA wrote:
I doubt the PAFBC would "purposely" leave a stream of the list so they could stock it. After all, not stocking a stream is a lot cheaper than stocking it, right?

They would. I, and I'm sure many others, will tell you we've been told that from people we've spoken to in the PFBC.

Let's make up some numbers, I don't have ANY idea how off base they are, so don't cry when they're in a world of utter fantasy....

It comes down to money. Sure, you can save some cash not stocking Stream X.. I dunno, $5000?

. Now, the problem is the 1000 guys who primarily visit Stream X will not buy trout stamps, so there goes $6000. Additionally, another 250 guys who ONLY fish for trout on Stream X skip lisences all together, so there's another $8600.

So, there's $14,600 lost, minus the $5000 you saved thats $9600 in the red.

Oh, and since you're down $9600, you need to increase the lisence fees. So, you goto the state reps and say, "hey, we lost some cash, we want to raise fees by $.50 for a trout stamp, dig?" The rep says, "well, Town A has 10 miles of Steam X running through it, and it was VERY popular... How about since you pissed off my constituents, I'll just vote NO and you can go pound sand?"

Neccessary evils.

 

[TUNA]

In that case, there could be another 1000 guys who quit fishing said stream because it was being stocked, and therefore quit buying trout stamps too. What if those 1000 guys decided to start fishing again, because the stream was named Class A and was no longer being stocked? The stream itself isn't going anywhere, it'll be there still, so if someone decides to stop fishing it because it is no longer stocked, in favor of it being named a Class A stream, thats their own stupid fault. After all Class A streams are supposed to be self sustaining streams that support a rewarding fishery. They are not Catch and Release streams. Things change over time, and having less stocked trout water in favor of more wild trout water is a better thing, IMO. I don't think the state should eliminate stocking or anything, but if a legitimate Class A fishery exists, let it be a Class A stream. Every year new waters are added and removed from the stocking list, not everyone is going to be happy all of the time. I just don't see where adding a Class A stream is going to cause an upswing in license prices, either.

 

[Chaz]

Somewhere I have a list of 18 streams that have been surveyed and show class a populations and are not on the Class A list. They are all stocked streams that are Class A, If I find the list I will post it.
If I can name a few, Little Lehigh outside the regs area , at least a couple of miles, Cold Run, Monocacy outside the regs area, ditto Bushkill (Easton), Pocono Creek Headwaters to mouth, there are many more.
As an aside to this whole affair no one really knows what the real cost of raising trout for stocking is because they never include capital equipment and real estate in their estimates.