Proposed DHALO regulations change

[mike_richardson]

I am just stating that if they switched a stretch of river to bait only you wouldn't just give up your fly rod to fish that stretch. You stated you only like to use a fly rod and that is the form of fishing you choose. So why wouldn't you just pick up spinning tackle and using an impaled waxworm. You simply don't want to. Same as how many of the bait guys simply dont want to pick up a fly rod or use a spinner.

 

[pcray1231]

I would, and have. In recent years I have fished with live minnies on both Spring and Penns Creeks. Yes, there were reasons. Both cases were high, muddy, and cold water, and my dad was visiting so I figured he'd struggle with fly gear in those situations. But if it were a bait only reg, yep, I'd still fish them.

But I'd point out your example isn't quite perfect. It'd be "bait only", not spinning rods only. I have used bait on a fly rod quite successfully before. But in these ALO sections spinning rods are allowed and welcomed. You can use lures, rubber worms, rubber minnies, egg imitations, nymphs, curly tails, and even dry flies with a casting bubble!

And yeah, you used a few bad examples. For instance, the LJR. There's not a single place on that river where you're not allowed to use bait. In no way anywhere is tackle restricted, only harvest.

Spring, Penns, and the Breeches, likewise. There's only a small area on Spring that you can't use bait, and I'm ok with that for historical context. It's not one of the better areas of the stream, and to me it's more a museum than a fishing place. Most of it is AT C&R where bait is allowed, including the best water.

Penns and the Breeches both have short ALO sections, though spinning rods are welcome in both. The rest of the breeches is special reg free. The rest of Penns is either special reg free or AT TT regs, where bait is allowed, and that includes the most popular wild trout portion.

 

[McSneek]

mike_richardson wrote:
I am just stating that if they switched a stretch of river to bait only you wouldn't just give up your fly rod to fish that stretch. You stated you only like to use a fly rod and that is the form of fishing you choose. So why wouldn't you just pick up spinning tackle and using an impaled waxworm. You simply don't want to. Same as how many of the bait guys simply dont want to pick up a fly rod or use a spinner.

But if I wanted to fish a "bait only" stretch I would use bait. I wouldn't lobby to have the regulations switched to my preferred way of fishing. If these bait guys don't want to pick up a fly rod or use spinners why can't they be content with the miles and miles of water they already have access to? Why change the regulations on a few short stream stretches just to suit them? Are only fly fishermen supposed to be open to other forms of fishing?

 

[mike_richardson]

i know these areas allow bait but i was just saying that if for some reason the commision said you are not allowed to use fly tackle on these streams many on here would not make the switch.

I know these are outlandish examples but to make a point i would not want to switch from flies either. I am not taking any form of spinning gear this year to camp with me. I am not against fly fishing in any way and try to promote it and get many people to at least give it a try so i dont here comments like these on other forums from other fly fisherman and bait fisherman:

"for every slob bait fisherman who gives fishing a bad name, there is an elitist fly fisherman that makes the sport look just a worse..."

not a quote by me but from another fly fisherman

just saying that in these times where anti's are out in record numbers trying to shut down all forms of hunting and fishing we need to stick together and not add fuel to the fire is all.

I dont like reading comments like these being a fly fisherman. I like to hold my head up when i say that i fly fish but because of the views of some we are being labled just as many bait fisherman are labled.

 

[bingsbaits]

Right from TAP.

Dear Fellow Sportsman,

A small group of live-bait fishermen met on March 21, 1994, to discuss the present situation of the trout fisheries of Pennsylvania. With that stated, the group is now formally known as "The Traditional Anglers of Pennsylvania" (T.A.P.).

We as an organization are not opposed to the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission or any other angling organization. It is in our interest as live-bait fishermen to have a voice in what is said and done with the trout waters of Pennsylvania. It is a major concern to this group that we are losing some of the best trout waters in this State to: Fly-Fishing Projects, Delayed Harvest Fly Fishing Only, No Harvest Fly-Fishing Only, Catch and Release, Delayed Harvest Artificial Lures Only, Trophy Trout Projects, and Limestone Springs Wild Trout Waters.

There's a serious problem arising along the streams and lakes that bless our State. The special interest groups whose financial dealings run deep in our State are receiving more areas of streams and lakes posted for artificial use only. Future generations of live-bait fishermen may not have a place to fish if new sections or whole streams are closed down to live-bait fishermen. Young fishermen use live bait the first years of their angling lives. If this current trend of closing waters to live bait continues, where will these kids fish?

The Traditional Anglers of Pennsylvania is not a "kill all you can catch" organization. This is in large percentage catch and release group. There's nothing wrong with keeping a few fish for supper. Although not know as a fact, but it's safe to say, live-bait fishermen buy more licenses and trout stamps than any other angling group!

This grass-roots organization is in its infancy stages but already there's talk of a few projects and programs in the future.




Seems they are against C&R and Trophy Trout projects.
Seems to me they want to be able to harvest more.

 

[mike_richardson]

Thanks for the open letter post bing i was not going to post that up

 

[pcray1231]

that if for some reason the commision said you are not allowed to use fly tackle on these streams many on here would not make the switch.

I'm totally on board with you regarding the FFO thing. Except in a few cases, where historical significance holds sway. I mean, a section of Spring Creek with the history of George Harvey and the 1 fish a year project, that section of the Letort where Marinaro redefined the sport, etc. Those are like museums for me, and those regs should be there because of the history.

But other than that, yeah, FFO isn't needed to protect the fishery. I think it's totally unnecessary, and doesn't need to be there.

But I will still contend that ALO areas are needed in places. And I don't see that as being restrictive of tackle choices AT ALL. Nobody is saying to pick up a fly rod and learn to use it. You can use the exact same tackle you use anywhere else. You just have to use artificial bait. The offering is not part of the tackle. It'd be like telling a fly fishermen that they have to use dry flies and can't use nymphs. And if that were helpful to protect a fishery, I'd be ok with it.

But even then, I'd give you that ALO should only be used in areas that AT C&R isn't sufficient to protect the fishery, which isn't very many places. I very much like the AT C&R regulation and think it should be greatly expanded. Perhaps to cover most wild trout waters.

 

[McSneek]

"The special interest groups whose financial dealings run deep in our State are receiving more areas of streams and lakes posted for artificial use only."

Did TAP publish a list of these special interest groups? I would love to see who they are. Trout Unlimited? Federation of Flyfishers? Izaak Walton? Dame Juliana? LMAO!

Mike - somehow I don't think Bing posted that letter in support of your position.

 

[mike_richardson]

Your sarcasm detector needs batteries McSneek.

I will get with the president to relay the groups we r revering too

 

[GreenWeenie]

What TAP is really saying is that they need to become a special interest group so they can get things changed to what they want.

 

[MattBoyer]

mike_richardson wrote:
I will get with the president to relay the groups we r revering too

To me that reads like "I will let you know the position I'm arguing with you about as soon as someone tells me what it is." Am I reading that wrong?

For the record, I couldn't even tell you the last time I fished any project water except the Bonnybrook section of the Letort, which is close to my work, and I fished bait longer than I have flyfished. That being said, I find TAP's position to be ludicrous. Really? That's the biggest social issue these guys can find? Oh, the injustice! "The big money fly fishing guys (who we vilify without actually identifying) are pushing us out of 1% of the water! We should fight this with every fiber of our being!"

Knowing this issue is out there, I may need to rethink the work I do with St Judes, as I'm obviously missing the big picture.

Boyer

 

[WildTigerTrout]

Foxgap239 wrote:

WildTigerTrout wrote:

Foxgap239 wrote:
Isn't Fishing Creek C&R and then a Trophy section? Is there even a DH area on Fishing Creek?

Foxgap, see my post above yours. Yes you are right there is not a DHALO area.

Is this a case of great minds think alike or do we both simply need to get lives! :-D

Maybe a little bit of both! Ha.

 

[mike_richardson]

Forgive for my rants on this. I will remove myself from this topic to not create further turmoil or get away from the OP's intent on the post. I should not have mentioned T.A.P. on a fly fishing site and please forgive me for doing so.

I will post the list of groups via pm when i talk to the president i do not want to unjustly denounce a group without consulting with him first. pm me if you would like to know where T.A.P. stands on these issues or for the list of groups our open letter talks about

Again i did not want to disturb this forum with bait fishing talk. Just hard when posts on the clubs core values pop up or if things are posted that do not reflect our club correctly.

Good luck to all of those heading out on the first day. If anyone is around Costello fishing the first fork i will buy you a beer. And dont set up a mini jam for free beer.

 

[henrydavid]

Am I correct or is my memory failing, didn't DHALO areas used to require all barbless hooks? And there was such a stretch on Fishing Creek, the exact location eludes me.

I remember fishing barbless in those stretches and losing alot of fish. The stretches did hold a good number of trout over, obviously a result of the barbless regs.

Now that the barbless regs are long gone they are only moving further in the wrong direction. I wish they would do what's right for the fish rather than their budget.

 

[CRB]

My problem with is discussion is why it is not stated specifically in the agenda?
Is the PAFBC trying to pull one over? Where is the transparency in the agenda that was put up on the pafbc web site? Why was there no discussion or discussion points made available to all?
Just my $.02.
I do fish these areas in the northwest part of the state and catch fish in the summer one these streams I practice CR and have caught fish that I let go weeks before. Once a fish is dead there are no more in the stream.

 

[PennKev]

I see nothing wrong with "wasting" a stocked fish by not harvesting it. The idea that a stocked trout is wasted unless intentionally killed by an angler is absurd. (The notion that there are all these poor rural folk fishing as a significant source of food is just as absurd IMO.) There are simply too many people in this state for fish, whether stocked or wild, to be managed as anything other than a recreational resource that also offers the angler the opportunity for an occasional luxury of a fresh fish dinner. There is nothing wrong with having stocked areas in which fish cannot be kept. I have enjoyed fishing such areas tremendously and consider myself fortunate to have DHALO areas only minutes from home. I have had many June, and even July and August days where I had good fishing on these areas. Lee Wulff said that a gamefish is too valuable to only catch once. This is true and even more so when we pay for it.

The true waste, in my opinion, is stocking a staggering amount of trout for the sake of one day of catch and keep.

I say keep it the way it is. It works, and the areas are popular with anglers year round here in the NW part of the state. There are more than ample opportunities to harvest stocked trout in this state. Good fishing later into the season is less common. In areas without quality wild trout streams, DHALO helps to fill that void, at least until the dog days of summer set in.

Kev

 

[LongWader]

Last year I was doing a lot of research on trout fishing in New York, the West Branch, and some of the other Delaware tributaries and in looking at the state trout survey statistics and I came across some interesting data. It would seem that the FFO and Artificial Only CR sections of the rivers had a much lower trout population density per mile and often a smaller average fish size compared to non-artificial only and non- CR fishing areas immediately adjacent to them. While the State Agencies gave no rationale for the results some fisherman postulated that it was because these areas are well known, often mentioned on sites like this one, and other well published sources of information and that they received more fishing pressure than the adjacent areas. Some guessed that it might be from CR mortality and others because of poaching, fishing pressure, and an overall lack of enforcement.
Where I live in Maryland we have a serious problem with poaching in the CR section of the Gunpowder and it is done mostly by folk hole hopping on dry land and canoeist and kayakers fishing bait.
While not all bait fishers are poachers it would seem at least in my area and from my experience that most poachers are bait fishers. For some reason and maybe some one more eloquent than myself can explain why bait fishers as a group are less inclined towards CR practices than FF and ALO fishers. I think that there is a feeling among the CR fishers that bait fishers as a group have not bought into CR practices they way many of us have and that is why most FF and ALO CR fishers have a almost viseral response to bait fishing.
When I am fishing a CR section of a trout stream and see some guy fishing worms stuff trout into a bag and run off through the woods when I arrive, or a kayaker fishing bait stuff trout into his six pack cooler and start paddling downstream toward the non-CR section it makes me crazy because I know if I call catch-a-poacher they enforcement folks will never arrive in time to catch them if they are able to respond at all. Every year I fish some CR sections of streams in Northwestern PA and every year I find large numbers trout fileted and thrown into the bushes near the access sites. Last year the smell alone was over whelming.

I personally feel that the lack of enforcement resources and my own concerns regarding some bait fisher's lack of buy-in regarding CR practices make me reluctant to support changes DHALO regs.

Sorry for the rant in advance.

 

[bigjohn58]

WildTigerTrout wrote:
The "Narrows" has no DHALO area. It has a portion that is under "Trophy Trout" regs and the rest is C&R.

I thought "Trophy Trout" was the same thing as DHALO except they had to be larger? I don't pay any attention to regulations since they are all catch and release to me anyways plus if no one is around to regulate them then regulations do nothing!

Quite honestly I feel these special regulation areas draw in too many people and fishing pressure. I'm not a big fan of them over all with so few people to patrol the streams, rivers, lakes, etc. You'd think with the way the fish commission complains about the costs to raise these fish and the cutting back of stocking that they would if anything decrease the chances of the stocked fish being kept in these areas. Water temps in these areas are not usually any kind of factor because they are usually in areas that a very cold stream confluences with the main water giving proper water temps for the trout. I mean I really doubt too many of these people complaining about not being able to fish bait in these areas are going to stop buying a fishing license. All they really care about is license sales and making some $$$. If they cared about the fish they would be doing more stream habitat restorations!

 

[pcray1231]

Yeah, there are a lot of streams where I feel the non-regulated areas are better fishing than the special reg parts. And yeah, its because of pressure. The effect isn't so noticable when special reg areas are large. But those 1 mile stretches on popular streams, that's when you see it.

Examples I'm familiar with include the Tully, Fisherman's Paradise on Spring Creek, both projects on Oil Creek, Yellow Breeches, etc. In the case of Spring Creek, I suppose it's the "less regulated" areas being better than the "more regulated" one.

Longwader, yeah, there is a higher % of harvest among bait anglers. But it's still the minority, most bait anglers don't keep fish either.

I think it's mostly attributed to the level of "avidity". Is that a word? lol. But non-avid anglers tend to be the ones who keep fish. The one or two weekend a year types. And they tend to be bait anglers because it's the easiest method to be successful without a significant time commitment and learning curve. More avid anglers can be bait, lure, or fly, but regardless of tackle choices, tend to be more the C&R types.

If you're judging by outlaw poachers, well, I'd suggest that this might not be a representative sample, lol. And nor do you fight unlawful behavior by increasing restrictions on the law abiding.

 

[Chaz]

No one is not allowed to fish DH water, anyone can fish DH waters, as long as they don't use bait. TAP is a very small group of anglers and I really don't understand why PFBC would make this change for them. DH areas create a lot of license sales among FFmen, they are the most popular areas for many Fly Fishermen to fish, because they don't get hassled by ignorant bait guys that jump in to a hole they are fishing.
Understand that not all bait anglers are equal and only a minority of them have bad manners. But let's get real here, they aren't going to sell more licenses by opening these waters up to bait fishing. As I've said many times, we need fewer special regs not more. Also because many of these DH areas are on private property, I'll bet that many will be posted if the rules are changed.