should we have new regs for nat repo and wild streams

SNPbound

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
35
Today while fishing a wild brown trout fishery in york county which usually fishes really well, I was not seeing as many trout as usual. Then I noticed some boot prints but really thought nothing of it....... until I found a bright green rooster tail, trebel hooks and all. It was a little discouraging to say the least. Why doesn't the fish commission care to protect what resources we have and make these streams catch and release single barbless hooks. Maybe they should take after virginia and make these types of streams have these restrictions.

Single barbless hooks
Artificial lures only
Catch and release

Sorry for the rant. Just frustrating to see a resource being depleted by people who do not care. This stream is not stocked and used to hold a pretty good population of wild browns. But in the last year I've seen more trash and bait contianers.
 
I agree tom. Just frustrates me when I see this crap. Not everyone understands why wild trout are so special. Maybe if the fish commission would put some info in the license booklets people would be more aware?
 
I think every stream that either meets class A standards or is not stocked should indeed be Catch & Release ALO. I've always felt this way, pretty much since I was a kid.

I'd also like to see the PFBC quit with excuses and games and stick to their darn word and officially list as Class A the streams or stream sections that have met that threshold, some repeatedly. Particularly a certain wild brown trout stream in the Southeast region they are well aware of.
 
I agree with catch and release on all Class A wild trout streams. What they consider a "legal trout" makes me shake my head. This native is just legal size, I think it would take about 20 of these to make anything resembling a meal.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0891 (Custom).JPG
    IMG_0891 (Custom).JPG
    46.2 KB · Views: 5
It shouldn't be just streams with wild fish. The Game Commision does not handle it's tailwaters in this state properly. The trophy trout regs on the Middle Yough allow too many anglers to keep fish. A good friend of mine watched 2 bait dunkers kill 8 14 inch rainbows with ease on Saturday. They need to evalutate what streams have serious potential to be world class fisheries. The Yough has little, if any, reproduction but could become exeptional if the right regulations applied and the right stocking occured.

I caught this fish on Sunday night...imagine how many more would get into this range if it was only managed properly?


100_1866.JPG


www.grobe33.blogspot.com
 
Dear Board,

I'm curious, is it all fish that can't be kept to eat or just trout?

Regards,

Tim Murphy 🙂
 
TT regs allow only 2 trout to be harvested. Why didn't your friend make the call?
As for regs I believe there is a case to not have C & R on all Class A streams. Incidental mortality will eventually catch up to the population of big trout and what you will have are a ton of streams with a lot of 14 inch fish and nothing bigger. Mortality percentage goes up each time a fish is caught, so the chances of a large fish dying even after release goes up every time it is caught.
I still believe a 2 fish a day limit is more reasonable on most streams, while C & R is appropriate for those streams where harvest limits recruitment.
Barbless hooks don't decrease mortality, but I'll allow that a single hook would reduce mortality of released fish though most studies show no difference.
 
"Barbless hooks don't decrease mortality'

I'd have to respectfully challenge this statement. I loose plenty of fish when I fish barbless, fish that I otherwise would have to handle and release.

Do we really need "Studies" to assume that trebles cause more damage than single hooks?

As far as the original question is concerned, all C&R on all streams all the time, wouldn't that be great.
 
SNPbound wrote:
Today while fishing a wild brown trout fishery in york county which usually fishes really well, I was not seeing as many trout as usual. Then I noticed some boot prints but really thought nothing of it....... until I found a bright green rooster tail, trebel hooks and all. It was a little discouraging to say the least. Why doesn't the fish commission care to protect what resources we have and make these streams catch and release single barbless hooks. Maybe they should take after virginia and make these types of streams have these restrictions.

Single barbless hooks
Artificial lures only
Catch and release

Sorry for the rant. Just frustrating to see a resource being depleted by people who do not care. This stream is not stocked and used to hold a pretty good population of wild browns. But in the last year I've seen more trash and bait contianers.

Do you have the same reaction when you see a single barbed fly tangled in a tree? Its a bit of a leap to state that a stream that usually fishes well didn't fish as well recently because at least one spin fisherman lost his/her spinner. Bait fisherpeople are at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to littering - they leave big white calling cards called styrofoam containers for all to see. Fly fisherpeople leave more subtle reminders of their presence, like tippet and fly boxes and flies.

Its not the method of fishing that matters the most, in my opinion. Its the attitude that the fisherperson has towards the resource that makes all the difference. I've seen slob fly fisherpeople and courteous bait and spinner fisherpeople (as well as vice versa); in fact, in some cases, I'd argue that fly fisherpeople do more damage to larger fish by overplaying them (gotta protect that light tippet, right), to the extent that after a long battle, the fish is released, completely exhausted and stressed but will it live to see another day?
 
I agree with u salmonoid about the attitude towards the fishery and resources. I guess what I was most upset with was the treble hook. I just find it hard to think that they were releasing fish after using that. Why not clip off two of the hooks and make it easier to release the fish?

And the original question was not about c&r on all streams all the times, it was for natural reproduction streams and wild trout streams. I have no problem with keeping a few stockies in streams that they are gonna die anyway.
 
Oh, the mistatements in this thread. Where to start?

hehe, ok. Well I'll start by saying that I AGREE with the premise. I'd like to see stricter harvest restrictions on a lot of our better streams.

But, to the OP, so you were doing worse than you thought you would, saw a rooster tail, and assumed the fish were gone due to the rooster tail guy? That's quite a conclusion to jump to. I s'pose it's possible, but certainly not the most likely scenario. Maybe the fish moved? Maybe they just weren't hitting while you were there? Maybe the guy with the rooster tail was only a half hour ahead of you and had em spooked (just like a FF ahead of you would)?

And Grobe
I caught this fish on Sunday night...imagine how many more would get into this range if it was only managed properly?

Typically, higher fish populations do NOT correspond to more big fish, quite the opposite actually. Though, admittedly, the Yough is a special enough of a situation that it may not follow the typical rules.
 
pcray1231 wrote:
But, to the OP, so you were doing worse than you thought you would, saw a rooster tail, and assumed the fish were gone due to the rooster tail guy? That's quite a conclusion to jump to. I s'pose it's possible, but certainly not the most likely scenario. Maybe the fish moved? Maybe they just weren't hitting while you were there? Maybe the guy with the rooster tail was only a half hour ahead of you and had em spooked (just like a FF ahead of you would)?

But that would mean the lack of success wasn't someone elses fault! LOL.
 
Personnally I do not think having all class A waters here in the NC PA C&R would increase the size & numbers of brook trout. I have fished the Brook Trout waters of Kettle & Lyman & have not caught more or bigger trout then before they put the regs in place. I know it's not scientific but....

P.S. I know I talk about eating native brookies, but I don't kill as many as some think. I think over almost a 20 year period I have killed maybe a dozen native brookies.
 
I never said I didn't catch any just noticed fewer fish? Talk about jumping to conclusions
 
The state-wide bag limit of 5 trout per day is unreasonably high, considering the numbers of trout (both wild and stocked) compared with the number of anglers. Two trout per day would be more reasonable.

 
There's a lot of different topics all kind of crammed into this thread, but I'll give it a try.

SNP - Taken individually, your experience on that wild stream in York County shouldn't necessarily be taken as a microcosm of the situation on wild trout streams in PA as a whole. When you're just looking at one stream, there are too many individual factors that can affect trout populations from year to year, and too many factors that can affect how it fishes from day to day within a season. In the end, there's no way to tell whether having a spinner fisherman on the stream affected things or not...my guess is any impact from the spinner guy(s) is relatively minimal in the grand scope of all the factors affecting the stream. You can't even be sure if any fish were harvested by the spin guys or not. I still fish spinners occasionally, some with treble hooks (although debarbed), and don't notice any difference in the health of a fish after landing them on a spinner vs. fly gear. They generally speaking can be landed faster with spin gear and even with a treble it's rare that they are hooked by more than one point...if you're careful when removing the hook they are no worse off than they would be hooked with a fly. Just the nature of how a spinner is fished makes it tough for them to get the hook very deep. Bait fishing with treble hooks is a different story however.

That said, I largely agree with the majority trend in the thread of decreasing the harvest limits. Yeah, I guess ideally there should be different regs on stocked streams vs. wild streams, but many streams have both stockers and wild fish, and this just creates a mess to attempt to regulate and enforce...not to mention the whole separate debate about whether we should be stocking fish over naturally reproducing populations which I won't go into here. Keeping with the KISS theory I think the following change would make sense...for all non special reg trout streams in PA regardless of stocked/wild/mix.

1. Change the size minimum to 10". This basically makes nearly all wild Brook Trout sublegal, and probably 90% of wild freestone Browns. Sure Browns/Bows in the limestoners grow bigger, but many of those are already special regs streams. Most stockers are at least 10" so this incease in the size limit should have no effect on whether they can be harvested or not. In the end you can accomplish a lot with this change...protect Native Brookie populations and better target the removal of the stockies instead of wild fish.

2. Drop the creel limit to 3 fish/day. 3 10"+ fish are big enough to make a good meal for the angler for a day. If it isn't, there's always the supermarket. Besides, anyone eating 3 fish/day, every day from our waters is probably taking some serious health risks.

As with any regs though, the key is getting the angler to be a sportsman, and know them and abide by them.
 
Great Post Swattie!

I agree with the size limit and reducing the number of fish kept per trip. It would be nice if there was a slot that protected the few larger fish that these wild trout streams produce especially in the Fall when the larger brooks and browns run up to the headwaters to spawn.

It is interesting that the Wild Trout section of the Gunpowder: two fish limit per day, has more and larger fish than the CR area. It would seem like a CR designation is like the kiss of death in my area. We have more poaching and motality problems in our CR sections of the river than anywhere else. The reduce limit regs seem to strike the right balance by reducing the number and interest of dedicated meat fishers and not attracting the amount of attention that the CR areas get.
 
Top