Spring Creek PFBC study?

[flyguyfishing]

I am surprised no one posted about being surveyed while fishing Spring Creek. I was asked twice in the last few weeks to complete a survey.

Survey started with categorical questions: my home location, how much $ spent on trip, how long fishing SC, how often.

The meat of the survey was gaining fisherpeoples opinions of trout sizes on SC. One question directly asked about changing some regulations downstream - would I support harvest of fish within a certain range (I think 8-11 inch only) (seems they want to set an experiment) It seems PFBC is aware of size issue on SC.

It sounded encouraging and I would like to know more about what they are thinking. Anyone got more info? My google search resulted in nada.

 

[silverfox]

I am surprised no one posted about being surveyed while fishing Spring Creek. I was asked twice in the last few weeks to complete a survey.

Survey started with categorical questions: my home location, how much $ spent on trip, how long fishing SC, how often.

The meat of the survey was gaining fisherpeoples opinions of trout sizes on SC. One question directly asked about changing some regulations downstream - would I support harvest of fish within a certain range (I think 8-11 inch only) (seems they want to set an experiment) It seems PFBC is aware of size issue on SC.

It sounded encouraging and I would like to know more about what they are thinking. Anyone got more info? My google search resulted in nada.

I think someone else posted about this and 4 different personal acquaintances mentioned being questioned too.

PFBC just approved a new regulation type based on the slot limit program on Penns Creek. I'd assume they want to use that new reg on Spring Creek to improve average trout size. My speculation only.

 

[Lou]

My buddy and I was surveyed several weeks ago by a Fish Biologist. Silver fox is spot on concerning a possible slot limit. My personal opinion is to keep it as is, catch and release only. Too easy for those keeping to not be accurate in their measuring "close enough attitude." If it's catch and release it's pretty cut and dry, no fish in your possession. Not to mention there are plenty of other streams and lakes for those who want to keep fish.

 

[troutbert]

I think the reason the trout run somewhat small on Spring Creek isn't because it's over-populated but from

I am surprised no one posted about being surveyed while fishing Spring Creek. I was asked twice in the last few weeks to complete a survey.

Survey started with categorical questions: my home location, how much $ spent on trip, how long fishing SC, how often.

The meat of the survey was gaining fisherpeoples opinions of trout sizes on SC. One question directly asked about changing some regulations downstream - would I support harvest of fish within a certain range (I think 8-11 inch only) (seems they want to set an experiment) It seems PFBC is aware of size issue on SC.

It sounded encouraging and I would like to know more about what they are thinking. Anyone got more info? My google search resulted in nada.

What does "downstream" refer to? Downstream of where?

 

[PennKev]

Too easy for those keeping to not be accurate in their measuring "close enough attitude."

It's just as likely that those who want to catch and keep forget a ruler and end up releasing legal trout because they are not sure. On the other hand, what is keeping anyone from poaching a bunch of trout out of Spring Creek right now? If an angler doesn't encounter a WCO, they can get away with whatever they like. There is not a single law or regulation on the books that can't be intentionally or unintentionally broken. However, the lack of absolute compliance and absolute enforcement is not a reason to not have regulations.

If it's catch and release it's pretty cut and dry, no fish in your possession. Not to mention there are plenty of other streams and lakes for those who want to keep fish.

What happens on other creeks and lakes is irrelevant. The regs would be implemented on a specific creek (Spring Creek) in order to correct a specific population issue (too many small fish). Additional opportunities to keep trout due to a slot limit on Spring would be only incidental.

 

[flyguyfishing]

I think the reason the trout run somewhat small on Spring Creek isn't because it's over-populated but from

What does "downstream" refer to? Downstream of where?

Of Paradise. I was surveyed at the Paradise.

Your post cut off? Why do you think fish are small on SC?

 

[flyguyfishing]

It's just as likely that those who want to catch and keep forget a ruler and end up releasing legal trout because they are not sure. On the other hand, what is keeping anyone from poaching a bunch of trout out of Spring Creek right now? If an angler doesn't encounter a WCO, they can get away with whatever they like. There is not a single law or regulation on the books that can't be intentionally or unintentionally broken. However, the lack of absolute compliance and absolute enforcement is not a reason to not have regulations.


What happens on other creeks and lakes is irrelevant. The regs would be implemented on a specific creek (Spring Creek) in order to correct a specific population issue (too many small fish). Additional opportunities to keep trout due to a slot limit on Spring would be only incidental.

I stated the same thing to the surveyor. I doubted peoples ability to only take fish within the size boundary.

I do support the change. It will be a study to see if the reg change does influence fish size. I’d be interested with results.

 

[flyguyfishing]

It was a little more than only slot limits. Probably see all SC go barbless. Perhaps no bait below paradise. There were other questions too. But the most significant was harvest of fish downstream of Paradise.

 

[tztrout]

It has always been well documented that Spring Creek is no harvest due to stream bed poisoning due to a chemical spill (Mirex). Has the water quality improved to the point where eating fish from here would be safe?

 

[flyguyfishing]

It has always been well documented that Spring Creek is no harvest due to stream bed poisoning due to a chemical spill (Mirex). Has the water quality improved to the point where eating fish from here would be safe?

You were correct but not anymore. They published a report that indicated the fish were now clean enough for humans. My guess is the report was fro 3-5years ago but I have no intention of eating any of those fish.

 

[tztrout]

Good news- they won’t be on my menu either!

 

[troutbert]

Of Paradise. I was surveyed at the Paradise.

Your post cut off? Why do you think fish are small on SC?

The idea that the trout run small in Spring Creek because the trout numbers are too high and reducing their growth rate is a hypothesis. It might be true, but there are other explanations that I think are more likely.

It could because the stream does not have much big fish habitat, i.e. deep pools with great overhead cover.

And it could be because the trout in Spring Creek are caught and released an average of 6 times per year. To reach 14 inches takes about 5 years. In 5 years trout are caught an average of 30 times. That must affect the mortality rate. It probably greatly reduces the number of trout reaching 5, 6 or more years of age.

Wild brown trout populations in good habitat generally do not have over-populated, stunted fish. They typically have lots of large trout. Their populations are self-regulating. Large brown trout eat everything they can, including small brown trout. This keeps the population in check.

If the number of large brown trout is low because of angling mortality, there is less of this check on the population. Instead of a prime spot being occupied by one large trout, it is instead occupied by several small trout.

 

[wildtrout2]

It has always been well documented that Spring Creek is no harvest due to stream bed poisoning due to a chemical spill (Mirex).

The same situation exists on Valley Creek, and that's why it's the fishery that it is today. Years ago, Conrail spilled PCB's into Valley and stocking was halted, so it became C&R only. Today it's a great wild brown trout stream because of that.

 

[troutbert]

You were correct but not anymore. They published a report that indicated the fish were now clean enough for humans. My guess is the report was fro 3-5years ago but I have no intention of eating any of those fish.

Yes, that's right. I don't remember the exact date, but I think it was more like 10 years ago. Time flies! But I wouldn't eat those fish either.

A fly fishing buddy called it "that polluted old creek."

 

[JeffP]

The idea that the trout run small in Spring Creek because the trout numbers are too high and reducing their growth rate is a hypothesis. It might be true, but there are other explanations that I think are more likely.

It could because the stream does not have much big fish habitat, i.e. deep pools with great overhead cover.

And it could be because the trout in Spring Creek are caught and released an average of 6 times per year. To reach 14 inches takes about 5 years. In 5 years trout are caught an average of 30 times. That must affect the mortality rate. It probably greatly reduces the number of trout reaching 5, 6 or more years of age.

Wild brown trout populations in good habitat generally do not have over-populated, stunted fish. They typically have lots of large trout. Their populations are self-regulating. Large brown trout eat everything they can, including small brown trout. This keeps the population in check.

If the number of large brown trout is low because of angling mortality, there is less of this check on the population. Instead of a prime spot being occupied by one large trout, it is instead occupied by several small trout.

I've never bought the stunted issue. Lakes and stream produce what they will bear.

 

[flyguyfishing]

The idea that the trout run small in Spring Creek because the trout numbers are too high and reducing their growth rate is a hypothesis. It might be true, but there are other explanations that I think are more likely.

It could because the stream does not have much big fish habitat, i.e. deep pools with great overhead cover.

And it could be because the trout in Spring Creek are caught and released an average of 6 times per year. To reach 14 inches takes about 5 years. In 5 years trout are caught an average of 30 times. That must affect the mortality rate. It probably greatly reduces the number of trout reaching 5, 6 or more years of age.

Wild brown trout populations in good habitat generally do not have over-populated, stunted fish. They typically have lots of large trout. Their populations are self-regulating. Large brown trout eat everything they can, including small brown trout. This keeps the population in check.

If the number of large brown trout is low because of angling mortality, there is less of this check on the population. Instead of a prime spot being occupied by one large trout, it is instead occupied by several small trout.

I agree with all these.

I would say, there were more bigger fish 20 years ago. I also think the average “normal” fish has decreased a 1-2 inches too. I think the hatchery changes either stopped escapes or reduced micro food source. It would not explain all of decrease, but could have attributed to it.

Or maybe my fishing skills are decreasing.

 

[DaveKile]

It was a little more than only slot limits. Probably see all SC go barbless. Perhaps no bait below paradise. There were other questions too. But the most significant was harvest of fish downstream of Paradise.

I was there yesterday and ran into the survey fella. Nice young man from the PFBC. Seemed like they would be continuing the survey for a few months. Same questions of how far I traveled, how much I spent on the trip, thoughts on fish size, slot limits, barbless hooks and artificial lures.

 

[Wild_Trouter]

The big fish in Spring Creek are there- just not in places where you expect them to be. I fish it 2-3x per week. It's true that absent a major hatch, the larger fish will just stay hidden throughout the day and you will catch cookie-cutter browns. Fish it closer to dusk or very early dawn, and you will see a different side to it and it's population. It also helps when you fish the more "under-utilized" sections of stream for which there are many. The current regs are fine unless your goal is to placate the needs of a few who don't care to follow the advice presented here. I have no complaints with the fishery as-is.

 

[Nymph-wristed]

The same situation exists on Valley Creek, and that's why it's the fishery that it is today. Years ago, Conrail spilled PCB's into Valley and stocking was halted, so it became C&R only. Today it's a great wild brown trout stream because of that.

I was thinking the same thing, and I think this fits troutbert's theory too. Plenty of places for big fish to live in Valley, so they do, even with the pressure....

 

[greywolf]

I agree with all these.

I would say, there were more bigger fish 20 years ago. I also think the average “normal” fish has decreased a 1-2 inches too. I think the hatchery changes either stopped escapes or reduced micro food source. It would not explain all of decrease, but could have attributed to it.

Or maybe my fishing skills are decreasing.

I know that the average size trout I catch on Spring has decreased from what I caught 10 - 15 years ago. I remember catching 4 trout between 16 - 18 inches in just one morning 11 years ago and seldom catch one that size recently.