steams where you didnt find trout

pat: "I will almost never blame fertility alone for a total lack of fish."

right, brookies can survive largely on the terrestrial bugs that fall in to streams with few aquatic insects.

 
afishinado wrote:
k-bob wrote:
I have fished lower n branch Bowman's just a bit while hiking somewhere else.. didn't see any fish but only spent a little time there.


That area received a devastating flood a few years back. I'm not sure if many of the streams in the drainage have fully recovered. It may take more years for the fish and macros to reestablish.

I checked out N Br Bowmans before the flood, and saw no trout.

Also, both myself and others have fished brookie streams in the hard hit area, Mehoopany and Loyalsock tribs, since the flood, and even though there was vast damage, i.e. landslides, huge piles of trees and rocks, channel avulsions, floodplain stripping etc. the brookie fishing has been decent.

As Mike said, a severe flood like that can knock the populations down hard, but it won't eliminate them. And their numbers bounce back pretty quickly, in about 3-4 years.
 
Its very rare to find a stream that looks trouty and isnt. Plenty of times I have fished streams that I was unsure of, and they turn out to be as good as Class A streams. This stream is a very rare occasion.

My favorite brookie stream is in good shape in regards to aquatic insects but its the terrestrials in mid summer that make it worth it. I fished about 100 yards of nice water with no luck the first time. Then I came across a pool with an overhanging tree about an inch from the surface. Green Weenie claimed 4 or 5 there.
 
I suck at fishing so take it with a grain of salt, but the West Branch Perkiomen at the Tollgate Road eco park looked dead as can be. Clear water, with the soil looking pretty much yellow and not a fish in sight.
 
pat: "If it happens to be class A, the class A list gives T_Alk, which is the best measure. This is not pH. You can have very low alkalinity and still not be acidic. It is essentially a measure of the buffering capability, which tells you how much acid has to be added to move the pH a fixed amount."

I agree with all of this, except maybe the "best measure" part. Alkalinity info is avail for class A, which is great. But for remote brookie streams, I'd rather know the pH than the alkalinity. Classic case: upper Devils Hole, which has very ST high biomass (see wilderness list). Its alkalinity is low (class a list), but there are hatches, water weeds, and all that biomass. Probably because of its good base-rate pH: upper Devils Hole has catskill headwaters bedrock geology and a pH of 6.7-7 if look around online (geo info from DCNR map online). Without some falls, that pH could even lead to a Chaz-Hell BT takeover. :) As you guys mentioned, habitat is critical and upper devils hole has pools, good temps, etc.

So while alkalinity is generally associated with fertility (for ex limestoners), upper devils hole has bugs and fish in big numbers with low alkalinity, given good base-rate pH and habitat. I know other class a brookie streams like this: low alkalinity (below 10 or even 5), but lotsa fish, bugs, weeds. They also probably involve good habitat, temps, base rate pH, & sometimes barriers to BT. As pat notes, that base-rate pH is associated with geology.

Alkalinity definitely matters, but it's usually so low in mtn streams that I'd rather know the pH.

The alkalinity data are interesting to me on a steam like Penns, where I might not have guessed the buffering was that high to look at it...
 
While the above is correct, I have not seen actual pH readings reported, whereas the T-Alk is. Hence "best published indicator" may be T-Alk.
 
right. but who knows, maybe fishing would be less fun if we had pH, alkalinity, and actual biomass data on the nat repro list? I like some of these hikes where I see a bear or a waterfall but no fish :)
 
It's nice to have "some idea" that you may be hiking a stream that holds trout if that is your primary goal. I have used data to pinpoint waters I thought might be good and have also blindly went to streams with no earthly idea if it held any life. I have had better luck with the data in finding worthy gems.
 
I'm dubious of using actual pH. What you really want is MINIMUM pH over the course of a year. And if you really get into it, the critical time period may be when eggs are in the substrate, as I believe eggs are more sensitive to acidic water than are fish.

Take a really infertile (T_Alk < 10) stream. Visit in a rather dry period of late summer. Yes, the pH can look very good indeed. The flows will be low, and what flows there are result from primarily groundwater, which, depending on soil and bedrock structure, could have a fine pH but almost no buffering capability at all. Plus, that soil is actively composting which naturally regulates the pH to be neutral or even a little basic, even if there is no bedrock influence making it that way.

Now visit that stream on a warm, rainy January day, where you have the season's worst acid rain on top of acidic snow (top layer of which can be extremely acidic if it's sat for a while), with a frozen ground underneath. The acidic water never touches the soil or bedrock, and it enters the water as runoff, where it meets a low volume of groundwater, which flowed through soil where composting has stalled. The pH, which last June looked fine, is suddenly dangerously acidic, and it's the eggs that get harmed.

If that stream had any buffering capability resulting from bedrock, the pH drop would not be as severe.

How much alkalinity you "need" depends on runoff rate. Everyone knows that's a huge factor for siltation and flooding, but it is for acidity as well. Even with frozen soils, if you have lots of depresssions in the drainage, scree type rocks, etc., then water collects, melts and freezes multiple times, slowly entering the soil. What does runoff takes the long way, so you don't get that spike. Helps if the soil itself is thicker and more permeable, too. You wind up with healthy groundwater flows even in winter, and less runoff.

On the other hand, if it's shallow compacted soils with a smooth slope right to the stream it runs off, and you get low groundwater flow and lots of runoff very quickly. (human landscaping matters here too, of course). While pyrite is obviously a bad form of rock, this is one reason why shale type bedrocks often produce poor fishing. They are associated with clay like soils and produce "smooth" surfaces throughout the drainage.

So regarding how acidic the water gets, you want to know what the "base pH" is of the groundwater IN WINTER. But you also need to know the alkalinity of that base flow, and, at the worst times, what % of the flow is direct unfiltered runoff vs. groundwater.

T_Alk isn't the whole story, but IMO it tells you more than a summertime pH reading (although, summertime pH is incredibly useful for identifying AMD).

When dealing with acid rain (not AMD), I'd offer that there's a huge difference between, say, a T_Alk of 4 vs. 8. I realize that can look like a small difference when limestoners with 200+ are on the same list. But it's not. It means you can add twice as much acidic water before the pH begins to drop. By which time the remaining runoff is smaller, to be diluted by a larger volume of water already in that stream, and your worst case pH is sure to be quite a bit better.
 
pat yeah I agree that pH, like water temp and flow, moves around a lot. for example, you have to expect higher pH readings at low flow (less rainwater input). and acidity spikes w snowmelts. just like you have to think about the circumstances that produce a 62F water temp or certain flow number.

so yes, pH numbers in a vacuum - no idea of flow/ summer or spring readings - would not mean much. a "summer flow pH" data point would be a lot better. say a summer flow pH on devils hole is 6.9. that says more about how it will fish than its 8 alkalinity does.

I dont see alkalinity as a direct fertility signal. alkalinity is about resistance to pH change. if the habitat and base-rate pH are good enough, streams can have high fertility - bugs, weeds, ST biomass - with low alkalinity. the summer pH would tell you more, imho. btw, I know a class a stream that fishes great w/ an alkalinity of 2.

great thread, thanks.
 
It is a direct fertility measure. Devil's Hole is an infertile stream (though not extremely so for it's size).

That said, fertility is a poor measure of how well it will fish. The opposite, sometimes. I think low fertility leads to more aggressive fish which leads to us catching a higher % of them.

Devil's Hole has fantastic structure, a high base groundwater flow, stable temperatures, and fairly low runoff. So it has a lot of fish, despite the fact that it's substrate is not particularly fertile. The low fertility merely means the fish are aggressive. Take a high fertility stream with just as high a biomass (several limestoners come to mind), and your catch rates don't approach that of DH.

It's also notable that the T_Alk actually FALLS as DH proceeds downstream. That's odd, and I'd guess is part of it's story. A T_Alk of 8 is actually pretty high for headwaters.

I also suspect that with all of the coal power plants closing doors throughout PA and the Midwest, the acid rain problem will steadily decline in the coming decade or two. Generally good for fishing, but also probably will enable brown trout to gain further ground on brookie dominated areas.
 
ok, but I think I'd do much better at choosing streams from summer pH data versus alkalinity data. if "fertility is a poor measure of how well it will fish," would you say that about summer pH? I wouldn't...

if you could have a stream report on an unfamiliar NEPA ST area, and had to choose between summer pH and alk data to guess how well streams would fish, which one would you choose?
 
Chemically speaking, alkalinity is the buffering capacity against large pH swings.

I would argue that larger alkalinity readings = longer living fish.
 
wildtrout2 wrote:
The only stream I've ever fished and did not see/catch a trout in was EB of Fishing Creek a long time ago. I've heard it's a "dead stream", while others have spoken of a few remnant brookies that can still be caught. I have to say it's a beautiful "looking" stream though.

I've caught brookies in EB Fishing Creek, but not many, the last couple of times none, but I saw a couple.
 
hooker-of-men wrote:
Toms Creek.

Fished it once, but I hike along it with the dog all the time. I have yet to see evidence of fish.

It's a tough stream but I've have some excellent days there. It's pretty fertile for a Pocono Stream too, it has lots of bugs. It is mostly browns with a few brookies so that's what make it tough. When I go, it's early morning when the hikers aren't there yet. I think with the trail along the stream the trout are spooked by the traffic of hikers.
 
Swattie87 wrote:
I suspect you guys are referring to some combination of geology and lack of bug life when you say a stream “looks” infertile, but can you elaborate on that? What do you “look” for? What leads you to suspect that based on the stream’s “look”? I’d like to try to better apply the same know how in my explorations.

tb – I want to say I remember talking to some guys who fished Greens Valley at the Jam a couple years ago. Might have been pcray’s group? I think they said they caught Brookies in it, but I’m not 100% certain. Pat – Was that you guys?

I’ve come across a few duds that should have held fish and didn’t appear to…Tumbling Run in the South Mountain area (trib to EB Antietam) comes to mind. Frigid water, good gradient and habitat, surrounded by streams that have wild Trout, not in an AMD area…but I suspect poor localized geology. Lots of fine, bright white sand and white rocks…not sure what that means, but the stream looks strikingly different than its neighbors. This one is not on the Nat Repro.

Another is WB Fishing Creek (trib to Lebanon Reservoir) in Schuylkill Co. This one is on the Nat Repro, as are its tribs, but I turned up nothing after a ball buster of a hike to get in there. That one’s in an AMD area, and had orangish rocks, but I expected to find fish. I suspect they are there, just not in great density.

Headwaters of Black Creek…SGL 52, Berks/Lanc border area is another. Not on Nat Repro.
Swattie, Michaux Forest Streams are infertile because of acid rain and geology. But many do have trout, mostly brookies.
 
MVHagey wrote:
I suck at fishing so take it with a grain of salt, but the West Branch Perkiomen at the Tollgate Road eco park looked dead as can be. Clear water, with the soil looking pretty much yellow and not a fish in sight.
For what it's worth that is not the WB of Perkiomen Creek, it's the Main Branch, and it does have a good wild trout population, but when temperatures go up the browns move upstreams.
The WB Perkiomen Creek is at Forgedale Rod, and flows into the Green Lane Reservoir about 1 mile south of the MB. To find it, drive along rt 100 to the Longacre Dairy Bar, look south on Rt. 100, you'll see it in the meadow. There are a couple of miles of water open to fishing, the rest of the access is spotty.
 
k-bob wrote:
here's one. good pH even at higher flow, low conductivity, bigger nearby streams have ST. dry at mouth, with nicer pools upstream. doubt it's water temps. my guess: floods or drought whack fish populations, and given dry/underground state at lower levels, they don't get back.

that's ok, I hike to fish, and this just became a nice hike. or I missed the brookies that are there!

A dry stream bed at the mouth usually doesn't block trout from entering a stream during higher water. A good stream that illustrates this is Asaph Run in Tioga Cty. It's channelized at the mouth, which is the primary cause of the water loss. Every year it's dry at the mouth for as much as 1/4 to 1/2 mile, yet there are plenty of brookies. I can cite other examples, some of the streams along rt. 209 above Bushkill PA sink during the summer, including Dingmans Creek.I would guess that it's a combination of factors, one of which is a dry bed at the mouth.
For the record, I cannot recall any stream that I fished and didn't catch trout, as long as I did my research. But I'll try and think of a couple.
 
if you could have a stream report on an unfamiliar NEPA ST area, and had to choose between summer pH and alk data to guess how well streams would fish, which one would you choose?

For NEPA, neither, but if I had to choose, probably pH, because I wouldn't suspect acid rain to be a terrible factor on any stream, but AMD and natural acid rock sources (pyrite) could be a concern. i.e. I'm not worried about acid from rainfall as much, so buffering is less important. Acid concerns are more related to acidic groundwater, and hence a summertime pH may capture it.

That equation changes when you go to NC PA and western PA, where acid rain is the primary concern, and pH would only capture it during runoff events.

The chart below is the pH of the rainfall, not the streams. Blue may be a poor color choice for the "better" areas, as "natural" rainfall should have a pH of >5, to put this map in perspective. So everywhere in PA has acid rain. Just some areas worse than others.

Note the date of 2007, though. And also note that several coal fired plants right smack in the bullseye are shutting their doors, as are many more farther west along the Ohio drainage. I expect a 2027 map to look quite different.
 

Attachments

  • rainfall pH.jpg
    rainfall pH.jpg
    124 KB · Views: 5
pcray1231 wrote:
if you could have a stream report on an unfamiliar NEPA ST area, and had to choose between summer pH and alk data to guess how well streams would fish, which one would you choose?

For NEPA, neither, but if I had to choose, probably pH, because I wouldn't suspect acid rain to be a terrible factor on any stream, but AMD and natural acid rock sources (pyrite) could be a concern. i.e. I'm not worried about acid from rainfall as much, so buffering is less important. Acid concerns are more related to acidic groundwater, and hence a summertime pH may capture it.
Many of the streams in NEPA start up high and run down to valleys, many are acidic, but because they have a lot of organic matter entering from the source, they are not infertile. Many also start warm because they start in wetlands. The fertility comes from the wetlands and the fact that the glaciers covered the area as far south as Camelback Mt. in some areas, changing the geology, buffering, acidity and alk. You could fish NEPA for a lifetime and not run out of fertile trout streams to fish. 3 drainages impacted by acid rain, and they are big drainages are Fishing Creek, Mehoopany Creek and Bowmans Creek. All have places in the drainage that have dead water, but all also support wild trout.
 
Back
Top