Stocking over Wild Trout in PA

[MHanes]

This is a recent hot button topic with the discussion recently at the Meeting on Penns Creek and I know it has been something discussed on the state level at meeting with PFBC and TU. We all know their are COOPS that stock trout over wild fish and in some cases even in class A water. What is everyone's feeling on this issue?

Personally I think it is one of the biggest issues in PA when it comes to wild trout management.

 

[tomgamber]

http://www.paflyfish.com/forums/search.html?term=Stockings+wild+trout&forum=2&sortby=p.post_time+desc&since=0&action=yes&searchin=both

 

[Dave_W]

While it's perfectly okay to start another thread on this topic...

It's been much discussed with many threads that drag into several pages and often dozens if not hundreds of replies. I've posted my opinion on this one enough and rarely chime in on these threads anymore. Others, of course, are welcome to do so.

 

[jifigz]

Everyone here is going to dis stocking over wild fish. It happens a lot all over the state. The PFBC stocks over wild trout in a lot of streams. Yes, I think it should stop but that won't happen. With the PFBC financial woes it is happening less, however, simply because stocking numbers are on the decrease.

 

[Mike]

Intended trout hatchery production has not been reduced for a number of years. The financial situation discussed in recent years has not produced a stocking reduction.

 

[MHanes]

It really makes sense when you look at things from a money stand point. There are trout streams up this way that have good populations of native brook trout that the state stocks once or twice a year with at most a 1000 fish total. It has to be more expensive to get to these streams to stock them than its really worth. Move those fish down stream near the towns with no wild trout and more people will fish for them and they would not have a negative effect on native trout.

 

[JackM]

Wild trout fanatics:

Fish wild streams that are not "stocked over." End of discussion!

 

[troutbert]

MHanes wrote:
It really makes sense when you look at things from a money stand point. There are trout streams up this way that have good populations of native brook trout that the state stocks once or twice a year with at most a 1000 fish total. It has to be more expensive to get to these streams to stock them than its really worth. Move those fish down stream near the towns with no wild trout and more people will fish for them and they would not have a negative effect on native trout.

Of course that makes sense, and nearly everyone on here agrees with it, and most of the PFBC biologists/managers would like to do what you say.

But the question is, what can be done?

And the answer is to send letters expressing your views to the PFBC, your PFBC Commissioner, and your state legislators.

And if possible, coordinate with others (such as in your local TU chapter) to support moving the hatchery trout away from the brookie streams to other waters.

 

[Mike]

I don't think you are going to find much local support for moving a stocked trout section downstream without the " abandoned section" being Class A or heavily posted. Stocked trout angler's often have traditional fishing holes and they are pretty darn protective of them...and when I say holes I am not referring to a specific stream; I am speaking about specific holes. Irrational as that may seem, that's the way it is. Under the scenario described above, I would predict that anglers would argue for an extension of the stocked stretch in a downstream direction toward the population center without having to lose the upstream area.

 

[bigjohn58]

JackM wrote:
Wild trout fanatics:

Fish wild streams that are not "stocked over." End of discussion!

Do what this man says! This way I'll have more stream to myself!

 

[Hook_Jaw]

they are becoming less and less

 

[MHanes]

Jack M,

Your comment makes no sense that is not the point the point is to improve protection of wild trout. Pretty sad that you as an admin would even make such a comment.

 

[tomgamber]

Are you suggesting that all Administrators on this board (or anyone else on this board, for that matter) MUST be wild trout advocates?

 

[Acristickid]

Anyone I would call an a fly Angler knows that stocking over wild trout is not good.

 

[tomgamber]

Know something is bad and being an advocate are not the same thing.

 

[troutbert]

MHanes, there will always be naysayers.

Just pay them no mind.

And work with people who share your goals.

 

[Hook_Jaw]

There's a lot of water getting stocked over in pa that's class a wild The fish and boat commission will do anything when they are getting their pockets lined

 

[tomgamber]

So who is paying them?

 

[misanthropist]

The problem is the mentality behind stocking. There is a large segment of anglers in Pennsylvania who think trout come from a stock truck.

I know a guy in Potter County who is completely unaware of the wild Brown Trout element. He refers to them as "colored up hold-overs". I tried to explain it to him, but It was pointless. He just refuses to believe it. There are a lot of anglers who think along these lines and I believe it's part of the problem.

I am on the extreme end of the spectrum. I completely disagree with stocking on any level. My reasons are strictly ecological.

 

[MHanes]

yeah them colored up holdovers and even the state stocked a lot of little brook trout comments really make me cringe to! sadly you are correct many guys just do not get it.