Swattie, I gotta run, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You don't know, but you do know that more guys spin fish and bait chuck than fly fish, and that 170,000 is ALOT more than 5,000. You have no idea who there are but it wouldnt be the first time a FFO stretch or C and R stretch attracted guys with spin gear, they are like beacons that read "these guys throw back fish, therefore, there must be big fish here"
The Spotburning Thread
- Thread starter afishinado
- Start date
GreenWeenie
Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 697
Swattie,
I never said all the anglers on BS learned from this site, I said this site brought a lot of attention to BS and there was a huge increase in fishermen after postings on this site. Big difference. What 1wt said was no bait guys read this forum.
Nice attempt to discredit.
FAIL. Try again.
I never said all the anglers on BS learned from this site, I said this site brought a lot of attention to BS and there was a huge increase in fishermen after postings on this site. Big difference. What 1wt said was no bait guys read this forum.
Nice attempt to discredit.
FAIL. Try again.
pcray1231
Well-known member
The part I always come back to is that you are not "creating" fishermen. I fully acknowledge that posts can move people around, and make people try a new place that they haven't tried before. But when they go to a new place, they're NOT fishing an old place.
And personally, I don't think PA has too many anglers for the available water. It's a great trout state. I do think our anglers are too concentrated on too few of waters, leading some to be overcrowded, and others to be, yes, undercrowded.
I fully understand the position that it's ok to post about well known, famous waters, and not to post about lesser known streams. Part of me even holds that view. But I can't escape the thought that it only makes the above issue worse. In the end, it's a detriment to all, when you start considering environmental protections and activisim on policy issues. We'd be much better off if everyone had a considerably larger stable of streams. You can still only fish one at a time. But you can support many. And your "vote" on policy matters will be more informed by drawing from a larger experience base.
I haven't completely resolved the issue myself. You want to encourage people to look for the lesser known waters. But you don't want to single one of them out, spoon feed it to people, and have it experience a rush that it can't handle.
I often resort to posting reports and pictures, without naming the stream. Kind of letting people know that these streams exist pretty much everywhere, without exposing it to a rush.
And personally, I don't think PA has too many anglers for the available water. It's a great trout state. I do think our anglers are too concentrated on too few of waters, leading some to be overcrowded, and others to be, yes, undercrowded.
I fully understand the position that it's ok to post about well known, famous waters, and not to post about lesser known streams. Part of me even holds that view. But I can't escape the thought that it only makes the above issue worse. In the end, it's a detriment to all, when you start considering environmental protections and activisim on policy issues. We'd be much better off if everyone had a considerably larger stable of streams. You can still only fish one at a time. But you can support many. And your "vote" on policy matters will be more informed by drawing from a larger experience base.
I haven't completely resolved the issue myself. You want to encourage people to look for the lesser known waters. But you don't want to single one of them out, spoon feed it to people, and have it experience a rush that it can't handle.
I often resort to posting reports and pictures, without naming the stream. Kind of letting people know that these streams exist pretty much everywhere, without exposing it to a rush.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 6,121
GW - I'm not going to get into a debate over semantics with you, so I'll leave it at this. I think at this point (and somewhat to your credit) your position on this topic is clear.
You asked 1wt if he talked to "all" of the anon's to see if they were bait chuckers. I'm simply asking if you've talked to "all" of the anglers on BS, that's all...not saying or implying that you believe "all" of them learned of the stream from this site. Sorry for any confusion.
I see where your confusion lies though...to more accurately reflect what I meant to say, I removed the word "all" as it relates to the anglers on BS from the first sentence in my first post (#215).
You asked 1wt if he talked to "all" of the anon's to see if they were bait chuckers. I'm simply asking if you've talked to "all" of the anglers on BS, that's all...not saying or implying that you believe "all" of them learned of the stream from this site. Sorry for any confusion.
I see where your confusion lies though...to more accurately reflect what I meant to say, I removed the word "all" as it relates to the anglers on BS from the first sentence in my first post (#215).
According to PFBC, 455,696 trout/salmon stamps were sold in 2011. As noted above and previously, this site pulls in 170k unique views, approximately 1/3 of the number of folks who can legally fish these streams for trout.
Tried but couldn't find the percentage of trout chasers who classify themselves as flyfisherman, I'm sure one of you fellas know that number.
But let's say 1 out of 6 fisherman use the long rod, so I guess you could say that this site is viewed 50/50 by the bait/spin crowd vs fly anglers, using very simple math.
Or you could say that out of the ~850k total licenses sold last year that 1/6 of those are flyfisherman, or roughly 140k. So you could also say that this site is viewed almost entirely, 80%, by us flyfisherman.
What's that mean? And does any of this really matter though if the Marcellus drilling threat continues to encroach on the most important resource of all, our clean water? Who cares about these stupid fish if we no longer have clean water to drink? There are countless drainages out there right now that are just one lazy, cost cutting 'accident' away from being wiped out in the name of short term finite material gains. Think Big Spring is crowded now? Imagine what it'll be like when it's one of the few clean streams left in the entire state that still supports wild trout. Luckily this neck of the woods here in southcentral isn't sitting over top all that dirty gas...
Imagine the progress that could be made on that front if we were putting all of this energy into protecting the actual resource instead of crying like babies about how somebody else got to your spot first on that particular day.
Tried but couldn't find the percentage of trout chasers who classify themselves as flyfisherman, I'm sure one of you fellas know that number.
But let's say 1 out of 6 fisherman use the long rod, so I guess you could say that this site is viewed 50/50 by the bait/spin crowd vs fly anglers, using very simple math.
Or you could say that out of the ~850k total licenses sold last year that 1/6 of those are flyfisherman, or roughly 140k. So you could also say that this site is viewed almost entirely, 80%, by us flyfisherman.
What's that mean? And does any of this really matter though if the Marcellus drilling threat continues to encroach on the most important resource of all, our clean water? Who cares about these stupid fish if we no longer have clean water to drink? There are countless drainages out there right now that are just one lazy, cost cutting 'accident' away from being wiped out in the name of short term finite material gains. Think Big Spring is crowded now? Imagine what it'll be like when it's one of the few clean streams left in the entire state that still supports wild trout. Luckily this neck of the woods here in southcentral isn't sitting over top all that dirty gas...
Imagine the progress that could be made on that front if we were putting all of this energy into protecting the actual resource instead of crying like babies about how somebody else got to your spot first on that particular day.
GreenWeenie
Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 697
Swattie,
I see your point. To answer your question, no I did not speak to every one of them but I witnessed the onslaught firsthand and spoke to enough locals who said that after all the publicity that BS received here and elsewhere, the stream experienced a huge and sustained increase in anglers. And as Bmarx pointed out, there were many posters on this forum who replied to the stream reports of late 2010, early 2011 clearly stating they fished it for the first time after reading about it here on this forum. The correlation is publicity most certainly brings an increase in fishermen.
My point with 1wt was he was making an absolute blanket statement with no basis that no bait fishermen read the stream reports. As Bmarx points out, by this websites own data, there are 170,000 unregistered users that visit this site so to assume none of them are bait fishermen is without merit.
I see your point. To answer your question, no I did not speak to every one of them but I witnessed the onslaught firsthand and spoke to enough locals who said that after all the publicity that BS received here and elsewhere, the stream experienced a huge and sustained increase in anglers. And as Bmarx pointed out, there were many posters on this forum who replied to the stream reports of late 2010, early 2011 clearly stating they fished it for the first time after reading about it here on this forum. The correlation is publicity most certainly brings an increase in fishermen.
My point with 1wt was he was making an absolute blanket statement with no basis that no bait fishermen read the stream reports. As Bmarx points out, by this websites own data, there are 170,000 unregistered users that visit this site so to assume none of them are bait fishermen is without merit.
"But I would like to fish BS and it would be for the first time, is this a bad thing"
csoult,
Not at all. I used to be an amazing stream, i gather its still better than many. It is not okay if you come back on here (in my opinion) with a report of how easy and awesomely amazing it is. Also don't post about seeing a ton of people in said report, because that is just annoying.
"Fishing was amazing, saw a ton of anglers and didn't like that" Very annoying to see, almost as annoying as "I like such and such stream because there is so much less people and i hardly ever see guys there" :😛almforehead::
I often resort to posting reports and pictures, without naming the stream. Kind of letting people know that these streams exist pretty much everywhere, without exposing it to a rush.
In my opinion that is the best stream report anyway. You can specify an area, and anyone who knows anything about fishing can still get useful information. What type of stream is that, I can expect similar water conditions/hatches/etc. If someone asks and you want to share the name or place you can always PM it.
Pcray, that is the best approach possible because it satisfies everyone, and its one of the reasons no one has every given you a pile of it for posting a report.
In my opinion that is the best stream report anyway. You can specify an area, and anyone who knows anything about fishing can still get useful information. What type of stream is that, I can expect similar water conditions/hatches/etc. If someone asks and you want to share the name or place you can always PM it.
Pcray, that is the best approach possible because it satisfies everyone, and its one of the reasons no one has every given you a pile of it for posting a report.
PennKev they indeed do. the analogy was essentially that a flyfishing WEBSITE that posts reports would probably be viewed along the same lines as a special regs water. If i search on here i can find where all these fly guys fish. That was the generalized thinking.
Part of your point is also why im so torn with special regs water. Some of the best fishing is out of regs water because people don't even know about it. However regs water can be helpful, however it limits the amount of larger fish. (It is a big internal conflict and how i feel about it changes day to day, except in march when it is a place i don't have to worry about fishing!)
The PAFBC publishing lists and such is not anywhere comparable to someone posting a specific stream with specific details in an easily accessible place. If a person is going to go to the trouble of getting a map, and connecting the dots with the PAFBC data and nat. repro. lists etc, GOOD FOR THEM that is the kind of guy i want fishing on my stream. They did home work, they did research, they used the data and came up with the conclusion, they didn't just take a spoonfed report and run with it. (I know you aren't saying that necessarily it was just a preemptive post)
Part of your point is also why im so torn with special regs water. Some of the best fishing is out of regs water because people don't even know about it. However regs water can be helpful, however it limits the amount of larger fish. (It is a big internal conflict and how i feel about it changes day to day, except in march when it is a place i don't have to worry about fishing!)
The PAFBC publishing lists and such is not anywhere comparable to someone posting a specific stream with specific details in an easily accessible place. If a person is going to go to the trouble of getting a map, and connecting the dots with the PAFBC data and nat. repro. lists etc, GOOD FOR THEM that is the kind of guy i want fishing on my stream. They did home work, they did research, they used the data and came up with the conclusion, they didn't just take a spoonfed report and run with it. (I know you aren't saying that necessarily it was just a preemptive post)
krayfish
Active member
- Joined
- May 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,466
These never cause an increase in fishing pressure. Keep posting hero shots and then complain that too many fisherman are ruining "your stream".
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1216
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1217
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1218
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1216
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1217
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=1218
pcray1231
Well-known member
hits are meaningless. Cripe, in threads I'm active in, I probably contribute two dozen myself!
Unique hits are more telling. Most of us probably only contribute 4 or 5 each, at the most.
Unique hits are more telling. Most of us probably only contribute 4 or 5 each, at the most.
krayfish
Active member
- Joined
- May 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,466
You made things a little personal especially when calling me God's gift to the D. In any of my reports / photos / videos, I don't single out any specific river, river section or go crazy with hero shots of fish. I show the surroundings, guys having fun, insect life, wildlife and of course... trouts. If asked, I'd tell someone right where I was fishing. It's on a map and it's no secret. I spent / wasted years learning how to fish on my own. I'm very grateful for any info shared. I really owe a ton of thanks to Bob Clouser for letting me basically live at his shop when I was in my teens. If I can help someone out, teach a new angler or save someone hours and hours of wasted time, I'm willing to do so. Maybe I've been surrounded by higher quality friends or have just been lucky. Anything I've shared has never come back to bite me....yet. When or if it ever does, maybe then I'll be more careful about handing out information.
As for BS... no secret. I fished it from 1980-ish until they closed the hatchery. There is no way that stream is seeing anymore pressure now. The ditch was filled with monsters and it was elbow to elbow from sunrise to sunset.
As for BS... no secret. I fished it from 1980-ish until they closed the hatchery. There is no way that stream is seeing anymore pressure now. The ditch was filled with monsters and it was elbow to elbow from sunrise to sunset.
GreenWeenie
Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 697
That comment, while true in the absolute sense, is completely misleading and doesn't tell the whole story. When the hatchery was in operation the ditch was absolutely crowded and elbow to elbow but the rest of the stream saw no one because it had no fish and was biologically dead. After the hatchery closed, the hogs removed, and the regs changed from trophy trout to FFO C&R, there was a massive drop off in fishing pressure and you were lucky if you would see 3-4 people fishing the ditch on a weekend. As for the rest of the stream, no one fished it because the PERCEPTION was the only place on BS that held fish was the ditch and rest of the stream held no fish. Now there is a substantial increase in pressure on the entire stream since the publicity.
As for your comment about the 3 photos I posted, you outted me!!!!! As previously explained, someone PM’d me about the stream, I shared info via PM, posted the pics online and PM’d the guy and then took him to the stream and showed him about it under the condition he doesn't post about it (and he didn't). There wasn’t any broadcast in a stream report to see what I caught. So now three years later you find them in an attempt to discredit me. Good job Sherlock Holmes.
There is a HUGE difference in putting out info in the public domain that can be found be someone if they are specifically searching for that info, as opposed to putting out the info and then telling people look here. If people don't know something even exists all the info in the public domain doesn't matter, they don't know it exists. Tell them it exists and point them there - that's different and what I think the this whole discussion is somewhat about.
