Thoughts on class a lists

[silverfox]

bigslackwater wrote:
It's my belief that stocking does more harm for wild trout than class A does. I know of a couple examples of creeks that have a distinct line where stocking ends and the wild trout begin especially where there is posted property. The few times I've been granted permission to fish a private stream the wild trout appeared on that property, literally beginning at the posted sign. I think we have a real problem in this state with fisherman who catch and keep completely wiping out all trout from stocked streams. If there happen to be wild trout, they get wiped out too.

This is exactly my sentiment as well. I've talked with PAFBC people and I've read the studies. Their opinion is that some 60-80% of fishermen (of all types) practice catch and release. That's either complete nonsense, OR the remaining 40-20% keep enough to absolutely decimate trout populations in some stream sections.

One of the best streams I've ever seen isn't stocked and I think most people have no idea there are even fish there. It's a little stream absolutely full of wild browns and if people knew what was there it would get hammered very quickly. Part of it is listed as class A and I know some other people do fish it, but given it's location and proximity to a large population, if it were listed as stocked it would get cleaned out. I'm 100% sure of it.

 

[pcray1231]

That's either complete nonsense, OR the remaining 40-20% keep enough to absolutely decimate trout populations in some stream sections.

Depends on the definition of "decimate", but, I think it's the latter. It doesn't take much to put a hurtin on a wild trout population. Especially on smaller waters. People keeping 50 fish or so and accidently killing another 50 can make a stream section fish a lot worse. In other words, a dozen or two "catch and keep" angler days, PER YEAR, will have the observed effect. And that's if they're following the law.

Larger streams, obviously, can handle more, because they have more fish to start with. Twice the width, twice the fish, if the biomass stays the same. Can take twice the pressure.

I say depends on the definition of decimate, because I think it's a lot harder to cause permanent damage. The less fish there are, the harder it is to harm further. Stop the damage and it'll bounce back quickly.

 

[raftman]

If it wasn't for that list, I'm not sure I'd be the angler (and person) I am now. It's that list that I used to figure out where the heck to fish when I first started. I didn't really know any other anglers, so that list was the way I started to figure things out. Even now, it's that list that pushes me to explore new water and places, which in turn, has put me onto some really beautiful places, but also some clunkers. I think it's a great resource and encourages the best thing about fly fishing - the journey.

 

[drakeking412]

raftman wrote:
If it wasn't for that list, I'm not sure I'd be the angler (and person) I am now. It's that list that I used to figure out where the heck to fish when I first started. I didn't really know any other anglers, so that list was the way I started to figure things out. Even now, it's that list that pushes me to explore new water and places, which in turn, has put me onto some really beautiful places, but also some clunkers. I think it's a great resource and encourages the best thing about fly fishing - the journey.

Same goes for me raftman, that list really helps a lot. It's the only reason I'm able to build well timed trips into the mountains and have a plan B.

I'm not sure the Class A definition brings more pressure or not. Recently i fished a couple and didn't see a single angler on any Class A but a single guy on a Class B but as others have said the streams were hit or miss.

@cristic, bummer to hear about Powdermill Run in Laurel Highlands being a bust, I had hoped to eventually do some door knocking to fish it for a wild rainbow

 

[wildtrout2]

raftman wrote:
If it wasn't for that list, I'm not sure I'd be the angler (and person) I am now. It's that list that I used to figure out where the heck to fish when I first started. I didn't really know any other anglers, so that list was the way I started to figure things out. Even now, it's that list that pushes me to explore new water and places, which in turn, has put me onto some really beautiful places, but also some clunkers. I think it's a great resource and encourages the best thing about fly fishing - the journey.

Couldn't agree more. The Class A list is what got me rolling years ago in my state wide quest for wild trout.

 

[PennKev]

troutbert wrote:

Anyone? Has anyone actually noticed that when a stream was added to the Class A list that fishing pressure went up?

Yes I have, but I don't think it is always a guarantee of significant increase in angling pressure. Other factors such as access and proximity to other, better known wild trout waters are factors too IMO.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

If it wasn't for that list, I'm not sure I'd be the angler (and person) I am now. It's that list that I used to figure out where the heck to fish when I first started. I didn't really know any other anglers, so that list was the way I started to figure things out. Even now, it's that list that pushes me to explore new water and places, which in turn, has put me onto some really beautiful places, but also some clunkers. I think it's a great resource and encourages the best thing about fly fishing - the journey.

Excellent post!
Been doing this for 31 years now and those lists are the single greatest resource to a PA trout fisherman. i print them out periodically to update them because the PFBC is ever expanding them.
Kudos to their great work protecting and documenting them.

Forget the guide books because these are more useful.
No offense Dwight, your book is very useful too.;-)

 

[Fly-Swatter]

I don't know if this was stated explicitly, but a benefit of the the wild trout lists, not only Class A, is they have the potential to reduce stocking. Under the assumption that stocking is used to fill perceived gaps in fish populations, these lists can demonstrate that stocking is not needed as much. Having said that, I don't think we can, or should, eliminate stocking. We should, however, reduce costs by minimizing stocking in a way that enhances wild trout and still gives anglers a put-and-take opportunity.

Of course, there are a handful of flaws in this reasoning. The two that come to mind first are: 1. PAFBC is underfunded so they cannot keep the list reasonably current and comprehensive; 2. most anglers don't know about the lists. I'm sure there are other variables.

I think PA is one of the best wild trout states. As we have discussed many times, we are not near our potential on this. The wild trout lists are a potential marker for success, but they are quite flawed. As with many changes we want to make that involve government, angler education and funding seem to be the friction points to getting these changes enacted.

That's probable much more than my $0.02 and a bit rambling, but I'm only on my 1st cup of coffee.

 

[jifigz]

The underfunded nature of the PFBC could be a boon for PA wild trout. With less money most likely means less stocking which means less pressure over wild fish.

I also do not think that the Class A list is detrimental in anyway to fish populations. For those of us that know about it I'm sure that the Class A list helps most of us to protect and appreciate the waters. Also, angler usage is only high right around the start of the season and the only streams that really maintain high angler usage all year long are the "famous waters" and those get hit by the more serious anglers. I hardly see a soul fishing 99% of the time on the waters that I fish 99% of my trips trout fishing. If I were to hit Penns, Little J, Fishing Creek, or Spring I would see people.

 

[Floggingtrout]

See some good points for list here thanks. The streams with easy access are the ones it hurts most. Instead of driving by these streams never with a thought of fishing many now stop for a few quick trout. Guess I can’t blame the list but the fisherman that keeps them or thinks he can stock his pond with them.

 

[Prospector]

Good topic!! My thoughts on several issues/questions raised.

- I only learned about the Class A list a few years ago. I was surprised to learn that streams I’ve fished for many years were considered some of the best in the state in terms of wild biomass.

- I began fishing these streams for one of 3 reasons: since they were the trib of a larger trout stream I fished, I spent time hunting in that area and just like “the looks of it” or someone told me it was a really great place to fish. I’ve only fished two Class A that I solely learned about from reading the PFBC lists.

- there are Class A streams where I fish that have PFBC signage stating “walk in fishing permitted”. It did bother me when I fish saw them.

- I’ve never seen another angler while fishing a Class A. I have never seen more than one set of footprints

- the most famous of the tiny Class A streams I spend time on have very educated trout. I fish a non Class A stream (with a Class A experience) where if you fish a green weenie and if you miss a fish they still come out and grab it 3 more times before they realize this is not normal. On some Class A I might only feel a few taps and the trout never comes back

- I did kill a native rainbow once on a Class A via an unfortunate hook up point. Turned belly up upon quick return. My worst class A memory

- a few streams I fish have a ton more pressure now than they did before being listed Class A but I hear so much word of mouth about those streams in parking lots across the state it’s difficult to say which was the main reason. I believe listing as Class A has contributed to increase but word of mouth is probably a bigger impact. It gives you more of a sense that you are missing out on something big.

- I agree that overall it is a good thing the PFBC provides the lists even though it has increased foot traffic where I fish. I try to stay on streams that have difficult access so it evens out and I see less people

- water levels and time of day do have an impact on a quality experience. Every day is different. Despite the listing, I think people that fish the stream on a bad day and don’t do well will not return.

 

[larkmark]

Lists, books and the internet have caused the decline of the trout fishing experience. This is based on my experience over 40 yrs. That said I bought Mecks book when it came out and it put me onto some places I would have never found. That book and a PA Gazeteer were all I needed. A lot has changed. Everything is over the top now. I much prefer the days of finding my own spots by poking around areas or through word of mouth and also observing and learning what flies to use instead of relying on fly shop reports and youtube. But it is what it is.

 

[troutbert]

I enjoy exploring unstocked forested freestone streams.

Some of them are on the Class A list, some not.

I don't see much difference in the fishing quality, or the amount of fishing pressure, between those on the Class A list and those that aren't.

 

[jifigz]

troutbert wrote:
I enjoy exploring unstocked forested freestone streams.

Some of them are on the Class A list, some not.

I don't see much difference in the fishing quality, or the amount of fishing pressure, between those on the Class A list and those that aren't.

I hear ya troutbert. Some of my favorite forested freestoners are not on the Class A list. One was proposed to be one time but never added.

 

[Prospector]

larkmark wrote:
Lists, books and the internet have caused the decline of the trout fishing experience. This is based on my experience over 40 yrs. That said I bought Mecks book when it came out and it put me onto some places I would have never found. That book and a PA Gazeteer were all I needed. A lot has changed. Everything is over the top now. I much prefer the days of finding my own spots by poking around areas or through word of mouth and also observing and learning what flies to use instead of relying on fly shop reports and youtube. But it is what it is.

I get your point and I agree some aspects of the modern mode of communication has led to more pressure and more focused exploring that brings people far across the state.

I’ve fly fished for 45 years so we’ve seen the same evolution. When I was young, my father and I primarily fished 3 streams around home and 2 streams in Potter on vacation. But a few times we added an additional short vacation in Carlisle to fish the Letort and Yellow Breeches. I guess in some ways that was the beginning for us to fish streams people were raving about prior to social media.

There were far less people fly fishing then but we were part of a club, The Do Fly Fish Club (New Castle) that promoted fly fishing by offering fly tying, fly casting and educational programs to bring people into the sport. The increased interest since then has certainly crowded the streams more than they once were. So that contributes to a degradation in the experience that you can’t walk into any hole that you want. Although some people with the wrong upbringing will weasel there way into a hole within casting distance of you.

A big part of the downturn in the fly fishing experience has been a trend of decreased hatches or trout not coming to the surface. As a kid on Kettle Creek I had a dry fly tied on 24x7 except during a rainstorm when I would use a streamer. I fish subsurface quite often up there now.

With all of that being said, I catch far more trout now than I did then. I also enjoy fishing 30+ streams per year now rather than 5 based on an increased awareness of what PA has to offer. I really feel that I overall the fly fishing experience is better with the increased information.

Being able to check flows and not waste a drive. Getting new patterns quickly. Finding new streams. Its probably better overall than it once was even though fly fisherman have doubled or tripled. The one caveat is a person who isn’t physically mobile and needs to fish near a vehicle is definitely impacted more by the increase in FFing Anglers crowding them out of the few places they can go.

 

[bigjohn58]

silverfox wrote:

This is exactly my sentiment as well. I've talked with PAFBC people and I've read the studies. Their opinion is that some 60-80% of fishermen (of all types) practice catch and release. That's either complete nonsense, OR the remaining 40-20% keep enough to absolutely decimate trout populations in some stream sections.

I believe its the 5% or so within that 20-40% that ruin it for everyone. You get that one person who goes day after day keeping their limit and then some that wipe out a stream. I've seen it first hand. Sad what one greedy uncaring individual can do!

As for labeling a stream class A and having added pressure I haven't seen any issue with it where I am. I live in an area where you throw a dart and you pretty much land on one. I bet you go to other area where there aren't as many and the situation might change.

 

[FarmerDave]

troutbert wrote:

troutbert wrote:

Putting a stream on a Class A list, without adding such regulations doesn't generate much increase in angler usage, from what I've seen.

Have you seen examples of that?

Anyone? Has anyone actually noticed that when a stream was added to the Class A list that fishing pressure went up?

Absolutely, and the increase was significant.

HOWEVER, I'm speaking of a stream (or two) in an area that doesn't have many class A. So the increase was significant.

Can't speak for streams recently added to the list.

Doubt there is significant change on smalls streams recently added in areas where class A are already numerous.

 

[Zak]

Troutbert nails it right here!

"Regulations such as Delayed Harvest, Catch-and-Release, Trophy Trout etc. create great increases in angler usage.

Putting a stream on a Class A list, without adding such regulations doesn't generate much increase in angler usage, from what I've seen. "

Magnitude of a list matters greatly. Let's start at the bottom. There is a massive list of 'nature repo' streams put together for the state. Has that list increased fishing pressure on those streams. To the extent that you are able to identify them, yes, but to the point that anyone would ever notice an increase in angler usage, almost certainly not. Now we move up to the Class A list. Folks know these are better streams so they focus more on them, but still there are probably hundreds, if not over a thousand in the state now. Except for a few occasions fishing pressure, while higher than most places, is rarely to high. Streams around urban centers being an obvious exception to that rule. Now we move to the Special reg class A streams. This is where the PAFBC fails. I know of one stream in particular (that wont be named) that they are ruining right now. Not from a trout biomass standpoint I'm sure but from a fishing experience standpoint. I'm sure there are a lot of trout there but the fishing pressure is so high now that they are a lot smarter and not as easy to catch thus making the fishing experience less fun if your goal is to actually catch fish. Long ago the fish were still around in great numbers but they were less educated making the experience more enjoyable. You also didn't have to worry about seeing an angler around every bend or lament at all the boot tracks streamside. What good is having a lot of fish if you catch way less of them? (although I do realize having a lot of fish is a good thing biologically speaking)

My rant aside.....this is where the PAFBC failed miserably with the Brook Trout Enhancement Program attempt. The idea was great but when you label 6 streams across the state with an exciting special regulation you are condensing emense angling pressure on these spots as everyone wants to catch their trophy brookie. What they ended up creating was the complete collapse of a fishery in the process. Probably not from a biomass standpoint but from a pleasurable fishing experience perspective. Take Camp Run in Westmoreland County a perfect example. 3 years prior to that idea I would never see anyone fishing that stream and could go there an enjoy a full day of duping unsuspecting native brook trout one after the other. It was a great little stream at the time albeit not Class A. Fish up to 9" were fairly common though. Then the Brookie program came and the signs went up. The change was almost immediate. The place got hammered with pressure, the trails were beaten down to dirt along the stream and any Saturday or Sunday would find at least 1 car in the small parking lot most times. Anyone that fishes the area could attest to this. The fishing became horrible almost overnight. Hasd the PAFBC included 300 streams on that list I think their outcome may have been far more favorable. Maybe not a success but maybe it would have been better. 1000 Streams even better. You get it.

So my point to this long post is simple. The more streams you have on a list the less likely overfishing is to occur. These lists may not impact overall fish numbers in a stream but they absolutely effect the quality of an experience fishing the stream. The PAFBC most definitely loses sight of that in a lot of cases. In general, unless there is a special circumstance such as pollution or history, special regs should either be greatly expanded to basically include all unstocked wild trout streams or they should be removed altogether so we're not stuck with so few condensing pressure. I'd be fine either way and so would the fish.

 

[silverfox]

bigjohn58 wrote:

silverfox wrote:

This is exactly my sentiment as well. I've talked with PAFBC people and I've read the studies. Their opinion is that some 60-80% of fishermen (of all types) practice catch and release. That's either complete nonsense, OR the remaining 40-20% keep enough to absolutely decimate trout populations in some stream sections.

I believe its the 5% or so within that 20-40% that ruin it for everyone. You get that one person who goes day after day keeping their limit and then some that wipe out a stream. I've seen it first hand. Sad what one greedy uncaring individual can do!

I agree. Anecdotal story from my youth; there was a little brookie stream (10 feet wide at best) that I fished a lot. Just your average mountain brookie stream with 3-4 inch fish and occasionally some 6 to 8 inchers. I went to fish it one day and it was devoid of fish. I mean, wiped out. I thought at first it had to be some kind of water quality issue. A while later, I was talking to a friend about it and he said; "oh yeah, jackwagon (local idiot) started running his mouth about how good brook trout cakes are, and outlaws A & B (local wildlife outlaws) took seine nets up to the stream and took almost every fish out of it."

The stream did eventually somewhat recover, but it was (not to my knowledge) never the same as it was. This stuff happens, and I'm not sure a lot of people are aware of it. The worst part is, the state is spending so much money on pellet heads that they can't afford WCO's. The only way to stop that crap is with law enforcement, which we can't have because the stocking program takes top priority.

These little streams are fragile in the sense that I don't think it takes a whole lot of harvest to impact the population in the short term, or even long term in some cases. I think this stuff would happen whether the stream is on a list of some kind or not. In my opinion, pressure=harvest pressure. We fly-fishers tend to be conservation minded, but these lists are public, and there are some meat hunters out there who know no bounds when it comes to harvest.

 

[jifigz]

silverfox wrote:

These little streams are fragile in the sense that I don't think it takes a whole lot of harvest to impact the population in the short term, or even long term in some cases. I think this stuff would happen whether the stream is on a list of some kind or not. In my opinion, pressure=harvest pressure. We fly-fishers tend to be conservation minded, but these lists are public, and there are some meat hunters out there who know no bounds when it comes to harvest.

True, there are definitely people that will over harvest and exploit a resource. However, in a society where fishing and hunting has taken such a back seat to other lifestyles, I feel that it is highly unlikely that people desire to mess with 5" fish for meat. Most people are too lazy to harvest things of even decent size and clean them so the likelihood of people keeping 40 tiny fish is unlikely. Just my opinion, of course.