Vote for The Tully

[TCOtony]

In the 30 years that i have fished the Tully... i can honestly say that i have yet to see a fish kill! Whether that is from heat exhaustion or from water quality. I don't think a yearly closed time on the Tully makes sense... BUT I do think that we can be more proactive and put signs and such at all parking areas to let anglers know that during drought years and very warm temps that anglers should NOT be fishing. Some people might still choose to fish... but it would at least educate those that don't know.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

A down side to a closed season would be that it would also keep the carp and smallmouth guys out of the stream, and in the heat of the summer the Tully can be a great fishery for both species.

I wonder how much ignorance is really at play. Another board member recently mentioned that he saw someone gearing up at Cacoosing and said to the gentleman that the temps were probably too warm to fish. The guy just blew him off. That ain't an issue of education at that point.

Is the lack of cold water at Blue Marsh an issue of engineering, or is it an issue of silt filling up the lake? I honestly don't know, so this is an honest question. From what I hear though, the cold water releases used to last much longer into the summer. I fish the Tully above Blue Marsh in Lebabon Co. quite often, and I can certainly see that silt would be an issue and would have no problem believing that Blue Marsh simply is not as deep as it once was...

 

[Nuthin_Fancy]

If conditional bait fishing is permitted, it might as well be ATW. I can only imagine the number of adults "helping" their children fish in the Tully under conditional bait fishing rules.

 

[OldLefty]

Some of these regs. proposals baffle me. I will say that, while I know little about the Tully compared to those who spend a good amount of time there and have experience to back up their statements, for some reason I have always felt that the Tully is more like a stream which experiences elevated water temps. in the summer but also has cold water refuges to allow trout to survive the high stress periods.

Mike may not remember this, however, we have had conversations in the past about the rainbow fingerling survival. His comment, as I remember it, was that those fish usually never made past 3 yrs.

I know that the fingerling program was terminated and I believe there was a judgement that it was not successful. I suppose that was due to a survival rate of less than 25%?

What have been the observations of anglers fishing the Tully in the fall before any fall stocking? Do you find that there is a fairly good population of trout remaining?

Tony, I appreciate your position that anglers should not fish for trout in elevated water temps. I know other shop owners and guides who disregard this and who believe that mortality isn't an issue. They believe that if the trout swims off after having been played and released in 80 degree temps. the trout lives. It may, but not for long.

Then there's the issue of the proposed regs. change on Pine Creek to C&R all tackle for the entire season. While there are some refuge areas in that section I can't be convinced that it is sufficient to support all of the large (and smaller) trout that are stocked in the stream section. This reg. on an entirely artificial trout fishery which sees water temps. nudge 90 degrees in a hot summer with low water levels just doesn't make sense. And then there's the issue of enforcement.

There is tremendous variation among the streams managed under DH regs. and that means managing them all the same is a major effort in compromise.

 

[troutbert]

The "Great Removal" on the DH areas is scheduled for the same time as the "Flyfishers Greatest Holiday", i.e Memorial Day weekend.

Some of these DH areas are short in length and only have a few major pools, and are crowded as it is on Memorial Day weekend.

You'd be adding another group of anglers and making it more crowded. Plus these anglers would be at cross purposes with the other anglers.

I predict conflicts on Memorial Day weekend.

 

[McSneek]

troutbert wrote:
The "Great Removal" on the DH areas is scheduled for the same time as the "Flyfishers Greatest Holiday", i.e Memorial Day weekend.

Some of these DH areas are short in length and only have a few major pools, and are crowded as it is on Memorial Day weekend.

You'd be adding another group of anglers and making it more crowded. Plus these anglers would be at cross purposes with the other anglers.

I predict conflicts on Memorial Day weekend.

That's OK as long as these stocked trout are harvested and not wasted.

 

[PennKev]

McSneek wrote:
That's OK as long as these stocked trout are harvested and not wasted.

The PAFBC likes to remind us how expensive stocked trout are every time they need to adjust stocking numbers and license pricing. But now they say we need to limit the number of times the fish can be caught by killing them by a certain date.

The real value of stocked fish is in the catching not the killing/eating. Not saying that shouldn't happen but setting aside a number of stocked fish for the sole purpose of repeated catching/releasing seems to make economic sense. After all don't the angler surveys show that a lot of c&r is already occurring. We have plenty of general regs water for folks who want to catch and keep, and for those satisfied with just catching, there are enough places (DH and other regs) to do that which will contain plenty of fish.

If the PAFBC is so worried about stocked fish wasting away in warm streams, they need to take a look at how many fish remain in the general regs waters past May.

 

[Mike]

PennKev:
Stocked trout fishing is promoted by the agency as a whole or by individual staff members through at least the early summer. It is expected that stocked trout fishing at that time of the year will include at least some harvest. Since it is frequently heard from anglers in general and from participants on this Board the belief that ATW's are fished out, the promotions are designed to keep anglers interested in fishing and educate them that many streams are not fished out, that flows remain good, or that streams remain unusually cool. This info often comes from AFM's, who are involved in stream surveys, and from WCO's who notice anglers doing well.

Frankly, as I fish previously (that spring) heavily fished urban or suburban streams in June or early July if the streams have not risen to unacceptable temps by then, I often wonder why anglers, especially fly anglers, feel a need to seek out stocked special reg areas at that time of the year. Regular ATW's often produce quite acceptable catch rates if the streams remain cool. ( I used urban and suburban streams to make a point about fish remaining in heavily fished streams...not to suggest that urban streams should necessarily be destination waters, although some famous destination waters are in fact urban wild trout streams).

If too many stocked trout remain in streams that become quite warm in the summer or are lightly fished the discretion remains with the respective AFM's to trim the stocking rates in order to shift those fish back into the statewide trout allocation system and get those fish stocked into waters where they will be better utilized. If angler use (angler count per mile) is low right from the get go on opening day ( in dry weather), then stocking adjustments are made, which may include removal of the ATW from the stocking program. Bottom line: If you think there are too many stocked trout remaining in an ATW that gets warm for extended periods in summer or where large numbers of stocked trout stack up at creek mouths on a regular basis in summers, let the appropriate AFM know.

 

[TCOtony]

To me it seems like the lines of who's on who's side gets blurred here! For the most part, this forums tends to attract fly anglers... and for the most part, fly anglers tend to be more environmentally conscious. Not to say that spin or bait anglers don't also play a part in trying to make a difference or better a resource... it's just that we normally hear from the fly fishing community here. That being said, aren't we ALL on the same side here? Isn't the goal to preserve and protect as many cold water resources that we have in PA? Don't we all want to see streams like the Tully live up to their potential?

PA has more streams in the state than most other in US. There are plenty of streams that are perfect for put and take fishing. I totally support ATF in these waters as it is a "gateway" for youth and others to the next step in fishing. I also love to see kids fishing!! If we don't make sure to get more youth into this sport, we will loose all of our resources we work so hard to protect.

So, they lets all work together to develop a program that can enhance, not degrade these resources. Maybe i am missing something... but if that happens, I would have to think that the PAF&BC would be happy with more license sales and more utilization... and the public would be even more happy with a stream that would produce memorable fishing experiences for all those that enjoy the resource. After all... isn't that the goal?

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

So, they lets all work together to develop a program that can enhance, not degrade these resources. Maybe i am missing something... but if that happens, I would have to think that the PAF&BC would be happy with more license sales and more utilization... and the public would be even more happy with a stream that would produce memorable fishing experiences for all those that enjoy the resource. After all... isn't that the goal?

You would think but obviously not. So I have taken the liberty of helping the PFBC launch their new "utilize first" policy. You , the PFBC, May use my creative license.

And my personal favorite, but you might need a release form from Maurice:

Good Luck!

 

[outsider]

Sal, LMAO when I saw your creative signs. Very funny.

 

[Chaz]

It seems to the part that goes against resource first is the bait issue. Kids will goes fishing with their dads if they can't use bait, I seldom used bait as a kid. But that's me. Anyway it defeats the idea of teaching kids to fish other ways if you allow bait. Fathers being who they are will use what is familiar to them when teaching a kid to fish, and if that's bait then you are just making more bait fishermen not teaching kids how to catch fish. Once they start using bait they will forever use bait, but it's just one way to catch fish.
With all the impacts of introduced species there will come a day when either PFBC or the EPA or some other agency will say, no more bait it's destroying biodiversity. What then.
I say no to bait in DH and C & R areas, it's just dumb, and it defeats the purpose of the regs.
But the problem is much bigger than these regs, because it diverts attention from more important issues. like stocking over wild populations, and high harvest limits on wild populations, and conservation of native fish. These issues are all part of the reason PFBC exists and for the most part these issues are ignored.

 

[Mike]

If nobody really cares if 1000 trout are stocked and they all die from warm water temps since they served their purpose, how many stocked trout would have to die on an annual summer basis before individuals cared...2000, 3000, 4000...in a 3.6 mile DH Area? I would like to know where the break point lies, if any. If it were that many, then would the individuals think that if some were harvested, say perhaps 10-25 percent, before the water warmed, the flow dropped, and/or the herons ate them, it would be too much to ask? (Full disclosure: some fish probably move out of most special reg sections as well). Do they really think that C&R Fly or spinner anglers would be able to notice a difference in their catches with something as inefficient as a fishing rod? And what about the delayed mortality of C&R'd fish in tepid water temps? How is a C &R of multiple fish in those conditions somehow more desirable than the harvest of 1 to 3 fish, the first ones that a harvesting angler catches that day? Which is more honest regarding fishing mortality?

 

[CRB]

Mike,
What do the studies say about harron mortality? Has one been done?
4000 stocked fish over 3 miles what stream is that project on? How many fisherman are turned away on that stream project? How long is it before 1 mile of open regulation water deviod of stocked fish adjeasent(either up stream or down) from a project water?
Where are the curent pennsylvania studdies done within the last 10 years on this subject?
Which politions are pushing the pafb to open these waters?

 

[Chaz]

They are stocked trout, they are meant to be harvested, there's no reason not to after the the DH period ends and harvest period starts except that anglers don't want to harvest them.
Having said that DON'T open DH areas to bait angling under any circumstances..

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

 

[outsider]

Mike wrote:
If nobody really cares if 1000 trout are stocked and they all die from warm water temps since they served their purpose, how many stocked trout would have to die on an annual summer basis before individuals cared...2000, 3000, 4000...in a 3.6 mile DH Area? I would like to know where the break point lies, if any. If it were that many, then would the individuals think that if some were harvested, say perhaps 10-25 percent, before the water warmed, the flow dropped, and/or the herons ate them, it would be too much to ask? (Full disclosure: some fish probably move out of most special reg sections as well). Do they really think that C&R Fly or spinner anglers would be able to notice a difference in their catches with something as inefficient as a fishing rod? And what about the delayed mortality of C&R'd fish in tepid water temps? How is a C &R of multiple fish in those conditions somehow more desirable than the harvest of 1 to 3 fish, the first ones that a harvesting angler catches that day? Which is more honest regarding fishing mortality?

If a 1000 fish are stocked and 1000 fish die from water temps, that's fine. They served their purpose and up until that point there was a fishery with a high number of fish and anglers could count on that situation existing until the stream itself could not support the fish

Mike, if you think this is about a specific number, you missed the point. IMHO, the message presented was that countless numbers of anglers enjoyed catching and releasing said 1,000 trout over a period of time. And how many anglers would care how many stocked trout would die in AT water during the same period? Has this been measured the same way the Tully has been (mortality rate due to thermal issues)? Why the Tully specifically has been targeted by the fish commission is beyond me. Enjoyed by anglers from so many SEPA counties and anglers from NJ and DE. How does the mortality rate in the DH section compare to the stocked area downstream from the DH section, as it is stocked spring and fall as well?

 

[outsider]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I have drawn a conclusion to our discussions with Mike: This has been (IMHO) a one sided affair. With all the points/opinions posted, not once did I see Mike say something like "good point, perhaps we (pa fish commission) should discuss this". Correct me if I am wrong. And I asked Mike some very pointed questions, which have been unanswered - Mike review my posts and correct me if I am wrong.

I said it before and I will say it again: THIS SHIP HAS ALREADY SAILED. I'm finished with it. Gotta find my bait can so I can take my expected grandson (due at the end of December) so he can enjoy the onslaught. Tight bait lines everyone!!!!!

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I have drawn a conclusion to our discussions with Mike: This has been (IMHO) a one sided affair. With all the points/opinions posted, not once did I see Mike say something like "good point, perhaps we (pa fish commission) should discuss this". Correct me if I am wrong. And I asked Mike some very pointed questions, which have been unanswered - Mike review my posts and correct me if I am wrong.

Why the Tully specifically has been targeted by the fish commission is beyond me.