Vote for The Tully

Keep 'em coming Sal.

Good points Outsider. Despite the response on this board, even if it is a small sample, the good folks over at the PAF&BC have one goal in mind - UTILIZATION (but only as they define it).

The reality is they are a struggling government agency who needs revenue to support what is probably an overstaffed, inefficient and wasteful organization. (Aren't they all?) The only think they can come up with to save themselves is to make UTILIZATION as easy as possible for everyone and anyone who wants to keep their catch. They've built an unsustainable business model.
 
Why the Tulpehocken? We have a unique bottom release in a populated area and many enjoy it throughout the season. Why mess with it? I would hate to go there in the fall knowing it was pounded by bait fishermen all summer. Those nice holdovers would mostly be gone having been taken from the coldwater refuges. The PAFBC is not thinking this through.
 
McSneek ,
Angler use and the term utilization do not refer to harvest. In AFM language they refer to angler counts expressed as the number of angling trips per stocked trout on stocked trout streams or lakes or the number of anglers per stream mile. This is why creel surveys are called "angler use AND harvest surveys." Harvest is a separate parameter from use. Usually when I say well-utilized I am referring to a high number of angler trips per stocked trout. Where did I use the term with reference to Harvest?
 
I have and do criticize some things the FBC does or does not do, but overall I believe they do a decent job in PA. I give them a solid "B" as a grade.

The FBC is not really a government agency since it is funded by license fees, permits and taxes on sporting equipment. Most times when I feel there are shortcomings and shortsightedness in what the Commish is doing, many it caused by pressure and meddling from the politicians.

One scary thing; if you recall a few years ago, John Arway announced the closing of two hatcheries and deep reductions in trout stocking. The pollies told the Commish to hang on and "we'll take care of it." Not another word has been heard. All bets are off if the FBC begins to receive funds from the general tax fund. You'll have to donate to your state rep and/or senator to get your crick stocked and the meaning of an Exceptional Value stream will change to an Exceptional $Value stream...:roll:
 
Stock less fish but encourage killing more? Makes perfect sense.
 
Outsider,
I did not focus on the Tully, nor did the PFBC. The op focused this discussion on the Tully. The presentation to the Commissioners on possible regulation change options for DH Areas referred to all DH Areas.

As for my specific contribution to the options, I was the source of the recommendation for moving the harvest period forward by about two weeks. This should not be a surprise, as I have mentioned this off and on for at least two years in this forum and have done so before the public for at least a decade.

Finally, the Commissioners are seeking public comment at this point, not field staff comment.

On a general note, I usually do not answer long strings of questions . Go through this entire thread and see how many comments I made and how many questions were asked and you may have a sense for why. I am one person responding to many. I need to stay on topic as much as that is possible.
 
If any change is made I would vote for NO KILL. There are lot's of fish that make it through the warm season. As far as utilization, if you make it bait fishing DH it would be just like many other streams that get very little use by bait anglers after the initial harvesting spree. And then the fly fishermen will be left with depleted numbers of fish....and they'll utilize it less.
 
Mike wrote:
McSneek ,
Angler use and the term utilization do not refer to harvest. In AFM language they refer to angler counts expressed as the number of angling trips per stocked trout on stocked trout streams or lakes or the number of anglers per stream mile. This is why creel surveys are called "angler use AND harvest surveys." Harvest is a separate parameter from use. Usually when I say well-utilized I am referring to a high number of angler trips per stocked trout. Where did I use the term with reference to Harvest?
Click to expand...

Mike,

This statement sure sounds to me like utilization = harvest.

"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."
 
Yes, you are correct in this instance. I was thinking in general terms about stocked trout streams where I have reduced the stocking rate due to poor use, which on those streams translates to less harvest than desired. I see how I mixed terms. I have not reduced stocking rates in any DH Areas because of use concerns or harvest concerns, but when the now trophy trout stretch on Codorus Ck was a DH Area I did eliminate the inseason stocking when the pres of Codorus TU called me with that request because he said that our standard DH stocking rate had put TOO MANY trout in the stream. I once received that complaint about the Tully too.
 
I'm glad you guys worked that out.
Thought I was going to have to change the whole campaign buzzword....
 
Dear Gene,

If the Tully goes away I'll shed perhaps one tear. If the Tully hadn't existed circa 1987 I would have never ventured north to the Pocono's. I do need to ask if the 1954 Chevy hood is still in the west bank of the stream just downstream of Reber's Bridge Road? That is what sent me north back in the day, I grew up trout fishing the Neshaminy and I didn't want to continue.

It wasn't much more than a carp crick with stocked trout in it in 1987 and it's less now because they stock less trout, why keep pissing away money and resources on a losing proposition?

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)
 
Dear Tim- If they mess up the Tulpehocken and other DH areas I hope all those anglers who currently fish them come and invade all your hot spots up north.
 
Tim,

In the 1987 time period the DH area was still being stocked with fingerling RT and BT. It was not until the early to mid-1990's that I heard grumblings from anglers that, in effect, the fingerlings were not doing well and that the fishing quality had taken a nose-dive. Apparently you took the rose-colored lenses out of your sunglasses long before most others, but to be honest the fish population data showed that the fingerlings were surviving well in most years through 1987. I'll cut you a break on the exact date that you noticed problems, however, since 1) you said cir 1987 and 2) I would not expect anyone to remember the exact date unless they had been keeping a log.

It probably was not too many years after 1987 when things began to change or at least become more variable with respect to fingerling survival there. The stream was getting wider and shallower, as streams do when the normal flow of sediment is trapped in a dam above, and the great blue heron population exploded from no local rookeries to three local rookeries, probably as a response to Blue Marsh's construction, large fish population, including a tremendous alewife population, and the new access to a new winter food supply in the Tully downstream from Blue Marsh in the DH Area.

The new accessibility to a winter food supply was the fact that once the dam was built the stream was now generally open in the winter rather than largely being iced over. In addition to that, the flows were probably often fairly low in the dead of winter (little runoff) or at least there was a lot of shallow habitat and the unnatural food source was present in abundance (stocked fingerlings). Just imagine how tempting the adult trout in the summer look when they are schooled up in the Tully's limited (2) and relatively small thermal refugia.

Great blues love trout and consume them voraciously, as any hatchery manager will tell you. With a fusiform shape and no pesky spines they go down the hatch like raw oysters on the half shell and end up as heron flesh and white-wash, just as Sal's photo shows. A Penn State grad student and researcher not too many years ago did a stocked trout residency study on Sinking Ck with tagged fish and hired an arborist to recover many tags from the G B Heron nests and tree limbs in the near-by rookery while the researchers scavenged the ground below for tags that had fallen from above.

Regards,
Mike
 
foxtrapper1972 wrote:
Dear Tim- If they mess up the Tulpehocken and other DH areas I hope all those anglers who currently fish them come and invade all your hot spots up north.
Click to expand...

Too late, New Jersey beat them to it.
 
Wow! At least we have stirred the pot! The PAFB Commissions is a great organization that does a great job.......wait for it......here comes the BUT, if as Mr. Arway says, they want to listen to the customers, then open your ears please. I understand that fly fishermen are a small part of the fishing community, but I also understand we do purchase licenses, help support stocking activities and in the case of the local TU Chapter have spent countless volunteer hours trying to make the tail water as well as the Upper Tully better trout habitat. The work is far from done, but the Tully is certainly a better "mostly" cold water fishery for it.

We can debate the numbers all day long, but it seems to me that just working the numbers is not all that is at work here. There are good years and bad years. Fish survive and fish die. I believe that happens in nature. On the Tully, there are good years and bad year as well. Some fish survive and some fish die. I do not understand why there is such a fuss about giving the fishery a chance to be its best and not "harvest" anything for 1/10 of the total miles that encompass the Tully.

As I look back over the years, I remember when the Tully trout on the DHALO section were overall small, but thought they were big. They were hard to catch and very smart and fought like hell. Then it changed. The fish got bigger, but boy are they dumb! Sorry, but I would rather be fishing than catching. I always thought it was trying to outsmart the fish not wave something in front of it that might look like food and BINGO! I got a big one.






 
Voice your opinion:

Thank you for contacting the PA Fish & Boat Commission. While we are not formally in the comment acceptance period for this topic at this time, I have forwarded your comments to our legal counsel and I have been told your comments will be included for distribution to the Commissioners prior to their decision on whether to change the regulations on the Delayed Harvest Artificial Lures Only sections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top