Waters with the Biggest Potential

[Oregon_OwlII]

I can't wade through ten pages, but has anybody brought up Pine Creek? Someone told me the creek above Galeton id Class A and below is Class D wild trout. There is a dam at Galeton, which likely warms the water limiting growth and reproduction of wild trout. Removal of that dam could produce incredible results. Pine flows north to south with a nice canyon, which lessens the number of hours the sun penetrates the water. Does the dam at Galeton have any redeeming value? Could an off-line pond/lake with a 10% max water withdrawal accomplish the same purpose as the dam?

 

[Swattie87]

I can't wade through ten pages, but has anybody brought up Pine Creek? Someone told me the creek above Galeton id Class A and below is Class D wild trout. There is a dam at Galeton, which likely warms the water limiting growth and reproduction of wild trout. Removal of that dam could produce incredible results. Pine flows north to south with a nice canyon, which lessens the number of hours the sun penetrates the water. Does the dam at Galeton have any redeeming value? Could an off-line pond/lake with a 10% max water withdrawal accomplish the same purpose as the dam?

There’s wild Trout above the lake in both branches and their tribs. It’s not all class A, but a good portion is.

I wasn’t aware of any significant wild Trout below the dam in Galeton, other than seasonal migrants from the tribs. In the Summer, it’s bass water beginning immediately below the dam. The Trout (mostly stocked) left either run up, or stack up at the trib mouths/seeps.

The lake itself is popular in Galeton. It’s used for their 4th of July celebration and is a hallmark of the town. I don’t think it would go over well suggesting it’s removal.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I can't wade through ten pages, but has anybody brought up Pine Creek? Someone told me the creek above Galeton id Class A and below is Class D wild trout. There is a dam at Galeton, which likely warms the water limiting growth and reproduction of wild trout. Removal of that dam could produce incredible results. Pine flows north to south with a nice canyon, which lessens the number of hours the sun penetrates the water. Does the dam at Galeton have any redeeming value? Could an off-line pond/lake with a 10% max water withdrawal accomplish the same purpose as the dam?

I heard they paid for a study on the dam and removal was indicated/ would be beneficial and then a bunch of local people said “then we won’t be able to see the 4rth of July fireworks reflection on the lake” and it went dead.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Waded through this entire thread and I'll put my vote in for Pine Creek & Moshannon.

However there are a number of streams currently stocked, have been previously destroyed by AMD or both that have massive potential for brook trout.
I won't name them all.

Sorry to be that guy, but not really sorry, I can't understand the displeasure in posts by certain members here. So I want to show support over those members posting in favor of brook trout while giving condemnation to grumblings of cankerous old men set in their ways.

I personally have enjoyed FishStick and silverfox posts on the board. Informative, interesting and well thought out. Are we here to learn, challenge ourselves and gain knowledge, or do we need only line cleaning and stocked or wild debates?

Our native fish need fanatical advocates and it's the very "if I had to catch 8" fish I'd quit fishing for trout" mentality that lead to exactly where we are in many streams.

Waters come up void of trout but can be reclaimed and often they are plugged with stock brown trout and lead to them becoming wild brown trout streams because people don't want to catch 8" fish. Some of these are bigger waters, with tributaries that are brook trout streams, then become a mixed population rather than a native watershed. It leads us further down the road to our native fish becoming a thing of the past. In these possible bigger waters that can be reclaimed, the way I described has our native fish kept confined to headwater streams and at 8" in certain waters. Of course some have other factors such as thermal or habitat that hinder brook trout in other watersheds, but I've witnessed some real possible gems get contaminated in this very way described in my lifetime by brown trout.

Conservation of our trout fisheries SHOULD have a native first approach.

If you don't enjoy, particularly FishSticks posts, why not simply scroll on by? To engage as a group within a group set against advocates for our native fish is puzzling. To be annoyed by it to the point of mocking them is sad. By engaging, questioning and mocking them you further that which you hate. They simply keep replying with even more informative discussion. If you ignored those posts, they would die off quickly.


“Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish they are after.” —Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862

If it is natives, wild brown trout, stocked trout, bass, stripers, catfish or carp does not matter in this regard, but we should be advocates for natives ad nauseum. The majority REALLY doesn't care, so who will if not us?

Consider what I say, I'm not looking for a back and forth engagement on the topic. I just think some are short sighted, if not selfish, and it's a disease in the fly fishing community that needs called out.

I voted for Pine Creek in this thread as one with great potential. It should be to the brook trouts benefit first, if it isn't then so be it. I'll enjoy fishing it then as I do now, for stocked trout, wild brown trout or what ever bites my line, 8" fish or 20" fish, either way, size of the fish isn't what fly fishing is all about.

If it is to you, you may want to golf all season instead. Anyone can get large scores pretty easy on any course.

 

[Oregon_OwlII]

I heard they paid for a study on the dam and removal was indicated/ would be beneficial and then a bunch of local people said “then we won’t be able to see the 4rth of July fireworks reflection on the lake” and it went dead.

So that's it, a 4th of July reflection pool? Sure that can be accomplished with an off-line pond/lake. There would be so much more in the way of tourism dollars if the wild trout fishery extended well below the dam. Don't these people like tourist dollars?

 

[lycoflyfisher]

Oregon Owl, I am going to assume you ha e never been to Galeton. The town is built around the confluence of 2 creeks, West Branch Pine Creek and Pine creek. Much of the town has issues with flooding and ice jams, not helped by the dam imo. There is no room whatsoever for an offline pond of any significance at this location.

Local officials did not want to listen to the recommendations made by a feasibility study and the consultant was more or less ran out of a public meeting and the report never published or was significantly redacted in the recommendation for removal. Our state politicians then allocated ~1million to do maintenance on the dam and maintenance dredging on the impoundment that occurred this summer.

 

[troutbert]

I can't wade through ten pages, but has anybody brought up Pine Creek? Someone told me the creek above Galeton id Class A and below is Class D wild trout. There is a dam at Galeton, which likely warms the water limiting growth and reproduction of wild trout. Removal of that dam could produce incredible results. Pine flows north to south with a nice canyon, which lessens the number of hours the sun penetrates the water. Does the dam at Galeton have any redeeming value? Could an off-line pond/lake with a 10% max water withdrawal accomplish the same purpose as the dam?

IMHO, removing the Galeton dam would be very beneficial, primarily because it would allow wild trout to move upstream into both branches in the summer to find cooler water, then drop back down in other parts of the year.

I talked to an older resident of the area who said when he was a boy the dam was either breached or partially breached, and large numbers of trout moved up through Galeton and continued up both branches. He said the dam was then rebuilt, and now the fish have no passage upstream.

Passage upstream is also important for spawning runs. There are wild trout downstream from Galeton. Many fisherman have known that for years. And I talked to a guy who studied fisheries at Mansfield and they surveyed below the dam and found wild brown trout. And the PFBC's wild trout list now extends downstream from Galeton a ways.

So, I think removing the dam would help a lot, but primarily because of allowing wild trout below Galeton to move freely up into the upper water.

The water temperature change would probably help too, but maybe not that much. How much does the dam warm the water? The Galeton dam has been discussed a great deal for years, but I've never seen temperatures from above and below the dam on a hot summer day. Does it warm the water 1 degree? 2 degrees? More?

It's important to see how much warming actually occurs there before basing your arguments on water temperature. My guess is that the warming wouldn't be all that much, because the amount of water stored behind the dam is small in relation to the amount of water flowing through. So, there is not much residence time for substantial warming. But, we really can't know for sure without actual temperature readings.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I heard about the feasibility study, someone should have assessed community willingness for removal prior to the $ for that feasibility study.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Oregon Owl, I am going to assume you ha e never been to Galeton. The town is built around the confluence of 2 creeks, West Branch Pine Creek and Pine creek. Much of the town has issues with flooding and ice jams, not helped by the dam imo. There is no room whatsoever for an offline pond of any significance at this location.

Local officials did not want to listen to the recommendations made by a feasibility study and the consultant was more or less ran out of a public meeting and the report never published or was significantly redacted in the recommendation for removal. Our state politicians then allocated ~1million to do maintenance on the dam and maintenance dredging on the impoundment that occurred this summer.

I can understand getting local input from people especially if your talking about just uo and removing something like that but when it needs alot of tax payer money to be fixed someone shiuod have just said not in budget and not applying for grant money for something ecologically reductive. Yhere were probably some motivated well meaning people involved I’m just arm chair quarterbacking the heck outta this because i’m really ticked some part of our tax money when to fixing that. Maybe its not fair I am not close enough to this situation to talk about it i guess and my anger at the residents that seem to not value the stream that runs though their town is just that and I don’t have the answer.

 

[Oregon_OwlII]

IMHO, removing the Galeton dam would be very beneficial, primarily because it would allow wild trout to move upstream into both branches in the summer to find cooler water, then drop back down in other parts of the year.

I talked to an older resident of the area who said when he was a boy the dam was either breached or partially breached, and large numbers of trout moved up through Galeton and continued up both branches. He said the dam was then rebuilt, and now the fish have no passage upstream.

Passage upstream is also important for spawning runs. There are wild trout downstream from Galeton. Many fisherman have known that for years. And I talked to a guy who studied fisheries at Mansfield and they surveyed below the dam and found wild brown trout. And the PFBC's wild trout list now extends downstream from Galeton a ways.

So, I think removing the dam would help a lot, but primarily because of allowing wild trout below Galeton to move freely up into the upper water.

The water temperature change would probably help too, but maybe not that much. How much does the dam warm the water? The Galeton dam has been discussed a great deal for years, but I've never seen temperatures from above and below the dam on a hot summer day. Does it warm the water 1 degree? 2 degrees? More?

It's important to see how much warming actually occurs there before basing your arguments on water temperature. My guess is that the warming wouldn't be all that much, because the amount of water stored behind the dam is small in relation to the amount of water flowing through. So, there is not much residence time for substantial warming. But, we really can't know for sure without actual temperature readings.

I've never seen the Galeton dam, but a dam on Pohopoco Creek near Parryville warms the stream from about 66 to 72 on a 90+ degree day. That is a lot of warming. I would bet the Galeton dam does similar damage. It would greatly shorten the length of trout water downstream. I agree that temperature samples are the first order of business in any rational discussion of dam removal up there.

 

[Oregon_OwlII]

Oregon Owl, I am going to assume you ha e never been to Galeton. The town is built around the confluence of 2 creeks, West Branch Pine Creek and Pine creek. Much of the town has issues with flooding and ice jams, not helped by the dam imo. There is no room whatsoever for an offline pond of any significance at this location.

Local officials did not want to listen to the recommendations made by a feasibility study and the consultant was more or less ran out of a public meeting and the report never published or was significantly redacted in the recommendation for removal. Our state politicians then allocated ~1million to do maintenance on the dam and maintenance dredging on the impoundment that occurred this summer.

OK, so it is a lost issue for another 40 or 50 years. Willful ignorance is a tough thing to bust through.

 

[Swattie87]

Though difficult to believe, some people value having a picturesque lake in the center of their town and a nice annual fireworks gig more than wild Trout. Spincasters probably.

On a more constructive note, as far as the dam and temps, both branches heading into the dam are already at a marginal place temperature wise during the Summer. I’ve found 68 degree water on the WB as far up as the Sunken Branch confluence before. This is probably 10 or so stream miles ABOVE Galeton. The dam is the final knockout punch. I’m skeptical on the number of wild Trout below Galeton. While I’m sure it’s possible at certain times of the year, Pine not a viable wild Trout fishery below Galeton.

Moving on, and as discussed from a practical perspective, that’s one of the least likely dams in PA to see come out any time soon.

 

[salvelinus]

They finished dredging the lake several weeks ago. As of last Sunday it was not being re-filled yet. Many truck loads of sediment were taken away. I thought it would make excellent topsoil, but they used it for fill behind the old County Line hardware store on Rt. 6.

 

[krayfish2]

sixfootfenwick wrote:
"if I had to catch 8" fish I'd quit fishing for trout" mentality that lead to exactly where we are in many streams.

Well, that is how I feel. Like it or not. Now, if you want to accomplish something really good... Get the gemmie lovers to stop stomping redds and fishing during the spawn.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

So that's it, a 4th of July reflection pool? Sure that can be accomplished with an off-line pond/lake. There would be so much more in the way of tourism dollars if the wild trout fishery extended well below the dam. Don't these people like tourist dollars?

I'm not sure it would add much more revenue to that area. There are already so many wonderful fisheries and hunting grounds in that area that get visited yearly.
I could be wrong.

I've seen the death toll at the bottom of that dam myself though so who knows.
It would make many fish survive.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Another huge impairment on Pine holding it back from its true potential would be the stocking including the slate run brown trout club fish because they appear of a higher fitness than the brown trout the state stocks. Since pine is a large watershed with multiple large and small freestone tributaries that are mostly forested the eastern brook trout joint venture has identified it as a very strategically important place to manage for native brook trout.

The slate run brown trout club fish being of higher appearing fitness than the states might even be solving a genetic bottle neck or harmful founder effect the original invasive brown trout may have suffered from allowing invasive brown trout to be more successful at displacing brook trout. This concept was posited in a 2008 paper on invasion biology in stream salmonids by Dr. Kurt Fausch.

But worst of all their their stocking right at the door step of slate and we all catch those fish in slate and cedar. No suprise their club came out trying to poo poo the stocking authorization. $$$$> pine creek ecosystem, selfish. The irony and dishonesty of the sign in their general store is tragic and an outright lie.

Lay people don’t think of Biotic impairments like invasive species the same way as sediment, nutrients, big dams(invasive species are a barrier too in many cases i’ve shared that study here) and temp but the end result can be the same. Id love to see what the pine drainage could do with just cessation of stocking alone. Id also love to know how many larval and juvenile hellbenders those stocked invasive browns are gobbling up. In the mean time I’ll continue with to get my gas and food in waterville.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Another huge impairment on Pine holding it back from its true potential would be the stocking including the slate run brown trout club fish because they appear of a higher fitness than the brown trout the state stocks. Since pine is a large watershed with multiple large and small freestone tributaries that are mostly forested the eastern brook trout joint venture has identified it as a very strategically important place to manage for native brook trout.

The slate run brown trout club fish being of higher appearing fitness than the states might even be solving a genetic bottle neck or harmful founder effect the original invasive brown trout may have suffered from allowing invasive brown trout to be more successful at displacing brook trout. This concept was posited in a 2008 paper on invasion biology in stream salmonids by Dr. Kurt Fausch.

But worst of all their their stocking right at the door step of slate and we all catch those fish in slate and cedar. No suprise their club came out trying to poo poo the stocking authorization. $$$$> pine creek ecosystem, selfish. The irony and dishonesty of the sign in their general store is tragic and an outright lie. View attachment 1641227260

Lay people don’t think of Biotic impairments like invasive species the same way as sediment, nutrients, big dams(invasive species are a barrier too in many cases i’ve shared that study here) and temp but the end result can be the same. Id love to see what the pine drainage could do with just cessation of stocking alone. Id also love to know how many larval and juvenile hellbenders those stocked invasive browns are gobbling up. In the mean time I’ll continue with to get my gas and food in waterville.

You are 100 percent correct.

I've seen brown trout entirely too big and in densities too large for Slate and Cedar during the summer months.
While it's possible to grow large trout in both, not in the densities I have seen.
These aren't wild trout but trout from that "club".

Stocking brown trout of apex size, around and in, spawning tribs statewide, is far more harmful than the fall redd stompers.
Believe it or not, we can multitask and advocate for good practices from multiple angles, starting from the top down to accomplish most bang for the buck.


Brown trout being near the top of that list. Stocking over wild trout in general regardless of species is a bonehead idea. Stocking where you know they will run up a prime wild trout spawning watershed is a bonehead idea too

 

[smoothlarryhughes]

little schuylkill

 

[Mikey2006]

Green spring could be a nice native brook trout re introduction project if they shut down the hatchery and did restoration where its dammed the springs up into a bunch concrete raceways baking in the sun. Wonder if that private hatchery is even close to in compliance with its effluent. Would not surprise me if there were brookies in bullshead branch but its all private land. I drove by the upper day and its full of flowing cress. Combination of shutting down that nasty hatchery, Ag BMP’s, and some wetland creation with legacy sediment style removal techniques if it’s suitable, which it looks to be(walked that too) would probably be a huge ecological lift for that place. Legacy sediment removal can make your springs pump more water and decrease average stream temps according to the DEP, TNC,LS and other partners with experience that I’ve worked with.

Would need about 4-6 people most likley to get something serious going. Id love to see more people doing what I and others are doing on the hammer creek. These spring creeks were once a common life history strategy for native brook trout.

Anyone with a spring creek near them who wants to restore it for native brook trout can PM me. These spring creeks are everywhere in south central/south eastern PA but their often just burried 5-10 feet under/a couple centuries worth of the effects of deforestation, Ag, or mill dams. When you excavate and daylight them the springs function much better in alot of them apparently.

For anyone interested I can set you up with people who can potentially write the grants for you, restoration specialists experienced in restoring spring creeks with legacy sediment removal where indicated. I can also help you personally build a watershed group, provide free resources/technical support thats out there, and help you draft a Memorandum of understanding for your effort as far as what partners you want to bring on and who is responsible for what.


SOOO many orgs/ agencies can help you and do things like write grants, survey and prescribe stream improvements, and much more. This stuff takes time but not like a full time job you can go slow at a pace that works for you and families. If there are geographic pods of people who want to team up and learn how to put these operations together let me know………..more and more money out there these days to do this stuff

how do you know if a creek is a spring creek and if its good enough to support fish? there is one i have in mind that i drive over on my way to another creek. It flows through a ton of farmlands so i dont know if there is much potential but it reminds me a ton of the falling springs, at least the way it looks from the road. I've always wanted to fish it and see what type of fish, if any, is living there. Probably never will since i don't feel like being shot at by some random farmer. It could be a crappy (from a trout fishermans perspective) warmwater creek but damn it looks really good.

 

[Fish Sticks]

how do you know if a creek is a spring creek and if its good enough to support fish? there is one i have in mind that i drive over on my way to another creek. It flows through a ton of farmlands so i dont know if there is much potential but it reminds me a ton of the falling springs, at least the way it looks from the road. I've always wanted to fish it and see what type of fish, if any, is living there. Probably never will since i don't feel like being shot at by some random farmer. It could be a crappy (from a trout fishermans perspective) warmwater creek but damn it looks really good.

Always comes down to the 5 component frame work governing stream trout populations.

Geomorphology/habitat
Water quality
Hydrology
Connectivity
Biotic factors(other organisms)

There can be one dominant limiting factor or several limiting factors.

In a spring creeks temperature(under water quality) and hydrology(base flow) are usually quite favorable. Nutrient(under water quality) and habitat can be less than ideal with active Ag in many cases but surprisingly not a deal breaker in many cases(driftless region study found watershed with native brook trout 92% Ag land use), springs forgive assaults on the landscape in many cases. Connectivity varies, most if not all have biotic factor issues with invasive trout species (big spring, BFC, ect.)