Wild Trout Nuts: What have you observed since the opening?

  • Thread starter salvelinusfontinalis
  • Start date
So im left to wonder which is it?
Are those tecniques you said effective on big wild trout or not?

First you claim they arent but now claim they will destroy the migratory browns in PA.

So which is larkmark?

Asking for my brook trout friends.:lol:


Troll as you may but you suck at it :lol:
 
This is like cabin fever in the middle of winter. Time for this thread to be locked.
 
On my end its not cabin fever.

Ill say this one time. Im tired of spotburning coming up on my threads. Half the people feel one way and half another.
Im done with the endless circle and im done being tactful.
I have no intrest in circular spotburning arguements.

No one has spotburned here.
Then this guy comes in like me posting a big fish picture i own or mentioning a known genentic trait that exists in PA brown trout is going to kill them.


I have not mentioned where i fish for these fish.

Well.
Fine.

The Susquehanna drainage.

Have at it boys !
Good luck!
 
So where did you catch the 25 inches? Just kidding!
 
WG did you fish the Seglock? I haven't been there for a while. Just wondering how it's doing. Used to have some good days 15-20 years ago but last few times it does not seem good. Could my 1st native brook there and the second on Elders run. Can't believe they used to stock it. Maybe it had more water and I'm sure a lot less silt.
 
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
I shouldnt even say this because there are so many faucets to this thread.

Still if you live in an area with a bunch of brook trout streams that run into a bigger river, drive around all the bridge stops and bigger pools in the early to mid april. See what you find.

Bigger brook trout are out there but they get cleaned out in the early season.
Im not saying they are in big numbers but we kill them, each year our migrant brookies get slaughtered.
Except in a few select watersheds.


Just sayin.
Click to expand...

As not to derail the thread, I've only seen the chaos while driving to the obscure places I fish this time of year where I'm the only one around. I don't like fishing with people and never have, so I have an assortment of "off the beaten path" spots that I usually hide out in this time of year.

Now, to Sal's point above, this is exactly why I've said we need some "systems" with brookie regulations. I'm talking 1st, 2nd, 3rd order streams with different creel limits or slot limits or C&R only for brook trout.

Want to get depressed? Download the fishbrain app and look through the photos there. I'm pretty certain I've seen some 12" plus wild brook trout on stringers with stocked rainbows and browns.

Knowing what the brookies do, I'm 100% certain Sal is right. "We're" inadvertantly culling the biggest brook trout out of existence. Then wondering why they're all small.

Anyway, probably a topic for another thread, and I guess this has been beaten to death and folks don't like talking about it. Kudos to Sal for bringing it up (along with my blood pressure). Tight lines...
 
AgFox, agreed. Creel limits on native brookies should be considered and discussed (in a different thread?). Pretty sure we all love them!
 
Guys that is part of the thread IMO.
I just thought the added havoc was interesting and sad too.

Silverfox nailed it.
Exactly my point.
 
Earlier this week- I observed many yellow crane flies AND 1 giant sulpher. Just one rogue one. It looked huge!!!
 
I've noticed great recruitment in the stocked streams I fish. Lots of small wild browns in the 4-7" range. Some larger wild fish but not unusual numbers. I've also noticed that while many parking areas are full the early season anglers. are comprised of bank fishermen, families and small children. They don't stray far beyond the bridges.

I'm certain that if these streams were not stocked there would be more larger wild trout. I am also certain that if they were not stocked fishing would be off limits. (as displayed by the remaining sections in the watershed that are not stocked)

Stocking is the most successful stream access program in Pennsylvania.

Change my mind.




 
SGLs
Mic drop
 
Maurice wrote:
I've noticed great recruitment in the stocked streams I fish. Lots of small wild browns in the 4-7" range. Some larger wild fish but not unusual numbers. I've also noticed that while many parking areas are full the early season anglers. are comprised of bank fishermen, families and small children. They don't stray far beyond the bridges.

I'm certain that if these streams were not stocked there would be more larger wild trout. I am also certain that if they were not stocked fishing would be off limits. (as displayed by the remaining sections in the watershed that are not stocked)

Stocking is the most successful stream access program in Pennsylvania.

Change my mind.


Click to expand...

No doubt true ^

That's why one should be mindful of landowner desires and be careful not to allow this to happen.

I believe the biggest threat to fishing in PA is the loss of access to fishing. I've been fishing for a long time and have seen access to fishing areas shrink at an alarming rate as well as lakes disappearing.

I've always been in favor of increasing funding for the PFBC. And not to increase the stocking of fish, but to put more dollars behind improving habitat and acquiring access to streams, rivers and lakes for anglers to fish..
 
Totally disagee.

SGL's access is far superior. Vast reaching lands, well maintained, good for the environment, permantly open and does not require dumping disease into streams harming native wildlife.

Not even close.



Not saying the PFBC is bad. You said that stocking is the greatest stream access program. It is simpily not.
 
https://www.fishandboat.com/Fish/Fishing/Pages/PublicAccessToWaters.aspx

LANDOWNER RELATIONS

Pennsylvania has a long and rich history of private landowners allowing the public access to on stream-side lands for fishing. While this practice has benefited generations of anglers, it also means that fishing as we know it in Pennsylvania is also very susceptible to privatization. Of our stocked trout waters, 83% are on private lands. About 70% of our wild trout waters are on private lands and 59% of our Class A trout waters are also on private lands.

The number one reason waters are removed from active management programs (like stocking) by the Commission is because of increased landowner posting in response to poor behavior such as littering, building open fires, trampling farm fields and blocking driveways and access roads. Preserving public access to private lands is a simple matter, but one that requires us all to take action to police ourselves. Recognize that the land you are on may very well be private property and act like a guest. Respect all postings, such as prohibitions against Sunday fishing.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Yes it opens land but it closes them too
I wonder if this happens on SGL's :-?
 
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
Totally disagee.

SGL's access is far superior. Vast reaching lands, well maintained, good for the environment, permantly open and does not require dumping disease into streams harming native wildlife.

Not even close.



Not saying the PFBC is bad. You said that stocking is the greatest stream access program. It is simpily not.
Click to expand...

Thats not what I said...I said “most successful” meaning more miles are open to trout fishing through stocking.

Just wanted to turn on another faucet. Good job turning it off. No doubt game lands are a great access program paid for by hunters. And likely more miles of wild trout streams open to public fishing are on state park, forest or SGLs. But I wouldnt be so sure.


 
Ok.

How many more miles of trout water are open because of stocking? Not how many miles are stocked on private land but how many more miles open because of it?

When you can provide that number and compare it to miles of trout water on sgl's we will see whos conjecture is right.

But you made the claim ,not me, it is up to you to prove. Always hated the"im making a claim up to you to disprove it memes". It's silly
Until then your faucet is making you "all wet."
 
*Popcorn
 
If i can find the thread you wont need much popcorn but i think it was before the site had a reboot.
These numbers were tabulated already once.
Its not even close.

 
"The PA wilds" consist of about the same acres as state gamelands which includes state gamelands. In those are:


16,000 miles of streams and waterways.
2100 designated trout streams.

A plethora of them are stocked streams. Which be open stocked or not. Just like on SGL#s.

Pa game commission owns 1.5 million acres. No one knows the square water miles they own in streams and lakes.

But its not even close.

Pa alone only stocks 5000 miles of trout streams . only 83 percent of that max could be open due to stocking. Which means what a little over 4000 miles max.


 
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