Wilderness Stream Designation

[sixfootfenwick]

Yeah the trib info is very useful and it would be nice to see species info, then again, you could watch the decline in real time with new surveys when it goes from ST to BT.
Don't want that.

 

[silverfox]

To add an addition to the modification of the aforementioned sentence modification

"since they are so common but should be set aside, because they are dwindling and will become uncommon."

The list might be expanding but populations are not. Rather brook trout are in decline, just because it got surveyed and documented doesn't mean it produced a new population.

This is a point I've suspected for some time to be cover for the lack of action on brook trout specifically. You could point to a statistic and say, "In 1997, there were 12,000 brook trout streams, and now there are over 42,000." That's not because there are more brook trout today than in 1997.

Also, common and fragmented is worse than rare and contiguous. The vast majority of PA's populations are fragmented. I'd love to know what the largest contiguous allopatric population in PA is. I would be shocked if it was larger than about 3,000 ha.

 

[jifigz]

This is a point I've suspected for some time to be cover for the lack of action on brook trout specifically. You could point to a statistic and say, "In 1997, there were 12,000 brook trout streams, and now there are over 42,000." That's not because there are more brook trout today than in 1997.

Also, common and fragmented is worse than rare and contiguous. The vast majority of PA's populations are fragmented. I'd love to know what the largest contiguous allopatric population in PA is. I would be shocked if it was larger than about 3,000 ha.

You're right. It's because there are more documented streams discovered holding brook trout.

Do you feel there are a lot less brook trout now than in 1997? Specifically in PA?

 

[jifigz]

And I know you're gonna say "yes, there are less brook trout." I just haven't noticed a loss in the streams I frequent.

 

[Mike]

That's not because there are more brook trout today than in 1997.

Probably correct, and I was not suggesting that there were more ST, although there could be as streams recover from historical mining damage, as sedimentation declines in streams that already harbor populations, and as some get cooler from increased shade. But even if we stipulate that the overall population of ST has not grown in Pa, that’s a separate argument from my point that ST streams are and have been quite common around the state. The unassessed waters program just further supports that observation, revealing even more than we knew in some (many?) cases.

 

[troutbert]

Do you feel there are a lot less brook trout now than in 1997? Specifically in PA?

That's a good question, and I don't know the answer.

Some sampling sites have been surveyed from the 1970s up to recently. If all the sampling sites with long histories were analyzed, they might be able to see a trend in brook trout populations.

I know of some streams where brook trout populations have gone down, and some where brook trout populations have gone up. And more where they seem about the same, or at least it's very hard to see a trend, particularly because freestone stream populations bounce around a great deal depending on droughts, floods, vs favorable flows.

 

[Fish Sticks]

The second strategy in issue 10 would really help answer a lot of these questions but they are not even starting this till 2025 i believe and will fail to meet the time line in the TMP.

No rush

 

[sarce]

And I know you're gonna say "yes, there are less brook trout." I just haven't noticed a loss in the streams I frequent.

There are significantly less in the area I grew up in, SE PA, specifically Chester county. I'd estimate a 40% reduction (a few streams population went to zero, others just have fewer fish due to less pool habitat) in the past 20 years. Entirely caused by development.

 

[jifigz]

There are significantly less in the area I grew up in, SE PA, specifically Chester county. I'd estimate a 40% reduction (a few streams population went to zero, others just have fewer fish due to less pool habitat) in the past 20 years. Entirely caused by development.

Yes, that is 100% believable. And development is gonna win almost always and definitely in the end.

 

[silverfox]

I suspect there are fewer today than in 1997 as a whole, but its difficult or impossible to say definitively since there are so many that were undocumented and likely pretty poor documentation of gains/losses (based on the PFBC document FS shared). If Maryland documented significant losses in the Piedmont region, I think it likely tracks the same way through PA. There are likely areas where populations have rebounded since then too.

PFBC is working on updating the data that drove the 2005 Hudy et al. study, so we'll know in short order what the trend has been since then. Hopefully they keep all the newly discovered streams out of that dataset as not to portray an increase in populations.

Mike, I agree that ST is likely the most widely distributed wild salmonid in PA. I've read quotes that say that BT are, but I doubt that and haven't seen any reputable data that suggests it's true. My earlier comment about contiguous watersheds is still my biggest issue with the population as a whole. We may have one of the most fragmented populations in the range. That's not a solid footing for the future. I know in SNP they've seen an increase in small populations blinking out over the past few years. To the point that the NPS is organizing scouting teams to try to rapidly assess losses.

 

[troutbert]

I know in SNP they've seen an increase in small populations blinking out over the past few years. To the point that the NPS is organizing scouting teams to try to rapidly assess losses.

What do they think is causing that?

 

[Fish Sticks]

What do they think is causing that?

This is Hudy et al 2006 so not current and would need to talk to NPS but this will give you a rough idea of what the largest issues were at that time

 

[Fish Sticks]

What do they think is causing that?

Looks like browns and bows took cake back then.

They don’t bat an eyelash at antimycin down there they actually have their own private stock. Lynn camp prong is a real success story they got invasive bows out and brook trout back and the project even survived angler sabatoge.

 

[troutbert]

This is Hudy et al 2006 so not current and would need to talk to NPS but this will give you a rough idea of what the largest issues were at that timeView attachment 1641229295

Silverfox's post says SNP. Which I believe refers to Shenandoah National Park in Virginia.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Silverfox's post says SNP. Which I believe refers to Shenandoah National Park in Virginia.

Oh i don’t know why I was thinking smokey.

Eastern Brook Trout: Status and Threats (2006) — EBTJV

This technical report identifies where wild brook trout populations remain strong, where they are struggling and where they have vanished. Most importantly, it provides state and federal agencies, anglers and community leaders with the tools to identify local rivers and streams that are...

easternbrooktrout.org

Every eastern state is listed

 

[silverfox]

What do they think is causing that?

Temperature and drought.

 

[silverfox]

One other point with regard to the WTS, and I think this is analogous to the rest of the state in some cases. I know of one WTS (it's a complex of a Class A (BT) and two forks which are both WTS) where BT are now prevalent throughout both forks classified as WTS. This is a fairly recent development within the past 10 years. Nothing has changed there from an environmental perspective. It's all SGL and heavily forested.

The official definition in Ch 93 is [emphasis mine]:

Wilderness trout stream—A surface water designated by the Fish and Boat Commission to protect and promote native trout fisheries and maintain and enhance wilderness aesthetics and ecological requirements necessary for the natural reproduction of trout.

So while we've protected the environment (it's already state/SGL, so I'm not sure it was ever in danger), we've done nothing to prevent displacement from nonnative trout.

My theory, with this particular location and likely a few more, is that the density of wild BT just downstream of the ST reached critical mass over the past 10 years due to declines in angling, more C&R, no regulations to encourage harvest, and improved environmental conditions. So, in theory, we've had this explosion in BT, and while gradient has seemed to have been a deterrent in the past, studies show that density is an important driver for movement. Rather than push downstream into frog water and pollution, guess where the BT go? Gradient is a deterrent, not a barrier. How long it functions as a deterrent may be based on a number of factors that are constantly changing.

 

[troutbert]

I think there are mixed population stream sections where the ratio of brook/trout is changing in favor of the brookies, after stocking ended.

Quite a few years ago I asked a PFBC biologist about this and he thought that might be happening in the Kettle Creek watershed. Which was also the most prominent example I was thinking of. He mentioned the Kettle watershed independently without me suggesting it.

I think the brookie/brown ratio has shifted in favor of brookies in: upper Kettle, Germania Branch, Hammersley Fork, Cross Fork, and some of the smaller streams in the watershed.

The first survey on Hammersley Fork said the population was dominated by brown trout. I doubt that it is true now.

I also think the shift towards more brookies has happened in the upper half of Slate Run, and its headwater tributaries Francis Branch and Cushman Branch.

There should be a lot of survey data for these streams, that someone could analyze. A good graduate student project?

 

[troutbert]

The following is from the PFBC website. Note that it says wild trout, not native trout.

"Wilderness trout stream management is based upon the provision of a wild trout fishing experience in a remote, natural and unspoiled environment where man's disruptive activities are minimized. Established in 1969, this option was designed to protect and promote native (brook trout) fisheries, the ecological requirements necessary for natural reproduction of trout and wilderness aesthetics. The superior quality of these watersheds is considered an important part of the overall angling experience on wilderness trout streams. Therefore, all stream sections included in this program qualify for the Exceptional Value (EV) special protected water use classification, which represents the highest protection status provided by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)."

 

[ROVERT]

I think it's very likely that that is posted land. But if you get permission to fish there, I'd be happy to tag along.

I'm pretty sure almost all of it is on Lewis property, which isn't surprising.

OnX isn't just for hunting.