omg, they destroyed the little lehigh

[Lining]

Took a drive and was going to go fly fishing below the second FFO, i called it the in between covered bridge and iron foot bridge section, the park system i'm assuming literally cut down every brush pile and almost every tree along the creek. The fish have no where to hide. It's literally disgusting to see now. Last year i went there in the fall and saw at least 4 trout over 20 inches before the fall stocking. Guess what, all the brush piles they were under are completely gone.

 

[troutbert]

Could you (or anyone) please post photos of this?

 

[Dave_W]

troutbert wrote:
Could you (or anyone) please post photos of this?

Agree.

It's highly unlikely that the LL has been "destroyed." Alarmist threads such as this draw a lot of attention... but often turn out to be overblown, based on rumors, or a misunderstanding.

 

[jifigz]

There is a particular location on my favorite stretch of Kish Creek that has been devastated too. All vegetation is gone and the steep bank had dump truck loads of some loose soil dumped down over it. High water is going to cause a ton of sedimentation. I noticed that over the winter. It isn't good but it certainly didn't ruin the stream but it honestly made me a little upset when I saw it. I understand your concern.

 

[troutbert]

I want to see photos for a different reason.

Because I think that the way parks manage riparian vegetation along the streams is a very important issue.

I've seen cutting down of riparian vegetation and maintaining lawns right up to streams in many public parks. I think it is a general pattern, not an isolated thing, and it's something that must be addressed.

Many of these parks have received grants from public tax dollars, including grants from DCNR.

The parks have a responsibility to take care of the streams that flow through them. And that means a wide riparian buffer flanking the streams.

And since DCNR is providing grant money to parks, they have the responsibility to make sure the parks are conserving the stream mileage, not wrecking it.

I don't know exactly what the situation is here, so more details, and photos would be great.

If they were removing invasive plants, such as autumn olive, multi-flora rose, ailanthus, etc, and will be replacing them with native trees and shrubs, then that is fine.

But if they are just wacking the riparian vegetation and will be maintaining lawns along the stream in the future, that is a very harmful change.

 

[jifigz]

Troutbert,

I think most parks also keep the grass mowed right to the stream bank and don't often maintain proper riparian buffers. Kish Park is this way. I think most people probably find it more satisfying to be able to walk right up to the stream and not have a bunch of scrubby bushes in your way. What is best for the fish is certainly not what most users of the park may like. I was talking to an old timer last week back on East Licking Creek and he was telling me about how Penns Creek TU is going to be doing some stream improvement work in the park so that is good. The stream is definitely widening and getting shallower in that stretch.

There is one more very big problem in public parks when it comes to reintroducing riparian vegetation and that is an overabundance of nearly tame ducks and geese.

 

[TYoung]

I know exactly what Lining is talking about. They cleared all the brush a long the banks. They did it back in February. Above and below the covered bridge you can see the stumps of these bushes. It makes the fish even more sitting ducks, and it's also quite ugly.

 

[troutwilleatflies]

The LL was destroyed years ago,the park dept is just maintaining the effort to turn it into a ditch.

 

[afishinado]

Ironically, the no wading restriction in the LL Heritage section was lifted in order the allow the riparian plants and trees to grow to shade the stream, provide cover and stabilize its banks.

Here is a post from the WCO in the area from a few years back:

WCO wrote:
The wading restriction on the LL FFO area below the hatchery was not created to protect spawning redds. If I remember correctly, it was basically a "gentleman's rule" that became the norm there.

In regards to the growth along the LL FFO stretch and other area streams...I took part in a few meetings this past month with area municipalities and not only commended them, but encouraged them to continue to allow riparian buffers to grow (we also talked about areas where buffers could be expanded). The benefits a riparian buffer provides to a stream and the trout population are well documented.

Perhaps the WCO, local TU, or anglers in the area can voice their opinion at the next meeting with the County Park Service and/or municipality charged with the care of the stream.

 

[CodorusTUTom]

I grew up just outside the Parkway and fished it hundred of times from the hatchery all the way down to 15th street. For decades, they mowed it right up to the edge without really making things worse. There was a miles-long blizzard of tricos every morning from early July into October, and plenty of wild and holdover fish. The extensive weed beds and shade from the many willow trees provided more than adequate shade and cover and for an urban stream, it fished pretty darn good. The real problems were (and still are) well upstream of the parkway and the hatchery. Back then it was the extensive silt from housing development construction sites and an overflowing sewer system. Now its the de-watering of the aquifer and/or warm runoff from all the huge warehouses and acres of impervious surfaces. I don't see it ever returning to what it once was, but I certainly wouldn't blame the cutting of the brush in the parkway. A lot of that stuff is invasive species anyway.

 

[PENZZZ]

“It's highly unlikely that the LL has been "destroyed." Alarmist threads such as this draw a lot of attention... but often turn out to be overblown, based on rumors, or a misunderstanding.“

Visit the LL for one mile below Rt 100, then make that statement.

 

[Dave_W]

PENZZZ wrote:
“It's highly unlikely that the LL has been "destroyed." Alarmist threads such as this draw a lot of attention... but often turn out to be overblown, based on rumors, or a misunderstanding.“

Visit the LL for one mile below Rt 100, then make that statement.

Do you think "destroyed" is an accurate term for this specific event?

If you're local, we would appreciate some pics and background information before we jump to conclusions about how a stream has been "destroyed."

Trust me, as a long time forum member and moderator, I've seen plenty of threads like this - often involving Cumberland Valley streams (on which I spend more time than the LL) - that announce some catastrophe and, upon investigation, the claims prove exaggerated or baseless.

Our beloved streams - like the Little Lehigh - have issues and problems. Hyperbolic claims on the internet about specific events, without supporting evidence, are deserving of skepticism.

 

[Lining]

i would've taken pictures but i didn't. for the one guy to say they mowed it right to the edge is false. maybe in some spots but not right to the edge of the water. they had trees and brush piles along this section. they seriously cut every f'ing tree and brush pile down. you can walk along the entire stretch and hit every single hole without any fear of hitting a tree. you know why? cause there are no trees left. you can see 3/4 of a mile down the creek

 

[Lining]

the riparian buffer, isn't there anymore. you gotta see it for yourself.
It's seriously disturbing to see.

 

[outsider]

troutwilleatflies wrote:
The LL was destroyed years ago,the park dept is just maintaining the effort to turn it into a ditch.

+1

 

[Lining]

if they did it there, IMO they will do it upstream from the FFO too. Pretty sure it's the same park.

 

[CLSports]

I bitched about this years ago. They used to maintain a riparian buffer and let the stream-side vegetation grown in which was perfect, but someone on here told me that the Allentown parks department was under pressure from local residents/politicians who did not like the high weeds growing and obstructing their view of the stream when they walked the trails. Money and power will always win out.

 

[Jaybird]

The Little Lehigh wasn't destroyed by this particular action its more of a Death by A Thousand Cuts , situation . I recently received an email about a new effort to restore the little Lehigh , that I found interesting . .
The thing about Limestone spring creeks is , they aren't making anymore of them . I hope that some group sees the little Lehigh as a tremendous opportunity to restore a classic stream .

 

[troutwilleatflies]

The main problem for the LL really began back in the 60's when they extended the sanitary sewer system up into the western twsps. When they did that work they tore the stream up and it never fully recovered.Of course when the sewer work finished the MASSIVE development followed with huge amounts of silt that turned the water very muddy after a rain.Soon after all this the bugs started to thin out,the weed beds were gone,etc.
The riparion strip did nothing to help that.the LL was a wonderful fishery before all the PROGRESS that occurred in the 60's and 70's.Why the parks dept is removing trees and streamside bushes and shrubs is a mystery to me,they also are removing dead trees that fall along the stream that provide food,cover ,and sometimes water flow.

 

[buckspa]

Site unseen and maybe a shot in the dark, however, what kind of vegetation was removed? If it was alanthus (tree of heaven), then it is a necessary evil as this is the host for spotted lantern fly and some townships are removing as much as possible.

If this was the reason and other vegetation grows back, then it will be better than it was previously.

If it was done as a means to manicure the bank, different story.