Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 2 (3) 4 5 »


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2011/5/3 12:22
From Morgantown, PA
Posts: 1266
Offline
Quote:

Hook_Jaw wrote:

The Land owners who didn't want it are a majority local and the ones who wanted it changed are a majority not local land owners.




Can you explain?

I admit, I am not local, or a landowner, though I have fished most of that area open to fishing. If this is what the "new" Section 5 landowners wanted (which it seems a strong majority of them did from the survey data provided), it seems to make sense to me. Not trying to be a wise guy...I am open to having my mind be changed, but I'll need your position explained better.

If the newly stocked section below 235 is mostly posted as you indicate, maybe a different decision should have been made about where to put those 2,200 fish, but I don't see how that effects the new Section 5 if this is what the landowners there wanted. It seems to me there was a clear difference of opinion in the old Section 5 amongst landowners at the very bottom end along Jollys Grove Ln from those further upstream. So they moved the boundary to account for that. Smart move in my book.

If I'm interpreting right, I think you're differentiating between local landowners (as in permanent residents) and non local landowners (cabin/camp/secondary homes) who are not there permanently. If I'm wrong, I'm sorry, and can you re-explain? If I'm right, I don't think there should be a distinction drawn between the two. A landowner is a landowner. Each landowner should get one vote.

Posted on: 2/27 8:49


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/14 23:22
From Penns Creek Canyon
Posts: 538
Offline
How can you take at vote a meeting where you don't know if everyone can attend? They need to send a letter to every owner let the vote be a fair way.

Posted on: 2/27 8:59
_________________
"That's why they call It fishing and not catching."


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2011/5/3 12:22
From Morgantown, PA
Posts: 1266
Offline
Quote:

Hook_Jaw wrote:
How can you take at vote a meeting where you don't know if everyone can attend? They need to send a letter to every owner let the vote be a fair way.


Sounds like they did. Reread the summary post of the meeting. I'm assuming (possibly wrong maybe) that they counted the mailed survey responses for those who couldn't be there in person. Can anyone confirm that?

Posted on: 2/27 9:02


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/14 23:22
From Penns Creek Canyon
Posts: 538
Offline

I should of clarified it more what I'm saying There was 2 separate letters one to the land owners of below the 235 bridge and one to the land owners of the upper section there should of been one letter stating what the full agenda was.

Posted on: 2/27 9:10
_________________
"That's why they call It fishing and not catching."


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2011/5/3 12:22
From Morgantown, PA
Posts: 1266
Offline
Quote:

Hook_Jaw wrote:

I should of clarified it more what I'm saying There was 2 separate letters one to the land owners of below the 235 bridge and one to the land owners of the upper section there should of been one letter stating what the full agenda was.


Ah. Agree with that.

Edit: Does anyone know what the landowners from 235 downstream wanted? I'm assuming the majority wanted it stocked as that's what the outcome was, but is that accurate?

Posted on: 2/27 9:11


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/14 23:22
From Penns Creek Canyon
Posts: 538
Offline
What I am saying is your vote could of been different knowing the full information of the agenda of the meeting. I like the water in section 5 and Im fine with the changes just think the compromise is a bad one for below the 235 bridge.

Posted on: 2/27 9:15
_________________
"That's why they call It fishing and not catching."


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/14 23:22
From Penns Creek Canyon
Posts: 538
Offline

Seeing as its already vastly posted swattie I can't see how. I think they fish commission was willing to do whatever to get that section 5 what they wanted.

Posted on: 2/27 9:18
_________________
"That's why they call It fishing and not catching."


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2016/1/14 15:28
Posts: 84
Offline
Agreed on the access issuesin that new stocked section... does seem kind of silly.

Posted on: 2/27 20:03


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 1735
Offline
So the landowners in one stretch are mad because stocking will be ended?

And the landowners in another stretch are mad because stock will begin?

It's hard to please people.

Posted on: 2/27 20:12


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2009/9/18 18:29
Posts: 4
Offline
PFBC staff stated that they walked and scouted the section below the 235 bridge. They acknowledged that there are private sections that would not be stocked but that enough access points existed in the stretch to allow for quality stocking and angler access.

Also, the meeting was not the only time/chance to vote or share to share comments. There is a public comment period Feb 17 - March 19. Select "contact us" on the PFBC web page then look for the
PROPOSED & RECENT REGULATIONS link.

Posted on: 2/28 7:10


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 2885
Offline
There is a link on the PFBC site to the Power Point presentation used at the meeting (gawl dang it took forever to load!! )

The Section 5 of Penns (just below Cherry Creek to Weikert) was last surveyed in 1977. It was only surveyed in one area and results were 5 kg/ha for wild brown trout.

Section 5 was surveyed in 2017 in 5 areas throughout the section and results were 45 kg/ha > making Penns a Class A wile brown trout stream in that section.

Just as a comparison, Section 4 (above Cherry Run up through Poe Paddy) was 73 kg/ha.

The section from Jolly Grove and downstream which is and will be stocked was 17 kg/ha.

It took a while (40 years between surveys) and we know the PFBC has been known not to survey a stream even if it is suspected to now be a Class A to avoid conflicts. But in this case, the whole thing with Penns was handled in the best and most fair way possible, IMO.

The survey was done, the landowners input was considered (mailing surveys is the best way to gather data, IMO) and the decision was made to extend the CRALO into the newly surveyed Class A section.

Plus stocked waters will not be eliminated, instead stocking will be extended further downstream, actually adding stream miles of stocked waters for Penns.

That's what I'm talkin' about!!.....good job by everyone.

As a side note, like many of us have experienced when fishing, Penns is loaded with quality-sized fish 11-16". And more 14" fish were surveyed up than any other size, at least in Section 4. Not many fish found > 18" though. A 20" fish in Penns is rare and a true trophy to release.

Posted on: 2/28 8:30

Edited by afishinado on 2018/2/28 8:50:02
Edited by afishinado on 2018/2/28 8:52:50


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2011/5/3 12:22
From Morgantown, PA
Posts: 1266
Offline
Quote:

afishinado wrote:

The survey was done, the landowners input was considered (mailing surveys is the best way to gather data, IMO) and the decision was made to extend the CRALO into the newly surveyed Class A section.

Plus stocked waters will not be eliminated, instead stocking will be extended further downstream, actually adding stream miles of stocked waters for Penns.

That's what I'm talkin' about!!.....good job by everyone.


That's basically where I'm at with it too. And on top of that, they clearly listened and tried to accommodate different landowner preferences in different areas. As evidenced by moving the lower limit of section 5 upstream to accommodate the apparent preference of the Jolly Grove landowners to have that section stocked. Not sure what more else they could do, or should be expected to do, practically speaking.

If the folks below 235 didn't want that section stocked based on the surveys and votes in person at the meeting, I can't imagine they would have forced that on them just to put the fish somewhere else close by. My assumption is the majority there wanted it stocked. And based on the lower biomass of wild fish in that section, it makes sense that they'd want it stocked.

Posted on: 2/28 8:50


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2016/2/5 22:11
From On a stream in central PA
Posts: 28
Offline
Link to the video of the meeting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXKRdCVJ8Q
Arway said it best Class A streams a special thing and it is our responsibility to protect and manage them for the future.
I think it is great that the Class A waters of Penn's is expanding .

I was surprised by Joe Humphreys's take on stocking the section.
The fish commission is still stocking the same amount of trout and actually expanding the amount of Penns that can be fished.
It is a better practice to put those fish in areas where there are not wild trout.

One thing that concerned me was is there data from the 2017 survey accurate Because the fish manger from the union county sportsman admitted to stocking 1000 fingerling trout after the 2016 drought.
Did those fingerling get counted as stream bred trout?


Posted on: 2/28 9:26


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/14 23:22
From Penns Creek Canyon
Posts: 538
Offline
Catching a 20 inch trout in penns is not rare in the least bit. I know the area and land owners very well below the 235 bridge and enough access points is a very questionable comment by the fish commission. I also highly doubt the fish commission walked a lot of that stretch being posted a vast majority of it more like drove most of it in their truck.

Posted on: 2/28 13:19
_________________
"That's why they call It fishing and not catching."


Re: Possible change of regulations on Penns Creek downstream of Cherry Run

Joined:
2008/6/28 15:57
Posts: 42
Offline
I'm neutral on the stocking. But I would like it if those doing the stocking- either PFBC or private- did a fin clip on the stockers in order to allow anglers to know the source of the fish we catch. And/or they could confine the species being stocked to rainbows, to ward off problems associated with spawning competition by stockers with the wild browns and brookies.

Posted on: 3/3 14:41



« 1 2 (3) 4 5 »



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Sponsors
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

USGS Water Levels
The New Keystone Fly Fishing Book
Polls
Where do you most want to fly fish outside the region?
Western US 39% (31)
Alaska 10% (8)
New Zealand 32% (26)
Florida Keys 3% (3)
South America 6% (5)
Elsewhere 7% (6)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2018/3/17 12:44
6 Comments





Copyright 2018 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com