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


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2) 3 »


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2008/6/25 9:41
From Pgh
Posts: 1242
Offline
Mike,
It's a no-brainer. Go with DHALO.

Rationale: DHALO laws prohibit taking of fish in the early season, so in essence it is C&R through the higher-pressure time period anyway. Any fish that makes it through the year in the DHALO is an added bonus. If the C&R doesn't hold any fish through the summer, why keep it?

Posted on: 2012/8/30 10:42
_________________
"I used to like fishing because I thought it had some larger significance. Now I like fishing because it's the one thing I can think of that probably doesn't." --John Gierach


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13491
Offline
Without knowing details, for the purpose of this survey as the options were given, I'd make the switch.

I don't put much of a distinction between ALO and FFO, perfectly fine with ALO.

Regarding DH vs. C&R, I prefer C&R, but DH isn't such a bad thing if the fish aren't going to make it through summer anyway. Certainly is more important to me to have the better stream be the one that's protected.

Posted on: 2012/8/30 10:43


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2008/5/5 11:06
From King Of Prussia, Pa
Posts: 1195
Offline
Quote:

afishinado wrote:
Oh no!.........French Creek!....LOL.

Manatawny DHAlO. Good trade, IMO.

As Gfen often chides - "amirite?"


Yup, French creek is what popped into my head as soon as I read Mike's op. With that said, is the landowner gonna post that section of french if the FFO restriction is taken away? Shouldn't that also be factored into the decision? Disregard if you're not talking about french, but I think you are.

Posted on: 2012/8/30 15:48


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2006/9/9 22:43
From Delaware Co.
Posts: 3470
Offline
Quote:

afishinado wrote:
Oh no!.........French Creek!....LOL.

Manatawny DHAlO. Good trade, IMO.

As Gfen often chides - "amirite?"


+1^

Posted on: 2012/8/30 17:39
_________________
There is no disadvantage in being able to cast far"
- Lefty Kreh -


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 9017
Offline
Quote:

shortrod wrote:
The more interesting question is: How/why did we put C&R regs on a section that does not have to ability to hold fish through May?



My guess was French Creek.

To answer the question above, certain landowners insisted that French be maintained as FFO. The FBC changed/simplified the SR designations a few years ago and eliminated the DH-FFO designation. The only FF regulation left was CR-FFO. So there you have it.

Things are often more complicated than they seem. Mike is making an effort to placate as many parties as possible....different groups of anglers, i.e., bait, spin, fly guys as well as landowners, politicians and the higher-ups in his own organization. Not always easy.


Posted on: 2012/8/31 6:22


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2009/6/5 14:47
From SW PA/Tioga
Posts: 196
Offline
Thanks, Afish, I am not familiar with that area of the state.

I am not looking to blame anyone for anything, only solutions to problems.

Problem:
A French Creek section currently has C&R FFO regs, but does not have the ability to hold trout through May. Also the landowners insist on FFO regs.

Solution:
Bring back the DH-FFO reg. Removing this reg was a mistake if you have landowners that want FFO.

Problem:
"No, you can't have both"

Solution:
Add the new DALO.
More DH, TT, or C&R areas are part of the solution to one of our biggest problems (see below). They are part of the solution because they make more efficient use of a stocked trout.

Problem:
Each year it costs more to create, raise, transport and stock a trout.

Solution:
A. Create additional stamps to off set the cost.
1. Stocked trout harvest stamp (required to harvest trout from any water)
This segment of PA angling requires the most money. Sell the stamp, divide the previous years revenue by the total cost to stock a trout and produce that many trout.

2. Special Regs stamp (required to fish any special reg water)
Let the revenue from this stamp pay for the cost of running the reg areas.

3. Wild trout stamp (required to fish any class A wild trout stream)
Revenue used to help wild trout streams and fix problems on streams that should hold wild trout.

4. Access stamp
Used to acquire land or rights ...

B. More efficiently use the trout you can produce by increasing the number of DH areas.

Lee Wulff said that "a gamefish was too valuable to be caught only once", we are heading into an era where a PA stocked trout is too expensive to be caught only once.

C. Stock less and/or less expensive trout. The PFBC has been doing this one but how far will they go?

D. Encourage and facilitate expansion of co-ops raising, transporting and stocking.

The PFBC still controls the quality of the fish without incurring the cost of raising and transporting the fish.

Problem:
TAP is against special reg areas that restrict by tackle type.

Solution:
I have nothing against bait fishing for stocked trout, I once was a bait fisherman. I also know that a skillful bait fisherman can practice C&R with no more lethal consequences than a nymph fisherman. That does not change the fact that most bait fishermen are not that skilled and that bait is more lethal than artificials.

So allow baitfishing in DH areas but require a stamp that offsets the cost of replacing the extra fish unintentionally killed by bait fishermen. Also, I know that bait fishing does not hold a monopoly on litter but the litter associated with bait fishing must be recognized. TAP must agree to be responsible for periodic cleanups of said reg areas or responsible for fines when the area is not clean.

Mike,
I know you asked a simple question, and surely you know that within the constraints that the new DHALO is a no brainer. I just don't like the constraints.


Posted on: 2012/8/31 15:40


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2006/9/13 10:18
From LV
Posts: 7647
Offline
My guess is Mike is talking about Ridley Creek. I've seen trout there during 90+ degree days taking tricos.Before anything changes the science needs to be in place. If that is the water, then I'd simply roll back the regs to the previous regs which were DHFFO. However, it could be French Creek, all I know about French Creek is that in July once I was swimming there in St. Peters and it was ICY Cold.

Posted on: 2012/9/1 22:25
_________________
There is always time to do more to protect wild trout.


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2012/1/16 18:57
From North East PA
Posts: 1315
Offline
Mike,

Given your criteria, I would vote for the change to DHALO. I practice C&R, myself. (Even with warm water species) I agree that the fish are too valuable to be caught only once.
That said, it the odds of longer term survivlal are that marginal, it would be better for the fish to be harvested rather than just "wasted".

My two cents worth.

Posted on: 2012/9/2 7:02


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 9017
Offline
Quote:

Chaz wrote:
My guess is Mike is talking about Ridley Creek. I've seen trout there during 90+ degree days taking tricos.Before anything changes the science needs to be in place. If that is the water, then I'd simply roll back the regs to the previous regs which were DHFFO. However, it could be French Creek, all I know about French Creek is that in July once I was swimming there in St. Peters and it was ICY Cold.



Could be, Chaz, but this line in the OP, ."..C&R FFO area that gets prohibitively warm in spring (sometimes as early as the end of May) and is not reputed to carry trout through the summer or having it replaced by a near-by (within 10 miles) a new DH-ALO area in the same drainage basin that would carry at least some fish through the summer..." eliminates Ridley I think. I can think of no likely streams in or close to Delaware County.

French and the Manny fit better, and to me, the French Creek FFO is a 3 month fishery for trout - stocked fish March, April, May, gets too warm by June, and no fall stocking. The Manny would hold fish longer and is within 10 miles of French in the same drainage, I believe.

But regardless, I think adding a decent DH area would be a good thing.

Posted on: 2012/9/2 7:38

Edited by afishinado on 2012/9/2 8:04:57


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2006/9/13 10:18
From LV
Posts: 7647
Offline
I'm going by what he's commented on in the past. I see no Special Regs. on the Matatawny, is there one?

Posted on: 2012/9/2 11:59
_________________
There is always time to do more to protect wild trout.


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 19:16
From Dallastown, PA
Posts: 7048
Offline
Chaz, the manatawney would be the water where the DHALO is placed in replacement of the C&R FFO on French. That is the supposed proposal.

Why not trade an eye for an eye....just move the C&R FFO to Manatawney. Lets face it anglers in the area will lose access to the old FFO area even if it goes general regs, the landowners will close it.

Why not just admit you screwed up by converting the DHFFO areas C&R? Convert them back to DHFFO and be done with it already. Talk about a waste of money by the F&BC. All the brain power being used to get rid of those damned FFO areas. What if we tell them this, or drop the reg and put one over there thats ALO, Or maybe .....

Unless the goal is to eliminate FFO areas, then just say that. Stop trying to lead us by the nose into things less desirable.

You know it amazes me that a supposed "social" program is being scrutinized NOT by the angling community but rather by the very agency that created it. Buyers remorse?

Posted on: 2012/9/2 15:28
_________________
Don't hit me with them negative waves so early in the morning. Think the bridge will be there and it will be there. It's a mother, beautiful bridge, and it's gonna be there. Ok?


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2006/12/29 10:00
From Harrisburg
Posts: 2013
Offline
Mo wrote:
Quote:
Or maybe .....

Unless the goal is to eliminate FFO areas, then just say that. Stop trying to lead us by the nose into things less desirable.



I've come to lean towards going easier on the op, given his job and how convenient it would be to rail on him. However, being Mo bucked up and said it....I've seen this tactic used before and I cant help but be suspect. Most likely be heralded as a winning move by the anglers and then spread to the other FFO's.
That was just too dumb of a question, from too smart of a man.

Posted on: 2012/9/3 5:38


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22352
Offline
I find this statement in the OP confusing:

"which would you prefer to have in the stocking program"

So the hypothetical proposes to stop stocking the first creek (former FFO) and begin or maintain stocking on the "new" DHALO? After the hypothetical change, are both creeks maintain with the same number of hatchery plants? I think you clarified that neither creek section holds wild trout, hence my confusion in your use of the quoted part of your ultimate question.

Otherwise, Maurice makes a good point, again.

As anglers of the fly, we are generally not the least educated anglers, nor are we generally more exploitive of a resource. You know this is true. So, if you really want a thoughtful answer, why not just lay it out what the agenda is? As I said, most of us are capable of understanding the full complex of issues.

The thought that your scenario is laying a Socratic Trap is palpable.

Posted on: 2012/9/3 7:24
_________________
Peace, Tony


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2006/11/10 8:32
Posts: 1739
Offline
Thank you to those who responded directly to the question. I am examining a specific, rare circumstance/potential opportunity and not the entire statewide program.

Posted on: 2012/9/7 22:04

Edited by Mike on 2012/9/7 22:32:39


Re: Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

Joined:
2009/10/15 13:45
From Eastern PA
Posts: 10290
Offline
Quote:

Maurice wrote:

Why not trade an eye for an eye....just move the C&R FFO to Manatawney. Lets face it anglers in the area will lose access to the old FFO area even if it goes general regs, the landowners will close it.


Because the argument against this is that Hay/Manny/Etc is full of hilljacks that will uprise if their bait and/or spin fishing is taken away. Mike has always argued against special regs on both Manny and Hay, quite adamantly, on this very site a few times. I can post links if needed.

Having said that, I agree that there is an agenda here. Additionally, I feel that Gary's point of a straw poll is quite valid. Using PAFF to poll the fly fishing community and using the limited responses of a small minority as proof of the desire of the masses is simply empirically unsound.

Posted on: 2012/9/7 22:33



« 1 (2) 3 »



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
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Will you be fly fishing this autumn?
Yes
No
Thinking about it
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll will close at 2014/10/31 17:56
Comments?





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com