Making the choice: warm FFO vs cool DHALO

[Mike]

ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE, if you were given the choice between keeping a 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 and would consistently provide longer fishing through spring and the first half of the summer, which would you prefer to have in the stocking program? No, you can't have both or a C&R FFO on the new stretch.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

What's the point of C&R if the trout die anyway? Seems counter productive to me, but I'm an ignorant man.

 

[Swattie87]

Assume the point is simply to give the FFO crowd a safe haven away from all the baiters and lure chuckers during the opening weeks of the season.

My vote's for the DHALO Mike.

 

[delta_dog]

^^^WHAT HE SAID^^^^

 

[Troy]

DHALO. Whatever is best for trout. I just want to see trout survive and thrive. Whatever way that can be done is fine with me.

 

[gfen]

Its a stupid question, because logically everyone would pick, "the one where the fish can live," and then someone could report back along the lines of, "I took a strawpoll of anglers, and they prefer DHALO over C&R FFO!"

That said, marginal FFO because the fish will magically find a way to live, its what they do, y'know, survive and all.

 

[DGC]

Need more info. Is there a class D or better wild trout population in the DH-ALO candidate? If yes, leave it alone and make do with the marginal FFO C&R. I actually worry about stuff like this.

 

[Fishidiot]

Mike wrote:
a 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

I have just such a stream near me and can think of a nice substitute a few miles away (on public land) to put under DHALO.

I'd make the switch if it was up to me.

In reality, for the "social" reasons that always come into play, I'd consider such a switch only possible in theory. To attempt such a change in reality on the waters I have in mind would be - I'm convinced - virtually impossible.

But yes Mike, count me in the "make the change" category for purposes of this survey.

 

[sandfly]

yes, depending on which one and the exact details...

 

[Biggie]

I'd make the change to DHALO

 

[albatross]

Make the switch to DHALO.

 

[Mike]

Just to clarify..there are no wild trout involved in this scenario.

 

[Chaz]

Personally I don't care because I don't fish stocked water, but from a management standpoint it makes sense to move the Special Regs area make it DH FFO. At least that way the FFO guys don't lose the water. Or you could just change the C & R water to DH.

 

[afishinado]

Oh no!.........French Creek!....LOL.

Manatawny DHAlO. Good trade, IMO.

As Gfen often chides - "amirite?"

 

[shortrod]

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?

 

[greenghost]

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?

 

[pcray1231]

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.

 

[JasonS]

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.

 

[Fredrick]

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

Manatawny DHAlO. Good trade, IMO.

As Gfen often chides - "amirite?"

+1^

 

[afishinado]

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.