Questions on PFBC stream surveys

[franklin]

In looking over some stream information relative to a couple threads on the board I've got some questions on PFBC stream surveys.

First, I notice on the Pennsylvania Bulletin which is used to publish changes to stream classifications that the Little Lehigh was surveyed in 2013 as referenced in the Bulletin. no Brook trout or rainbow trout totals are listed. Is this because none were found? Or they were not counted? Or there was an insignificant number to list?

Second, there are 20 streams listed each with a corresponding stream survey. I can't seem to find these on the PFBC site. Am I not searching correctly or are these generally not available to the public?

Link to Pennsylvania Bulletin.

http://fishandboat.com/images/exec/minutes/2016minu/03agd-exh-e.pdf

 

[Chaz]

For streams being added look here;
Rulemakings

As for brook trout and rainbows, the overall population of 95% browns probably negates the small populations of bows and brookies. I can tell you they are there, but they are less tolerant of pollution than browns so you may find them where the springs are in fair numbers, but not find them where you are away for springs. There always was a significant migration of brook trout in September at the LL. But I, having not fished it regularly for years can't say that still exists.
I was with the Survey Team during a survey in 2003 where the population of all trout was probably the highest and I can say that good numbers of bows and brooks were in the Heritage section at that time.
I have caught both species in decent numbers as far down as the covered bridge. Brown trout being tougher to catch then brooks and bows in the unregulated water probably limits the brooks and bows outside the regs water.
The section in Trexlertown from the spring down had a very good brookie population until that section dried up during a drought in the late 80's(88). Since then as far as I know they never returned. They were replaced by browns.

 

[pcray1231]

On the first question. Since other streams list very low biomass levels for some species, I would interpret the lack of data there to mean no rainbows or brookies were found.

With a caveat. Most likely no WILD bows or brookies were found, specifically at that survey site. That of course, doesn't mean the stream contains none, just not right there. It's also possible that since portions of the stream are stocked, they declined to attempt to determine origin on any species that is not stocked. So if they found bows they didn't want to determine whether they were wild or stocked and thus just excluded the data, since browns alone are enough to qualify as class A.

Anyway, no, surveys are not all made public. Sometimes they publish a biologist report. The only such report I could find for the LL is from 2003:

http://www.fishandboat.com/images/fisheries/afm/2003/5_08-11llehigh.htm

 

[franklin]

pcray1231 wrote:
On the first question. Since other streams list very low biomass levels for some species, I would interpret the lack of data there to mean no rainbows or brookies were found.

With a caveat. Most likely no WILD bows or brookies were found, specifically at that survey site. That of course, doesn't mean the stream contains none, just not right there. It's also possible that since portions of the stream are stocked, they declined to attempt to determine origin on any species that is not stocked. So if they found bows they didn't want to determine whether they were wild or stocked and thus just excluded the data, since browns alone are enough to qualify as class A.

Anyway, no, surveys are not all made public. Sometimes they publish a biologist report. The only such report I could find for the LL is from 2003:

http://www.fishandboat.com/images/fisheries/afm/2003/5_08-11llehigh.htm

I suspect they are not public but if they are referenced in comment for rule making they should be public.

Another example is Saucon Creek. Last biologists report in 2004. I suspect it has been surveyed since. With discussion on proposed rule changes it would be relevant if any since 2004 were public.

 

[Chaz]

All stream surveys are able to be viewed by the public at the Pleasant Gap offices, not all are posted on the internet.

 

[Dave_W]

Chaz wrote:
All stream surveys are able to be viewed by the public at the Pleasant Gap offices, not all are posted on the internet.

Newer surveys, those roughly from after about 2005, are generally not available there.

I do agree that all new surveys, especially those referencing changes in wild trout status, should be available online. They don't need a polished slide show with graphics and big fish pics, just the data and conclusions.

Oftentimes, if a TU chapter or Sportsmen's Club asks nicely, the regional AFM will visit and present the recent findings or provide them to the organizations' leaders.

Perhaps it's me, but it seems that the PFBC did a better job a few years ago getting these studies up on the agency website (there is still a treasure trove of Biologists Reports that can be viewed - if you haven't perused them, you really should take some time to do so). In the last several years, however, many new surveys continue to be conducted but these newer surveys often don't get posted like they used to. This is unfortunate.

 

[Mike]

When one views the rate of survey posting on the PFBC web site by any particular management area, check all types of survey results being posted, not just a specific kind, such as trout stream surveys. For instance, a region might be posting surveys at the same rate as always, but may now be concentrating on lake and river survey results. Those web site postings represent a sub-set of the surveys that are done and the reports that are written, and they are in a format that is more user-friendly.

 

[franklin]

Mike, as a bass fisherman who fishes a number of PA lakes I am aware that there are surveys of various types of waters. I have talked to regional biologists a few times for advice when making fishing trips to waters in the western end of the state. (I'm in SEPA.)

I have a number of questions and would appreciate if you could help me understand or point me to someone in the PFBC who could.

What percentage of surveys turn into biologist reports?
Why are some surveys not published?
How is the decision made on what is published and what is not?
Who makes these decisions?

 

[Mike]

A small percentage are on-line...less than ten percent. AFM's have a minimum required number each year and they decide which ones are worthwhile posting. In Area 6 they are usually the ones of high interest to anglers or ones that present a topic that will be of interest once anglers read it.

 

[franklin]

Thanks for replying Mike.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

All stream surveys are able to be viewed by the public at the Pleasant Gap offices, not all are posted on the internet.

This is what I remembered. Isn't that just a fish hatchery in Pleasant Gap?

Newer surveys, those roughly from after about 2005, are generally not available there.

Where are these surveys available to the public?

 

[Dave_W]

Sal,
Please check your PM.