Something we can do?

[StarvinMarvin]

Is there something that we can do as a citizens and tax payers to overturn this decision, with either petitioning or legislature,, on closing Oswayo and Bellefonte. I'm pretty PO'd about it. I mean cant we take a polll to see if people would pay $5 more on the trout stamp to keep these hatcheries operating? We're going to lose almost 1/4 of the trout. Theyre not going to close to close for two years, although I'm suire they cut theyre eggs and fingerlings for them now so we do have some time. Anyone with more knowledge here, maybe an attorney or someone with political power care to way in? or is it a lost cause?

 

[StarvinMarvin]

Here's another thought they just added multi year licenses so the people who got them got stiffed smh . .

 

[SBecker]

Why? It needs to be done. My area is fully stocked by Bellefonte. I am not worried, another hatchery will just pick up the slack. Don't understand why everybody is so up in arms regarding the closing of the hatcheries. There is no money, it has to be done. I am more P'd off about the money that they spent on Bellafonte and now decided to close them.

 

[bikerfish]

doesn't matter to me, I rarely fish for stocked fish anyways.

 

[StarvinMarvin]

I dont know if it will be picked up? I hope it does, I just think we as a group that supports them were stiffed, why cant they hold more public meetings dicsussing these issues, if I'm wrong or missed something lemme know, but I feel like I was cheated by them.

 

[SBecker]

Lol what do you think they are not going to stock the whole Lehigh Valley region, because they closed Bellafonte?

Edit: I don't feel stiffed, why would I?

Editx2: I only pray and hope that they don't have enough fish to stock my favorite stream. Please please please please run out of fish.

 

[midnightangler]

If the state combines this move with the cessation of stocking over class A populations, I expect they'll have a surplus of stocked fish to ship to western PA and other parts of the state where wild trout populations aren't viable.

The state is currently stocking hundreds of miles of wild trout water that doesn't need to be stocked. Closing a few hatcheries is a step in the right direction. Why should we pay more $$ for licenses to stock a bunch of streams that are already full of wild trout? I see this move as a positive thing.

 

[StarvinMarvin]

I hope you guys are right, I just dont know if they care about that, or they see it as a way for them to be under budget.

 

[SBecker]

O because government agencies are supposed to be over budget? Lmao

 

[Maurice]

midnightangler wrote:
If the state combines this move with the cessation of stocking over class A populations, I expect they'll have a surplus of stocked fish to ship to western PA and other parts of the state where wild trout populations aren't viable.

The state is currently stocking hundreds of miles of wild trout water that doesn't need to be stocked. Closing a few hatcheries is a step in the right direction. Why should we pay more $$ for licenses to stock a bunch of streams that are already full of wild trout? I see this move as a positive thing.

Midnight...this is a real stretch. Are you implying that there are class A or even Wild Trout streams being stocked totaling 750,000 trout?

I agree its a good thing overall and also that the initial response will be to reduce the overall trout allocations by the percentage of overall reduction. (ie. 25% reduction in numbers for each stream currently on the list) Then the lists will be looked at and any "low numbers" under a few hundred fish will be considered for removal. This will involve some wild trout streams. They will cut these through practical rationale. Then the fish from these streams will be redistributed in the region.

Thats the way it WILL happen, IMHO. What SHOULD happen is for the F&BC to look at the wild trout streams, Take them off the ATW list and just tell the legislature, tough nutz! We ain't got the Fish. And then cut the marginal ATWs by the remaining percentage.

Removing the Wild Trout Streams that are stocked (a very small percentage of the allocation reduction) will NOT result in a reduction in license sales. These streams are in rural and wilderness areas where people have camps or locals travel short distances to in order to fish them. These are informed and diehard fishermen whether bait, lure or fly, they will continue to by a license.

The license sales that make up the lions share of the budget are from the lake trout stocking and urban trout stream ATWs. You can bet these trout allocation densities will be impacted the lease as to not disrupt the race for increased license sales.

So you/we will get some perks in the form of less WTS being stocked but I expect in my region (York County) the numbers will fall by a greater number than the overall trout deficit. Just because we are out of sight out of mind and farther from the population centers where the potential for license sales numbers come from.

So they will stock the WTS near the pop centers with the same numbers or slight reductions and kick us to the curb.

It is a chance for the PF&BC to make a statement about Wild Trout Opportunities and educate the public. This will be a shot heard round the state when it makes the papers, closer to the Impact date...My guess is they will take the high road and zip it when they COULD spring into a positive, pro-active campaign to make the population of PA aware of the Wild Trout Opportunities around the state.

 

[PennKev]

midnightangler wrote:
I expect they'll have a surplus of stocked fish to ship to western PA and other parts of the state where wild trout populations aren't viable.

Screw that.

I live in WPA and there are plenty of places that shouldn't be stocked here either. They can start by cutting socking on all the **** trickles that only have one or two small fishable pools, yet get stocked pre-season and in-season. (Many of which have small but stable wild trout populations.) These streams aren't good wild trout fisheries, but they are pretty crummy stocked trout fisheries also.

Kev

 

[StarvinMarvin]

^^ amen, one of the nastiest ugly streams I've ever seen is in the heart of Butler, and it gets more fish in one hole than some remote streams I've seen. It's becuase its in the city and more and more people will fish there, but its economics, simple supply and demand.

 

[klingy]

What hatcheries have done to some of our streams is a crime (see big spring, huntsdale, etc) and stocking of pellet heads over wild trout continues to suppress many viable Wild populations. I see the closing of a few hatcheries as a great (although forced) step by the PFBC to take a look at where should we REALLY be stocking fish.

 

[Fishidiot]

StarvinMarvin,
I understand your point and can sympathize with your feelings.

We've gone round and round about stocking over wild trout in a different thread. Let's give it a rest on this thread (please).

In an effort to get your thread back on topic......
I think there are limited actions you can take as I suspect the closures are probably a done deal (although I really don't know). It wouldn't hurt to write your state legislator and tell him/her your feelings about this situation. The underlying funding problem is one of pension obligations and this is a very big and very intractable mess. I'd emphasize, if it were me, that you would really prefer to see an increase in the license fee and that such an increase could help keep hatcheries solvent and trout in streams. As always - numbers talk. Visit a sportsmen's club or put a petition in a fly shop or outdoor store supporting a license increase. The more names you got, the better. A letter to your local newspaper describing the decrease in stocking that will be a result could also get some attention on the subject.

 

[wildtrout2]

bikerfish wrote:
doesn't matter to me, I rarely fish for stocked fish anyways.

x2^ Except, you can put "never" in place of "rarely". They could close them all and it wouldn't make a diff to me.

 

[midnightangler]

Midnight...this is a real stretch. Are you implying that there are class A or even Wild Trout streams being stocked totaling 750,000 trout?

I think they'll increase production from some of their other hatcheries to compensate. I expect they may cut the number of trout stocked in the larger freestones to some extent, like Pine, Kettle, etc. I think the trend will move toward raising fewer large fish, which could be accompanied by moving some streams to fingerling stocking programs. They could reduce fall stockings.

Honestly, anything that makes it likely for wild trout streams to receive less stocking will have my support. I'm sure they have a strategy to mitigate the loss of these hatcheries.

How much sense does it really make to truck fish across the state from Bellefonte or Oswayo in the first place? The streams near those hatcheries are exactly the places that don't need to see stocked trout.

 

[tyeager]

There is truth in that last paragraph.

 

[PennKev]

midnightangler wrote:
How much sense does it really make to truck fish across the state from Bellefonte or Oswayo in the first place? The streams near those hatcheries are exactly the places that don't need to see stocked trout.

And it's not like we don't have Pleasant Gap and Benner hatcheries in that area.

 

[Maurice]

midnightangler wrote:

Midnight...this is a real stretch. Are you implying that there are class A or even Wild Trout streams being stocked totaling 750,000 trout?

I think they'll increase production from some of their other hatcheries to compensate. I expect they may cut the number of trout stocked in the larger freestones to some extent, like Pine, Kettle, etc. I think the trend will move toward raising fewer large fish, which could be accompanied by moving some streams to fingerling stocking programs. They could reduce fall stockings.

Honestly, anything that makes it likely for wild trout streams to receive less stocking will have my support. I'm sure they have a strategy to mitigate the loss of these hatcheries.

How much sense does it really make to truck fish across the state from Bellefonte or Oswayo in the first place? The streams near those hatcheries are exactly the places that don't need to see stocked trout.

Its a biomass/NPDES issue. They cannot raise more biomass at existing hatcheries w/o raising the limits of nutrient and suspended solids discharge. So they could raise more is smaller like fingerlings as you suggest. But to just raise more in not an option.

 

[gfoledc]

I agree with saving money and not stocking over wild fish. I also fish for wild fish almost exclusively. My grand kids will miss going to Bellfonte to see all the fish.