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


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 »


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 6450
Online
Even many PFBC personell don't believe this stuff about harvest not impacting populations. I was at a meeting and overheard a PFBC biologist telling a colleague about electrofishing a 12 inch native brook trout (yes 12 inches, measured with a ruler by a real biologist), and on a small freestone stream. I asked him the name of the stream and where it was. He said, "Oh no you don't." He wouldn't tell me. And this is common. Many PFBC people are very close mouthed about giving out locations of brook trout streams with bigger fish. Because they know if the word gets out, those fish will be GONE.

Here's another example. A brookie stream up in Potter County met all the criteria for the wilderness list. But this stream had a quite an unusually good brookie population. He did not submit the stream for the wilderness list because he was afraid the attention would lead to overharvest.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 18:51


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/18 8:28
From Attitudinally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf
Posts: 880
Offline
>>However, i do feel that the PF&BC posting lists of all Class A streams and nearly all wild streams for easy access is a mistake.>

It's been a few years and I could have it messed up, but if I recall correctly, this was not entirely a volitional action on the Commission's part. If I remember right, they got involved in a real dilly of a legal wrangle over a proposed landfill somewhere near Brockway. And I believe one of the things that came out of this was a court decision saying that this information had to be published under the Sunshine Law.

So, I'm not sure it can be said that they made a "mistake" here. I don't think they had many options.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 18:59


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22587
Offline
See, I mock the persuasiveness of armchair evidence and what do I get? More armchair evidence.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 19:01
_________________
Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal.

-- Leo Tolstoy


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/18 8:28
From Attitudinally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf
Posts: 880
Offline
I'll say one thing about all this and that'll be it for me.

I think everybody has a piece of the truth in this harvest impact matter.

But I'm not sure anybody's piece is as big as they think it is...:)


Thank You.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 19:04


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/14 10:34
From Southeast PA
Posts: 521
Offline
Quote:

JackM wrote:
See, I mock the persuasiveness of armchair evidence and what do I get? More armchair evidence.

Aw, c'mon, Jack. It's just that we're not lawyers and we haven't learned the fine art of ignoring common sense and disbelieving what we see with our own eyes.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 19:22


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/11 21:48
Posts: 580
Offline
This past Saturday, I drove buy a stream that holds a decent population of wild trout. This stretch is NOT stocked...but it is above and below it. I saw Three (3) cars there on opening day. In all my years (13) living near this stream I have never seen that many cars at this one stretch of water. I could see at least 4 fisherman fishing.

The most I have ever seen at this stretch of water was one car and I know the angler who fishes it.

But the fact of the matter is....on wild trout streams under the current regulations for harvest....it will not take a large amount of pressure to impact the population of wild trout.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 19:45


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 6450
Online
So Jack, are you going to check it out on opening day? There are some wild trout streams down your way aren't there? You can be the SW PA researcher.

I'll check some here in centralcentral PA (as opposed to southcentral and northcentral PA). Other people can check unstocked wild trout streams wherever they may be. Let's take a look. I've been doing this since 1994, and it's pretty interesting what you see out there on the actual streams, in the real world.

The only way to know, is to go.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 20:13


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22587
Offline
My license fees each year go to support an agency that is staffed with qualified scientists and fisheries managers. While I recognize there may be certain influences that might interfere with them doing a completely honest and fair job of managing the resources entrusted to their care, I don't believe they falsify data, nor do I think they are half as inclined to seek and find evidence which only supports some preconceived notion of proper fisheries management as are some of those here who think they know better.

The fisheries managers are employed full-time. If all that was needed to understand the impact of various events on the streams was to go fishing 50-100 days a year, I would think they'd all rather do that instead.

I may or may not make some observations on opening day, but if I do, you will hear from me whether it supports any preconception I have or whether it refutes it. In the meanwhile, since you'd like to press me to complete your homework assignment, are you going to complete mine by designing a study and requesting a grant to carry it out? Just make sure that the sampling method you choose is something more scientific than whether a trout decides to mistake the imitation on the end of your leader for food.

Posted on: 2007/4/4 20:31
_________________
Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal.

-- Leo Tolstoy


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19118
Offline
Quote:

RLeeP wrote:
>>However, i do feel that the PF&BC posting lists of all Class A streams and nearly all wild streams for easy access is a mistake.>

It's been a few years and I could have it messed up, but if I recall correctly, this was not entirely a volitional action on the Commission's part. If I remember right, they got involved in a real dilly of a legal wrangle over a proposed landfill somewhere near Brockway. And I believe one of the things that came out of this was a court decision saying that this information had to be published under the Sunshine Law.

So, I'm not sure it can be said that they made a "mistake" here. I don't think they had many options.


Rob, I only said that I feel it was a mistake. i didn't say who's mistake.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 7:37
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 9157
Offline
Jack,

I agree that scientific evidence is needed to manage wild trout, but PA is not the only State that uses scientific evidence to manage fish and wildlife. Not long ago I posted the new rules for the Savage River watershed in West MD – not far from where you live. MD has made the entire watershed in that area C&R for brook trout. Further, their findings were that “easily accessed” areas were found to be depleted of wild trout, and the C&R regulations were instituted for the entire watershed to protect the native brook trout population.

I’m with Jack on this, I’m not one to label the PFBC the “evil empire”. I see them for what they are, a government agency struggling for their fiscal life, since they depend almost solely on fishing license sales and boat registration fees for their funding. They must maximize sales of both to remain in existence. I know that there are a lot of PFBC people that care about the conserving wild resources including wild trout, but sometimes it is difficult to choose what’s best for the resource, while still trying to maximize fishing license sales. It’s a balancing act. I don’t agree with all that they do, but if you keep the aforementioned in mind you begin to understand.

As I said before, I believe that the costs of stocking and maintaining hatcheries are now beginning to outstrip revenue, and stocking will be reduced in the future. Self-sustaining trout streams will not be stocked, and the stocking of marginal put-and-take streams will continue for those who wish to keep fish.

BTW, I was one of “those fisherman” out for the opener on Saturday. I caught and kept five stocked trout and fried ‘m up Saturday…and they tasted good! I haven’t missed an opening day since my first, when I was seven years old. I plan to keep the tradition going…some of my fondest memories of fishing when I was a kid were on opening day.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 7:50


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/14 10:34
From Southeast PA
Posts: 521
Offline
Quote:

FarmerDave wrote:
Quote:

RLeeP wrote:
It's been a few years and I could have it messed up, but if I recall correctly, this was not entirely a volitional action on the Commission's part. If I remember right, they got involved in a real dilly of a legal wrangle over a proposed landfill somewhere near Brockway. And I believe one of the things that came out of this was a court decision saying that this information had to be published under the Sunshine Law.

So, I'm not sure it can be said that they made a "mistake" here. I don't think they had many options.


Rob, I only said that I feel it was a mistake. i didn't say who's mistake.

What RLeeP says makes sense. I know that there have been problems for developers with the endangered species act, in that they may invest a lot of money in land for future development and then find out afterwards that there is a population of endangered turtles or something there, and they can lose a lot of money. The same thing could happen with Class A streams if a develper like a quarry or landfill isn't aware of it beforehand, since these are Exceptional Value streams that can have restrictions on discharges.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 8:25


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19118
Offline
Very good Jack. You are very skilled.

We both seem to "recognize there may be certain influences that might interfere with them doing a completely honest and fair job of managing the resources entrusted to their care."

I even agree with this "I don't believe they falsify data," They don't have to.

But this part is really good.

Quote:
"nor do I think they are half as inclined to seek and find evidence which only supports some preconceived notion of proper fisheries management as are some of those here who think they know better."


I guess we agree. At least to some degree. Breaking that statement down ... What it says is you agree that they are inclined to seek and find evidence which only supports some preconceived notion .. " You just don't think they are half as inclined as some of us think. Could be more, could be less, just not half as some of us believe. At the same time, you are making it look like you don't agree. That's pretty good, Jack. You should be a Lawyer.

Quote:
The fisheries managers are employed full-time.


Exactly. they are employed by the PF&BC. They are not independant. It is a business, doing internal "studies" on how they are doing. what would happen of a few of them went on record to say that the management sucks.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 8:28
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/9/14 10:34
From Southeast PA
Posts: 521
Offline
Quote:

LehighRegular wrote:
This past Saturday, I drove buy a stream that holds a decent population of wild trout. This stretch is NOT stocked...but it is above and below it. I saw Three (3) cars there on opening day. In all my years (13) living near this stream I have never seen that many cars at this one stretch of water. I could see at least 4 fisherman fishing.

The most I have ever seen at this stretch of water was one car and I know the angler who fishes it.

But, as Jack would say, this observation doesn't prove anything. It's possible that they are C&R fishermen who were trying to avoid the crowds on the stocked streams. Or maybe they didn't know it wasn't a stocked section. Of course it's also possible that they wanted to eat some wild fish, and that's why they were there the first thing on opening day, to get theirs before they were gone. In any event, you would have to see them carrying around dead trout to know if they were harvesting them.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 8:36


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19118
Offline
I agree, WM. Although it took me a few seconds to figure out what volitional action meant, I wasn't disagreeing with RLP.

Sounded logical. I often wondered about that (as in what were they thinking???). Now i don't have to anymore.

Posted on: 2007/4/5 8:36
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Wild Trout Stream Survey
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22587
Offline
Quote:

FarmerDave wrote:
But this part is really good.

Quote:
"nor do I think they are half as inclined to seek and find evidence which only supports some preconceived notion of proper fisheries management as are some of those here who think they know better."


I guess we agree. At least to some degree. Breaking that statement down ... What it says is you agree that they are inclined to seek and find evidence which only supports some preconceived notion .. " You just don't think they are half as inclined as some of us think. Could be more, could be less, just not half as some of us believe. At the same time, you are making it look like you don't agree. That's pretty good, Jack. You should be a Lawyer.


I said "... as are some of those here..." not "... as do some of those here..." making the likely antecedent of "as are" the "seek[ing] and find[ing]" rather than the "think[ing]." So maybe we don't agree because what I said is that "some of those here are at least twice as inclined [as the PFBC managers] to seek and find evidence supporting their preconceptions....


Quote:
Quote:
The fisheries managers are employed full-time.


Exactly. they are employed by the PF&BC. They are not independant. It is a business, doing internal "studies" on how they are doing. what would happen of a few of them went on record to say that the management sucks.
[/quote]

I don't think it is just a question of "how are we doing" for them. I think it is a question of how to best do it. There may be a built in bias that favors the status quo, but I think when findings support a change of course, they are willing to follow the evidence.

I do enjoy advocacy of behalf of the devil, but I don't want to be mistaken about what I favor or what I believe. At the same time, I think it is useful to keep things in perspective. Sometimes the available evidence supports one's beliefs and sometimes it refutes them. When it refutes them, or even just calls them into reasonable dispute, I think a better reaction is to conduct a better study, rather than sticking our fingers in our ears and voicing the "LaLaLaLaLa I can't hear you."

Posted on: 2007/4/5 9:37
_________________
Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal.

-- Leo Tolstoy



« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 »



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





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