Flatheads in Upper Juniata

[jifigz]

I have had several pieces of evidence as the existence of flatheads in the upper Juniata before. One piece is that a forum member here caught one several years ago on a streamer near Mt. Union, I believe. Another is that a guy once tried to describe a large fish that he kayaked over and his description immediately made me think that he was talking about a flathead. A couple of weeks ago a winery customer showed me a picture of a fish that his son or grandson or whatever caught and I immediately asked him to send the picture to me. This is the first bigger flathead that I've seen from this portion of the Juniata and I honestly do not like the idea that they are here now at all. Flatheads can certainly put a hurting on the smaller sunfish species and the smallmouths. I love catfishing but I'm content with the channel cats that are all ready here..I really don't think that the river needs this voracious predator and I wish people would stop taking the liberty to stock fish as they see fit.

I did post this picture on Frederick's one snakehead thread but I feel that flatheads and their invasion of eastern PA needs to be discussed. I fear these fish a lot more than snakeheads.

 

[Dave_W]

Good post and an important topic.

With FH above the Susky dams, it's probably inevitable that they will get well up into the Juniata watershed (at least to Warrior's Mark) and - eventually - the rest of the West Branch and North Branch of the Susky watershed.

Will also be interesting to see if they colonize mid sized and smaller tribs.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

OT but speaking of warriors mark, a guy last night on facebook mentioned being harassed by a landowner across the river at the bend. Said his kids and him were throwing rocks towards them and trying to scare fish. Landowner was upset he was fishing across the river from his house.
I was just going to try up that way this weekend but I'm reconsidering. Told the guy he should report it.

Anyone see this up there?

 

[outsider]

Somehow they got into in Blue Marsh Lake. Probably planted there by someone. Last year a record flathead was caught there, 48 lbs - 6 ounces.

 

[Paraleptalata]

I don’t comment much on the forum but this post caught my eye. Flatheads have been present in the lower to middle portions of the Juniata for a number of years. I spend many days every year guiding and fishing the river and have seen many mid to large sized flatheads. One thing to keep in mind is this is one of those times when we need to let local anglers know that it would be positive to catch and keep these fish. One thing that I believe will keep numbers in check is the popularity of bowfishing. These guys shoot a lot of flatheads. They have dramatically reduced the carp population on the river and I think they will do the same with flatheads. From a bass conservation standpoint I help spread the word on the events held in my area for bowfishing tourneys. Now along with these above thoughts I will point out that the lower river bass population has increased at the same time flathead cats have become a legit population in the lower. Also something to keep in mind is that although flatheads are invasive, so are carp, and for that matter smallmouth bass.

 

[jifigz]

Para, I'm well aware that every fish that I catch from the Juniata except for redbreasts, fallfish, and eels are not native. They are not necessarily considered invasive anymore and that is only because of people's opinions on the matter and that they are in a state of stasis, more or less. I don't think flatheads will be the end of the great fishery that the J is, but they are going to change it for a number of years until they also reach a state of equilibrium with the environment, other fish populations, etc. There have been studies where once flatheads arrive sunfish species decline rapidly until the flathead population stabilizes and then the sunfish rebound. This could take 20 years or more.

There is one undeniable truth now and that is that flatheads are now the top predator of the river. Muskies are great and all but they cannot match the appetite and amount of prey consumed by the flathead.

 

[troutbert]

Dave_W wrote:
Good post and an important topic.

With FH above the Susky dams, it's probably inevitable that they will get well up into the Juniata watershed (at least to Warrior's Mark) and - eventually - the rest of the West Branch and North Branch of the Susky watershed.

Will also be interesting to see if they colonize mid sized and smaller tribs.

When you say Warrior's Mark, what are you referring to?

There is village called Warriors Mark not very far from State College, but it is not near the Juniata River or other large waterway.

 

[outsider]

I wonder how much they affect the Schuylkill River. I know a lot of anglers (including myself) that have noticed a decrease in smallmouths, sunfish, and rock bass. 15 years ago it was easy to catch a bunch of smallies just about anywhere in the river, and I fished the river from Leesport in Berks County down to Royersford in Montgomery County. Now you have to find pockets of smallies. Perhaps I should start a new topic for discussion regarding the Schuylkill River.

 

[Dave_W]

Paraleptalata wrote:
One thing that I believe will keep numbers in check is the popularity of bowfishing. These guys shoot a lot of flatheads.

This is an interesting angle I had not considered.

I know that carp have been reduced by bowfisherman (whether this is a good or bad thing is a matter for a different discussion). I didn't realize they were shooting FH. I would think that targeting FH would be difficult due to the tendency of FH to lie up on the bottom in deeper pools rather than cruising shallows in groups, like carp. I would think they would also be a lot harder to see than carp(?).
Hhmm....

The Juniata is a very shallow river. I wonder how much ideal habitat there really is for FH in the J? These fish like deep holes with woody debris, not chunk rock and pea gravel two feet deep, as is characteristic of much of the J.

 

[Dave_W]

troutbert wrote:
When you say Warrior's Mark, what are you referring to?

I goofed - meant to sat Warrior's Ridge... the dam downriver from Petersburg. I believe that this would block upstream movement of fish into the upper Juniata watershed(?)

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Lol Daves goof led to mine. I was speaking of warriors path not mark

 

[troutbert]

Dave_W wrote:

troutbert wrote:
When you say Warrior's Mark, what are you referring to?

I goofed - meant to sat Warrior's Ridge... the dam downriver from Petersburg. I believe that this would block upstream movement of fish into the upper Juniata watershed(?)

Yes. Fish would not be able to get up past that dam. I've been there and it's high. According to Wikipedia it's 27 feet high.

If you Google "Warriors Ridge Dam" you can see photos of it.

 

[jifigz]

Dave_W wrote:

Paraleptalata wrote:
One thing that I believe will keep numbers in check is the popularity of bowfishing. These guys shoot a lot of flatheads.

This is an interesting angle I had not considered.

I know that carp have been reduced by bowfisherman (whether this is a good or bad thing is a matter for a different discussion). I didn't realize they were shooting FH. I would think that targeting FH would be difficult due to the tendency of FH to lie up on the bottom in deeper pools rather than cruising shallows in groups, like carp. I would think they would also be a lot harder to see than carp(?).
Hhmm....

The Juniata is a very shallow river. I wonder how much ideal habitat there really is for FH in the J? These fish like deep holes with woody debris, not chunk rock and pea gravel two feet deep, as is characteristic of much of the J.

Dave, I think that you need to realize that catfish are all highly predatory. They may hole up in the day and stay near fallen timbers, tires, etc in deep water but during the night they go shallow. And j mean very shallow. I'd consider myself to be very knowledgeable on the J and catfish can easily be in 6 inches of water at night picking off the small fish. I've seen it first hand many times. Also, the bowfisherman with lights at night will see this fish. They can destroy flatheads at night because of this tendency.

 

[Dave_W]

jifigz wrote:

Dave, I think that you need to realize that catfish are all highly predatory. They may hole up in the day and stay near fallen timbers, tires, etc in deep water but during the night they go shallow. And j mean very shallow. I'd consider myself to be very knowledgeable on the J and catfish can easily be in 6 inches of water at night picking off the small fish. I've seen it first hand many times. Also, the bowfisherman with lights at night will see this fish. They can destroy flatheads at night because of this tendency.

True enough.
I'm well aware of catties' proclivities. I've night fished the J. for decades and have seen the channel cats in shallows and riffles where they cruise and hunt.

I forgot that many bowfishermen "fish" at nightime and agree that FH would be more vulnerable when they're cruising shallows at night. I would imagine that most FH harvested by archers are taken at night. Now that you mention it, I recall that the bowfishermen who target snakeheads on the Potomac are mainly doing this at night as well.

 

[TJones]

Not a big fan of bow hunting for fish here... especially the wastefulness of it. If people want to shoot a couple of fish for food that’s fine, but good grief the way a lot of these guys kill tons of carp and cats is beyond wasteful.

I don’t think we have anything to fear from the big cats... they are native to the Allegheny and seem to fill a healthy niche there... lots of bass still around.

The lower susky seems to be doing quite well in spite of the Flathead proliferation... which is going on almost 20 years or more now.

I will say this, something has decimated the rock bass population in the Juniata and I’m not sure what it is... could be over harvest, pollution or disease or who knows what, but I don’t think big cats are to blame, although they surely won’t help.

 

[jifigz]

When I started this thread and have been posting here I've been thinking about the Allegheny and how flatties are native to that drainage. I agree that that river is in, for the most part, fine shape. I don't think flatheads are going to ruin the Juniata or the Susky or anything but they will certainly change it for some time.

On a side note rock bass numbers went down a long time ago where I am used to fishing. if I go back like 16 years or so it seemed that rock bass were everywhere and I still have a small hole that was very easy to wade to for even the you geat of kids that we call the "rock bass hole" that I haven't caught a rock bass out of in years. On the flip side the Redbreasts have seemed to increase their population so I actually prefer that.

 

[TJones]

I’m with u Jifigz on the redbreasts, they do seem to be healthy in population fortunately... I’ve seen the same thing with Rockies... around year 2000 or shortly thereafter they started to decline big time in the main rivers.

 

[Mwheaps32]

I saw on another Pa based fishing forum where a flat head was caught several miles upstream in Penn's creek.

 

[jifigz]

Mwheaps32 wrote:
I saw on another Pa based fishing forum where a flat head was caught several miles upstream in Penn's creek.

Do you know roughly where that flathead was caught? I can't really see them causing much damage to the good trout fishing area of Penns but I guess you never know.

 

[Dave_W]

jifigz wrote:

Mwheaps32 wrote:
I saw on another Pa based fishing forum where a flat head was caught several miles upstream in Penn's creek.

Do you know roughly where that flathead was caught? I can't really see them causing much damage to the good trout fishing area of Penns but I guess you never know.

I'm curious about this too.

When FH appear in a river, they're in the entire connected watershed (in theory). I've long assumed that they would move up into tribs and occupy the typical areas where we already get channel cats (channel cats migrate up and down some of the local creeks I fish).

However, I'm not hearing about FH being caught well up into small or even medium sized tribs of the Susky. This report on Penns suggests several miles (internet rumor?). It may just be that FH are still expanding and doing so by moving more up the Susky River itself and only occasionally up tribs the size of Penns(?) You don't hear much about FH getting caught in tribs or trout streams in western PA in their native range.

It may be that these are just fish that prefer rivers of a certain size and that a few outlier fish may show up in tribs (like this one in Penns), but few of them.