New Class A Surveys

It's a very good thing to get this in the NY Times.
 
About three times per year I have been receiving tips from anglers either via pm's , office emails, or telephone calls regarding the locations of wild trout streams of which I may not have been aware. Those contacts have been appreciated and, in most cases have led to stream surveys being conducted. One survey this year revealed that the previously unknown stream (to me) supported a Class A population. When anglers have speculated that wild trout are present, the results have not been very fruitful.
 
So it would seem anglers suggest a survey without actually fishing there themselves previously?
 
Mike wrote:
About three times per year I have been receiving tips from anglers either via pm's , office emails, or telephone calls regarding the locations of wild trout streams of which I may not have been aware. Those contacts have been appreciated and, in most cases have led to stream surveys being conducted. One survey this year revealed that the previously unknown stream (to me) supported a Class A population. When anglers have speculated that wild trout are present, the results have not been very fruitful.

My take away is a couple of positives:

1. If the PFBC is doing it's job it should not be easy to find streams that are not on their list.

2. Some anglers are sending in reports to the PFBC on streams they think might qualify for inclusion.

3. PFBC seems to be acting on the tips leading to additional surveys and in some cases additions to the list.
 
PennKev: "So it would seem anglers suggest a survey without actually fishing there themselves previously?"

Mike: Yes, that has been a rare case, but it happens. That's why we may seem a little critical of suggestions by asking a few probing questions when anglers volunteer supposed wild trout waters (unless, of course, we already know the angler). Wild goose chases can be expensive and take us away from the time we would have spent on better prospects. Time=money=license dollars.


 
1. If the PFBC is doing it's job it should not be easy to find streams that are not on their list.

OUCH! Hey, it's a big state and a small staff, plus finding them and doing a survey are not all that are required. Report writing is required as well, and that limits how many streams can be "found" in a year.
 
Mike wrote:
1. If the PFBC is doing it's job it should not be easy to find streams that are not on their list.

OUCH! Hey, it's a big state and a small staff, plus finding them and doing a survey are not all that are required. Report writing is required as well, and that limits how many streams can be "found" in a year.

I'm sorry Mike. That was meant as a compliment. Streams that qualify for the list but have been missed are rather hard to find. I appreciate the job you guys are doing.
 
Franklin, no problem and thanks for the clarification.
 
All the more reason for all anglers to contact PFBC biologists, if they find a stream that has trout in it. All trout streams need the protection of DEP Regs.
 
Chaz wrote:
All the more reason for all anglers to contact PFBC biologists, if they find a stream that has trout in it. All trout streams need the protection of DEP Regs.

Dear Chaz,

Not trying to pick nits, but didn't you mean to say that all streams need the protection of DEP regs? ;-)

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)
 
Mike, I only have one question regarding the Class A list. When is the PFBC going to place the class A surveyed section of Martins Creek on the list? This section is already unstocked and has been surveyed twice in seperate years and each time it exceeded the Class A standards for wild trout. Both times my chapter was told it would be listed and when that didnt happen we were told it was just a mistake and it would be corrected.
 
I'm all for supporting wild trout and class A streams . But I think the Smallie needs more protection these days especially in the Se
 
Tim, Well no that's not what I meant, but I maybe should have been thinking along those lines.
 
Back
Top