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


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 ... 10 11 12 (13) 14 15 »


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/11 18:42
From Manheim, PA
Posts: 412
Offline
Quote:
Jay L wrote:
The question I have is whether the WBTEP has increased pressure to that magnitude on the streams in question. As usual, I'm skeptical that the numbers used here are realistic, but that's just in my nature I guess.


Jay,

This is just my one personal experience and example. I used to fish Lyman Run in Potter alot with my father and Sal before the WBTE reg. I would hardly see anyone fishing above the dam. (above is not stocked, below is).
After the reg, the last 1/2 dozen times there, it was hard to find a spot to park far enough away from anyone. In those time I saw only 1 smallish brookie. I used to catch a decent amout on an outing.
I don't fish Kettle a ton but I hardly ever catch brooks while there. Mostly browns and bows.
Little Kettle I fish more and usually do 50/50 with brooks and browns. I don't think that one has been too hurt.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 7:43
_________________
I can spell Leprechaun. Some idiots can't and have to practice.
I PREFER BROOK TROUT so SMB!


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/9/10 16:07
From Pine Grove
Posts: 2412
Online
Eric, when were the regs put in place on Lyman? Bruno, Ryanh and myself hit it at the '07 jam and while I caught less than I would at a comparable stream around here we did pretty well including one in the 9ish range and a missed take on my behalf that was much larger. You are right about the number of people fishing it, though. For a tiny stream we passed several a full spot before we could park. I was guessing by the number of cars there must have been hordes of giant trout, though there obviously weren't. In fact if I remember correctly, Sal and Dan said they were up that weekend, so you may have been part of the crowd we saw and vice versa.

Boyer

Posted on: 2009/7/1 8:01


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13361
Online
JackM,

I think the browns in more fertile water thing is questionable too. As was said, browns and brookies both grow larger, quicker, in more fertile waters. Also, browns tend to be larger than brookies even in the same waters. If you take out the limestoners, there are still more special regulations, by percentage of total, on brown trout streams than brook trout streams.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 8:07


Re: "wild" rainbows
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22144
Offline
A stream does not have to be a "limestoner" to be fertile. Brookies I think are as capable of growing large quickly as are browns, stream fertility being equal. I have never read anything authoritative to the contrary. It just so happens that the more fertile waters tend to be dominated by brown in PA.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 8:20
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat it, and I just hate them. --Hank


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13361
Online
Quote:
A stream does not have to be a "limestoner" to be fertile.


True, but if limestoners are excluded, I think brookies inhabit as many fertile streams as do browns. Other stream characteristics (such as cover, gradient, etc.) and water temperature seem to play a bigger role than water chemistry on what species of trout will be present. For instance, its very common to have brookies in the headwaters transitioning to wild browns farther down. I've seen it backwards too, more browns farther up and more brookies downstream. There's also the odd brown in almost every brookie stream I know of, maybe 1% of the trout population.

Quote:
Brookies I think are as capable of growing large quickly as are browns, stream fertility being equal.


I don't think thats true. For instance, in BFC, I've yet to see a brookie I honestly thought was better than 13". I've caught and seen many browns considerably larger than that in the same stretch of water. And in all the situations of my previous paragraph, browns average much larger. In fact, I don't know of a single stream that holds both browns and brookies where the browns don't average larger.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 8:55


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/11 18:42
From Manheim, PA
Posts: 412
Offline
Matt,
I believe '05 or '06 was the first year. Don't quote me on that. I remember being there in '04 with my father and it wasn't WBTE then.
The last time I was there was last year and it was car after car after car in every pulloff. I just turned around and went to Little Kettle and did my usual here, decent. My wife caught a nice 14" wild brown that day. She also caught a 16" stocked bow by the bridge at Kettle. That was the highlight of the day though. Watching her pull those out on her fly rod.

I remember that weekend Dan and Brian went up. I however was not there that weekend. My wife and I had a trip planned elsewhere.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 9:05
_________________
I can spell Leprechaun. Some idiots can't and have to practice.
I PREFER BROOK TROUT so SMB!


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 18124
Offline
Quote:

JackM wrote:
A stream does not have to be a "limestoner" to be fertile. Brookies I think are as capable of growing large quickly as are browns, stream fertility being equal. I have never read anything authoritative to the contrary. It just so happens that the more fertile waters tend to be dominated by brown in PA.


Hows this for contrary.

World record brook trout: 14 lb, 8 oz. (1916)
World record brown trout: 40 lb 4 oz. (1992)

The brown trout record might not be up to date, but you should see the point. As a side note, the top brown was from an introduced and totally artificial fishery.

Given the same water, brown trout most certainly do have the ability to grow faster and larger.

What you appear to be saying is that Pink Salmon are capable of growing as large as Chinook. Skipjack are as capable of growing as fast and large as bluefin. etc. etc. and apparently it isn't just me who sees it that way, so don't give me that crap about responding to what I think you are saying. I am responding to what you are actually saying. Surely you know better.

They are different species. "Stream fertility being equal" and assuming both can survive in the given environment, brown trout grow larger. That is how they displace brook trout which are after the same food sources. That is until the brook trout become the food source for the larger browns. Well that, and the fact that European implants have inplanted brown trout continuously for over 100 years to help them out.

It is not uncommon for an exotic introduced "species" to displace a native species. Look at how many birds and plants have become extinct in Hawaii. Another good example is white man in this continent. OK, that isn't a different species, but it is still a valid point. One population displacing another by out competing it.

The same thing has happened in PA in the larger and higher PH streams. Brooks and browns both do better in more fertile environments, but the browns simply grow bigger in any environment where they both survive thus displacing the brook trout. It is true that brook trout do "better" than browns in some environments in PA, but unfortunately those environments are less fertile, so the remnants tend to be smaller than what is shown in historical record.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 9:31
_________________
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" rainbows
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22144
Offline
Quote:

FarmerDave wrote:
What you appear to be saying is that Pink Salmon are capable of growing as large as Chinook. Skipjack are as capable of growing as fast and large as bluefin. etc. etc. and apparently it isn't just me who sees it that way, so don't give me that crap about responding to what I think you are saying. I am responding to what you are actually saying. Surely you know better.


Your imagination is the only explanation for why I appear to you to be saying anything whatsoever about Pink Salmon, Chinook, Skipjack, bluefin and either of etc. or etc. I made a statement about wild brown trout and wild brook trout in the context of Pennsylvania flowing water. While I didn't reiterate that context, anyone truly trying to deal with my statement would have taken it in that context. In addition, as I stated, I have not read anything authoritative to the contrary and that still hold true. I am willing to reconsider my belief if and when something authoritative to the contrary is brought to my attention.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 9:40
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat it, and I just hate them. --Hank


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/11 18:42
From Manheim, PA
Posts: 412
Offline
Quote:
Quote:
Brookies I think are as capable of growing large quickly as are browns, stream fertility being equal.


Quote:
I don't think thats true.


I also believe this to not be the case.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 9:58
_________________
I can spell Leprechaun. Some idiots can't and have to practice.
I PREFER BROOK TROUT so SMB!


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 18124
Offline
Quote:


Your imagination is the only explanation for why I appear to you to be saying anything whatsoever about Pink Salmon, Chinook, Skipjack, bluefin and either of etc. or etc. I made a statement about wild brown trout and wild brook trout in the context of Pennsylvania flowing water. While I didn't reiterate that context, anyone truly trying to deal with my statement would have taken it in that context. In addition, as I stated, I have not read anything authoritative to the contrary and that still hold true. I am willing to reconsider my belief if and when something authoritative to the contrary is brought to my attention.


I took it in context. If i made a false assumption, it was that you just wrote it poorly. that is why I didn't say anything initially. But others picked up on it.

The choices were that, or that you really don't know what you are talking about on this.

But hey, if you think this is all my fault, I'm fine with that.

In water where both can survive. Brown trout grow bigger. It is in their genetics, just like the other examples I gave.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 9:59
_________________
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" rainbows

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13361
Online
PA fish commission website:

http://www.fish.state.pa.us/pafish/fishhtms/chap16.htm

Brown Trout: Wild brown trout in infertile streams may grow only slightly larger than the brook trout there. But in more fertile streams brown trout that weigh a pound are common. A brown trout over 10 pounds is a trophy. Brown trout may exceed 30 inches in length. The state record is nearly 18 pounds.

Brook Trout: At maturity, wild brook trout may be from five inches to 18 inches long, according to the availability of food in the home stream.

This proves Jack wrong. Even in infertile streams, browns grow "only slightly larger" than brookies, which is still larger. I personally find that questionable, as many of the trophy browns I've seen come from infertile streams, they feed on the brookies. But in fertile streams, browns have a much, much bigger high end, brookies max out at about 18 inches and browns around 30 inches.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 10:13


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 18124
Offline
the message in question.

Quote:

JackM wrote:
Wild brown trout streams are generally more fertile than their brook trout counter-parts. Hence the consequential truth that wild brown trout tend to be larger or grow to large sizes sooner. These are the types of streams where harvest regulations can assist in maintaining stronger populations of catchable trout. Catchable trout means trout over 7 inches. Most brookie waters would not be improved in this aspect by special regulations. I believe it has been suggested by studies that harvest is NOT the limiting factor in population density or size distribution in the relatively infertile waters where brook trout have their stronghold.

I consider the above line of reasoning to be a likely explanation for why more brown trout streams have special regulations. Simply put, the fishery managers, with judgment unclouded by a preference for one species over another, are applying the regulations to the streams which can most benefit by them.

In addition, since we all know these regulations are primarily social, the truth is that wild brown trout streams tend to be more popular-- not because of a preference for brown trout per se, but more likely because of a preference for catchable trout.


I didn't have a problem with what i felt you meant which is why I didn't respond, but you certainly were not clear. If so, why are so many questioning it?

That first paragraph is not entirely correct as written.

But hey, it's my fault.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 10:15
_________________
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" rainbows
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 8869
Offline
FYI from the link below:

"The brown trout is able to live and grow in warmer waters than other native trout species, such as the brook trout. As such, the brown trout has been able to establish itself in many areas in which brook trout cannot exist or where warmer waters exist. Given changes temperatures and climate change, it will be interesting to understand what implications, if any, this has on the changing trout species in a given area. The brown trout also grows faster and can be bigger than native species, such as the brook trout. Therefore, in certain areas, brown trout can outcompete brook trout and other native species.

Because brown trout is more adaptable than brook trout, in some areas, they are considered to outcompete native trout species. Brown trout has been cited as reducing native species through predation. It also displaces other species and contributes to increased competition for food. There have been several studies that have analyzed the impact of brown trout on other trout species, specifically the brook and golden trout. While juvenile brook trout can outcompete brown trout, there is significant evidence of brown trout displacing adult brook trout as the competition between the species changes over the lifetime of the fish".....

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/cerc/dano ... spp_summ/Salmo_trutta.htm

Posted on: 2009/7/1 10:16


Re: "wild" rainbows

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 18124
Offline
Pcray, Technically, Jack only said they grow fast. He didn't say they grow "as" fast. So, as long as you don't try to put that in the same context as what started this, that message was actually accurate.

But hey, it is my fault.

my bad. sorry...

Posted on: 2009/7/1 10:20
_________________
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" rainbows
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22144
Offline
Quote:

afishinado wrote:
FYI from the link below:

"....The brown trout also grows faster and can be bigger than native species, such as the brook trout. Therefore, in certain areas, brown trout can outcompete brook trout and other native species.....

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/cerc/dano ... spp_summ/Salmo_trutta.htm


Well, now we are getting somewhere. This at least says something contrary to what I have said and appears to be authoritative.

My undertanding is that up to the time of sexual maturity, the two species do NOT show a significant difference in growth rate. I also have not seen anything suggesting that growth rate as a percentage of weight (that is, percentage increase rather than raw length increase) differs after sexual maturity. What is firmly established is that brook trout attain sexual maturity a year sooner than brown trout and that spawning negatively effects growth. Thus, brown trout have an extra year of growth before spawning activity intervenes as a negative impact.

As I say, I am not beyond believing the bolded statement suggested by the article shared by afishinado, but I remain curious whether the author's statement is refering to an absolute difference in growth rate between the species or the difference that is the direct effect of sexual maturity factor.

Either way, it does show that my statement was incorrect regarding the two species growing at equal rates over the same period of time.

Posted on: 2009/7/1 10:52
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat it, and I just hate them. --Hank



« 1 ... 10 11 12 (13) 14 15 »



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