DH Area considerations (partial)

[Mike]

Under "Special Reg Waters?" Afishinado has provided the opportunity to gain insight into SOME of the thinking that goes into the establishment of DH Areas. The discussion is not meant to be all inclusive; it is just one example. If you are interested, you must scroll down in the thread to find the rebirth of that discussion. While the discussion is water-specific (Hay Ck, with a little French Ck thrown in), the overall theme is not and can be applied elsewhere. Nevertheless, each situation is a little different so there are various considerations in each case that may not apply to the next, i.e. Pine Ck. Some things are consistent, however, and you'll find that establishing a DH Area is not simply a case of just going out there and saying this stream is going to have a DH Area or is physically suitable for a DH area and, therefore, it will have one. Ask Maurice. I am sure he can expand on this Re: access, land ownership, posting, parking,etc.

 

[ryanh]

Here's an idea that should make everyone happy. All trout should be stocked with in 1/4 mile of the road. All water that is > 1/4 mile away from the road will be catch and release or at least delayed harvest.

The state could focus their fish. All that bait chuckers could limit out. All of the trash would be localized. And if you wanted to walk there would be viable fisheries just round the bend. Sounds too good to be true but....

Here's a lesson I learned at the Smokies. We went looking for Brookies. We probably hiked 3 to 3.5 miles up. There were fish everywhere. I mean everywhere. We fished lower down on the stream and there were fish but #1 not as many, and #2 way more educated.

I stoped in to the Tremont Institute (the Environmental Research center down there) and the guy told me that I was the only "tourist" who has ever reported fishing that far up the stream.
This guy knows the park and the fish. Lesson learned. Walk = trout.

 

[Wulff-Man]

afishinado wrote (in the "Special Reg Waters?" thread):
Mike..... I suppose my/our viewpoint on special regulation areas are in the minority. Thinking about it further, if majority ruled in PA with respect to special fishing regulation areas, than I suppose there would be few if none in the State. It does appear that you do see the need for more special regulation areas in the highly populated southeast region.

I think it's kind of odd to look at SR areas as being not very popular, considering the amount of usage they get for long periods of the fishing season. When the crowds die out a couple of weeks after the season opener in the ATWs you will still find them on the SR sections for several months, and then in the fall again. There are those on this board who cringe at the thought of some streams getting SRs because of the attention that it would bring to some of their favorite streams. Someone recently posted about the changes on Pine Creek, saying that landowners are complaining about the crowds since they went to DHALO. I guess this still doesn't mean that the majority of anglers want them, but if you're looking at angling-hours as a measurement of popularity instead of total number of anglers, it would be a different story. Then again, license revenue is based on numbers sold, not numbers of hours fished, so I can understand that the PFBC has to keep the largest numbers of anglers happy. But even the PFBC has studied and publicized the increasing popularity of catch-and-release, even among the opening day crowd, so maybe it wouldn't be a monumental battle to sell DHALO. But you still have opposition from the bait anglers, and from what JayL said, they are in a VAST majority at Hay creek. And those Berks County Dutchies can be the most stubborn people in the world (this from a born Lancaster County Dutchie).

So Mike, I guess what I end up with is that you have a very tough job in trying to satisfy as many people as possible and balancing that with using the resource as best you can. But I do think that SRs are popular to a greater extent than they are available in the area, and I think they will become more popular in the future. The 4 miles on the Tully doesn’t seem to be all that much, considering the number of miles of trout water in Berks. I'm really surprised that it's been determined that French Creek doesn't get enough usage in the Fall to merit a stocking. From my perspective as a year-round angler, it's a loss of another stream to fish after the beginning of the season. I also think that it's better not to repair Rt. 82 along Hay Creek, as a member of the segment of the angling public who prefers to hike a little to get away from the crowds and to hopefully find more fish to catch.

Afishinado, it looks like the only way to address your observations on Hay may be to post those educational signs about wild trout and hope for the best.

Mike, thanks for taking the time to discuss this with us and to give us the benefit of your knowledge on the subject.

 

[RRR]

Speaking of utilization, I am not sure I am correct about this but wasn't part of the reasoning behind the discontinuation of stocking fingerlings on the Tully because the resource was underutilized? If that was true, it may well have been due to the fact that by the time the fingerlings grew to reasonable size they were extremely well educated and the average fisherman had trouble catching them so they would give up. It certainly wasn"t because there weren"t enough fish in the stream. When a hatch or spinner fall occured it used to look like it was raining marbles there were so many fish rising. Went up there yesterday and Thank God the plan has worked. I rode the entire length of the Spec. Regs. area before I could find a place to park. Utilization is definitely up. However,I never saw an adult size fish rise the whole time I was there. And yes, they are super easy to catch. All I had to do was tie on a B.H. Wooley Bugger and hang on. Caught 14 in abouy 2 hrs. One thing I will say, they were very nice size with the majority being in the 12 in. range. This kind of catch rate would never have happened with the fingerlings on a Wooley Bugger. I am very happy to report that I saw a good number of fingerlings surface feeding (about a dozen) so even though they didn't stock many of these jewels, the ones they did stock seem to be thriving and acting the way a trout is supposed to.

 

[afishinado]

RRR,

The reason given for not stocking fingerlings in the Tully was not underutiliztion of the stream, or survival of the fingerlings. Adult fish are now stocked because of thr recent practice of stocking larger fish, the PFBC ties up more space in the hatchies, holding some fish longer to grow to a larger size. The fingerling program had to be curtailed because of lack of space at the hatcheries.

The last word I heard is that the PFBC will stock some smaller trout (not necessarily fingerlings) in the lower part of the Tully SR area in the fall. These fish will be subtracted from the amount of fish scheduled to be stocked in the spring. That's my understanding anyway.

 

[Wulff-Man]

The reason given actually was that the fingerlings didn't do well. Now, I'm saying this was the reason GIVEN. I don't know if there are other factors involved, like the hatchery utilization issue, which I believe Mike told us about while explaining some of the problems they are now running up against. I don't think anyone could say that the Tully was ever underutilized! It looks like now it is being utilized to the extent that the PFBC would see as a great success, but which I see as a negative thing. But that's my problem, I guess.

 

[afishinado]

Mike,

Given the fact that fishing license sales (revenue for the PFBC) is on the decline, and costs for maintaining and operating the hatcheries continue to escalate, we can assume that the amount of trout that can be stocked has and will continue to be cut. The solution would seem to be for one, creating more C&R and DH areas to stretch the amount of fish available to anglers, and secondly, to restrict stocking in streams which contain, and have the availability to sustain wild trout.

I see no other answer since this appears to me to be the economic reality, and the solutions seem to be the only logical course of action. The people on this board and other similar boards and organizations would likely be you ally in trying to sell this to the rest of the PA angling community.