Fryin' up wild browns

[troutbert]

The_Sasquatch wrote:
We just got pcrayed! OT pcrayed!

Back on topic, if BT have existed in NCPA since the early 20th century (which I'm not arguing), then I wonder by what measure the state used to designate Lyman and Kettle a "WBTE" stream.

Some of the streams chosen for WBTE regs are all brookie streams, and some are streams that have a lot of brookies, but also some browns.

I think it was reasonable to try some examples of both, to see what happens on both.

Whether Lyman Run was a particularly good choice, I'm not sure. The stream was already under special regs before the WBTE regs.

 

[wildtrout2]

I think taking a wild brown from a mainly brookie stream is a good thing. Other than small feeder streams, I've only encountered a couple of brookie only streams anyway. I have kept 2 wild brown trout and they are both on my wall (18"/19"). I have never intentionally killed a a native brook, I never will. Those bigger browns can and will play hell on small natives, so I say keep the big ones. Here's one of those two.

 

[RLeeP]

>>They picked a few that were publicly accessible, capable of growing good fish and providing an overall good experience, yet not class A. And they put signs up.>>

That may be true of the majority of the streams being managed under the WBTE program (Minister, etc.), but I'm pretty certain it is not true of Sec 02 of Lyman, the section under discussion here. It has been on the Class A list for as long as there has been a Class A list, that is, from the conclusion of Operation Future in the early 80's to the present.

In any event, "they" (whoever they are...) can encourage all the selective harvest of browns they want from the WBTE section of Lyman, it almost certainly won't do much to change the percentage composition by species of the trout in the stream section.

I've never seen one of these Affirmative Action programs for brook trout at the expense of browns ever achieve its goal. One reason for this is that once you put a stream section under special regs, you immediately draw a much higher percentage of anglers who simply will not harvest any fish at all, regardless of species.

That's just been my observation, at any rate..

 

[k-bob]

WBTEP regs may have been created due to controversy over whether harvest is reducing the number of bigger brookies on small PA freestone streams. I have read that fish biologists were skeptical that this cropping was a significant problem.

When I started fishing, I kinda bought the argument that brookie streams are rare, and I went to the special-reg brookie streams, that is WBTEP across the state, so I could find some rare brookies. IMHO, they range from ridiculous to sublime

Now I realize that there are many streams with brookies, and if they are small, remote, and/or overgrown, they probably dont really have the bigger fish cropped off. Still may not be many bigger brookies, due to habitat. Shrug.

(true story ... I walk in to a fly shop NE PA when I started and ask about streams with wild brook trout. guy says "this is not the 19th century." OK, I get confused about whther it's the 20th or 21st or whatever, but I knew that. At the time, I thought he just didnt know me and would not tell. Now I think that not so many guys fish for brookies, he really might not have known many streams)

imho, habitat is a better predictor of numbers of bigger brookies than harvest, from the least known to best known brookie streams.

So if you work really hard to get on a stream two miles from a road, no trails to speak of, there may be bigger brookies if the habitat supports them. Stream with average habitat in the middle of nowhere will have only average fish. Stream with decent habitat and reasonable access will often have more biggish brookies. Habitat > harvest. I am not really chasing bigger brookies, dont really care.

Sure, I still believe that cropping theoretically can reduce the number of bigger brookies in a small stream. I seldom post stream names here, I dont like to fish behind people and in some cases I was given leads that I should not publicize. I dont really like it if I tell someone about an off-the-radar stream and they ID it on the internet, either.

But practcially speaking, there are so many small streams with brookies in say NE PA, and not that many people who fish them. There may be cropping on a few better known streams partcularly at nice big or deep pools with easier access. Shrug. A WBTEP listing might lead to more of this. Be careful what you wish for?

Biggest wild brook trout I ever caught was in a stream with good habitat but brutal hiking and climbing, right by a highway

With some hiking and map scouring, you can fish brookie streams where you'd be very surprised to run into another fishermen on the nicest weekend of the year.

 

[k-bob]

btw I would rather not have some of my favorite streams go WBTEP... I am not too concerned about cropping and it'd just make it more likely that I fish behind someone..

 

[k-bob]

pat how fast can you type?

 

[pcray1231]

pat how fast can you type?

haha. About 100 words per minute on the typing test thingies. Obviously reality is slower than that, as your formulating actual thoughts rather than just transcribing.

 

[Foxgap239]

I will say this, I have only about 6 months under my belt as a brookie snub but in those 6 months I've fished quite a few brook trout streams, some class A, some wild repro and some neither. I have only 1 wild brookie in that time at 10" (maybe, I may have stretched him a bit to get the 10) so by my experience I think they are rare. Although we did see a few larger fish spawning this year and the biggest wild brookie I ever caught was in late October during spawning season. I think it is fair to say I have only fished freestone streams which most are not full of food which even at 3 or 4 years old doesn't allow brookie's to get large. Some of these streams have so many brookies that you feel you can walk on them so now you have all that competition for no where near limestone water food sources.

Just the humble opinion of a brookie rookie.

 

[k-bob]

"freestone streams which most are not full of food which even at 3 or 4 years old doesn't allow brookie's to get large"

right, that's the vast majority of PA streams with wild brookies. there are brookies not browns due to acidity and extra cold water, and the a poor food supply due to acidity

so it's habitat not harvest that makes most PA brookie streams have small fish

with less acidity and w/o supercold water, there'd be bigger fish: brown trout

 

[k-bob]

WBTEP every stream in the state and it wouldn't make much difference imho...

 

[FarmerDave]

bikerfish wrote:
I think the more important question is "how are we gonna cook them?"!!!!!!!!

I prefer them stuffed with my wife's homemade crab meat stuffing because then they taste exactly like my wife's homemade crabmeat stuffing.

As table fare, brown trout do kind of suck. IMO of course. But it has been a long time since I had wild brown trout so I could be wrong.

 

[k-bob]

if brown trout tasted good and I caught a big one on a stream that's almost all brookies I'd make sandwiches.

another brown would show up of course

 

[Hook_Jaw]

Damn that sounds good farmer dave I could eat that for breakfast. lol

 

[k-bob]

It's the 4H model of looking for bigger PA freestone brookies: "Habitat Helps more than Harvest Hurts." sing along

Habitat Helps more than Harvest Hurts!
A few are fried
it can't be denied
but pools still rule
in the bigger brookie sweepstakes

Habitat Helps more than Harvest Hurts!
you may hike all day
your skin my flay
but with no holes
the brookies look like tastykakes

 

[k-bob]

ok, so I am k-bob, and not bob "the sun isn't yellow, it's chicken" dylan. to paraphrase him:

"the brookies aren't eaten, they're starving" eeeaaayyooouuuh/ harmonica blast

 

[pcray1231]

I have only about 6 months under my belt as a brookie snub but in those 6 months I've fished quite a few brook trout streams, some class A, some wild repro and some neither. I have only 1 wild brookie in that time at 10" (maybe, I may have stretched him a bit to get the 10)

Yeah,

a 7 incher is a "solid" but common, you get a few on most outings. There are certain streams where they are no better than average.

a 9 incher is "good" and semi-common. They make you happy for sure, but you can expect a couple per year.

10+ is getting rare, the fish of a season, often you only get one every few years.

11 or 12 is the fish of a decade at least, maybe a lifetime. It's a trophy. But they do exist, and there's plenty enough evidence to support this.

13+ are ghosts. Like the PA mountain lion, I won't say there aren't ANY out there. But nobody seems able to prove it. When one does pop up, there are almost always special circumstances. Like limestone, large lake or river, somebody feeding it, a mis-identified stockie, etc. I have never seen an honest to goodness account of a small freestone headwater stream producing one.

So Fox, put yourself in this context. After 6 months, having 1 10ish incher, you're doing just fine. It's been 2 years since I've caught a 10 incher, something I need to change.

 

[k-bob]

I doubt ive caught a wild brookie more than a foot.

I almost always fish dry flies, just what I like to do. Im not particularly interested in fishing above impoundments or reservoirs, or casting nymphs etc, clearly thats the way to look for bigger fish. Or walking streams when fish are spawning to figure out if there really are bigger brookies in a particular stream.

 

[Swattie87]

I pretty much agree with pcray’s breakdown on the relative frequency of catching large Brookies in the sizes he describes. This mirrors my experience for the most part…assuming you’re talking about small, headwater freestoners that is.

pcray - I’m sure you’ve seen this fish before as you commented in the original thread. As is always the case, there is no way to be 100% certain, but the general consensus at the time in the original thread was that this was a wild fish. I still believe it to be…13“ female in winter color tones (it was caught subsurface in February 2012). Caught from a small, headwater, first order unstocked freestoner. She came from the biggest, deepest, and best hole habitat wise (huge submerged boulders) on the stream. A hole that I didn’t catch a single fish from in the previous two years. Sadly I have caught several different 7 or 8 inchers out of this hole since…hopefully one of them is now growing into the next 13 incher in this prime hole.

 

[pcray1231]

Swattie, just on the pic alone, I'd be a slight lean toward wild. Maybe 60% sure. About the only things I see are fin condition and the white/black line thing. There's nothing else on it that I can see which I'd take to be a decent indicator either way. Nothing else screams stocky, nothing screams wild.

If it were 6" instead of low teens, I'd be more certain, but fish of this size always demands a healthy amount of skepticism. Especially with the lack of color.

Combined with the background, I'd increase my confidence to maybe 80%. That's a heck of a fish!

And I have no recollection of how I answered before? Was I consistent?

 

[Swattie87]

pcray1231 wrote:
And I have no recollection of how I answered before? Was I consistent?

Pretty much...I think you just said it was a "nice fish." Played right down the middle my friend! ;-)

I'm more or less in the same neighborhood. Knowing the exact specifics of the situation, I was in the 90% neighborhood in my OP. The color tone is part of what keeps me shy of 100% but I've seen many other Brookies in this watershed with a silvery Winter tone. Enough even that I'd call it normal for this area. Plus I suspect it's a female. Simply put, size is the biggest question mark for this fish...like every other fish in the 10"+ discussions. Not that many grow that big, so the ones that do will always be questionable to varying degrees.