Murder at Stans Pool

[wetnet]

I'm hard pressed to believe that people keep big fish just because they love to eat trout. I'd hope that maybe with the send a picture in where they can do a mount without the fish might help. You get a great fish on the wall if that's your thing and you have the opportunity to catch it again. My son has 4 fish on his wall. One Brook, one brown, one ranbow and one golden rainbow. He caught them when he was between 14 and 15 years old. If you asked him now if he had the choice to mount each fish again or catch it again you can probably guess the answer.

 

[riverwhy]

So would the locals object more to restrictions on fishing bait or to making it catch and release? I think you need to take their perpspective into account both because it is the right thing to do and because I don't want to get my head bashed by someone who is resentful of my type of fishing.

One thing to consider on Penn's is the fact that the fish become more concentrated as the water warms.

I think that I would be more inclined to make it artificials only
barbless hooks and allow the current harvest(or maybe a slot). That way you could keep a fish that is injured and not feel guilty either about creeling him or having to turn him back for the coons. It may actually have less effect on the population than the current regs. I can't remember how the TT regs compared to the catch and release downstream but even with the data it is tough to compare given the known migrations that occur virtually every summer.

Another thing to think about is the enforcibility of the regs. I for one have never seen a single WCO on Penn's and I have logged many hours there over the years. Perhaps, given the realities it is fine the way it is. Certainly, I have had some good fishing over the years on Penn's and it has rarely disappointed me, even after drought years. While I don't catch a ton of fish I always see plenty.

Jay P

 

[sundrunk]

My whole thing is I don't want to pay for it, period. Those who want to argue the merits of bait fishing are free to do so; just don't pentilize me in the process, with over priced fishing license's and trout stamps. Those fee's go, mostly, to the hatcherys, so they can make more fish. I agree with Trever, If a stream supports a wild trout population C&R rules should apply. There are plenty of stocked streams for harvest fisherman to practise their art on; it doesn't have to be an either or thing.

Most C&R fisherman I know will pick up trash around rivers and streams when the see it; they care about the enviorment, It's a mentality thing. You can break down the 80-20 rule, 20% care about wild fish and the enviorment, 80% don't...This rule applies to more then just fishing unfortunetly, this is why our speices is such a mess...In the end we're all just a bunch of misfits...

 

[Mike]

Well, LR as Jack M has pointed out there is a more than adequate number of 14"+ trout in the trophy trout stretch.

Those who want C&R have a place to fish downstream.

IMO it would be a mistake to "experiment," as you suggested above, with C&R in the present trophy trout area. I would anticipate that some anglers who prefer C&R and think it is necessary no matter what would not easily allow the results to dictate the stream's management unless, of course, the results "said" that the stream should be C&R. Additionally, flip-flopping regs on a body of water every few years is appreciated by few people other than biologists.

 

[LehighRegular]

Hey Mike

If Jack's numbers are correct, which I don't doubt..... who says its "adequate"....can it be "BETTER" with a larger population of big wild trout (>14").... can the population be doubled? can it be increased incrementally? Can the population of fish in the 18-20 in. range be increased significantly to make a more attractive and enjoyable fishery.

I hope I don't misinterpret your "tone", but I find your response less than adequate coming from our PFBC. Again, the approach of "it is what it is".

Hypothetically, speaking, If it was possible to double or triple the population of large wild trout (16-20" in Penns by placing the 7 miles in C&R ALO, how many anlgers would be in favor of that?

My second and probably biggest issue with the TT stretch not being C&R is that during summer months, this area is a thermal refuge for the trout in the C&R area and lower reaches. THese types of areas need to be protected.

Also, Jack #s are only "angling" related mortalities. THere is no account of natural mortality (Heron, Eagles, Osprey, Otter, Mink, etc) and don't forget drought condition mortality too. SO, his #s are a bit skewed.

 

[riverwhy]

Some questions regarding the data and the application to Penn's Creek:

When were the drought years?

How do the approximate fish sizes correspond to age?

Were the studies all done in June (early, mid, late?)and at the exact same location?

How is the structure chosen? Riffles vs flats vs. holes? Was this kept consistent across the years. I bet if the temps were warm some had started migrations already and or moved to the areas with most oxygen.

Does sampling sites show a bias toward smaller fish or bigger fish holding areas?

Why is their no category for fish over 18 inches?


Why are there so few fish over 15?

Could good years in this section reflect high heat and the fact that the downsteam fish have moved up?

Do most/all fish in the C&R stop around swift run, or Poe, or even move further up to Inglby? Do some fish move downstream in search of Cold water or is it always up?

Jay P.

 

[littlejuniata]

All you need to do is look at Spruce Creek, Colerain section, all actch and release reulted in stunted fish.

 

[vcregular]

Here is the Penns data showing estimated number per hectare in Sec 3 (14-inch kill size) and Sec 4 (C&R).

Year 1995 was the first year for the TT regulation in Sec 3. In general, Sec 3 had more trout, except those of the (14") kill size and larger, than Sec 4. Maybe it has better habitat; I know it has cooler water in summer than Sec 4.

Unfortunately I don't have any more recent data.

 

[vcregular]

Riverwhy:

2001 and 2002 I think were drought years - - though I am not certain. For the most part each sampling for either section is done at the same place. For instance the sampling site for Sec 4 (C&R area) is done at the PFBC cabin above Cherry Run. Samplings are usually done June/July time frame, and yes water temps definitely effect sampling returns.

You ask some really good questions that I don't think anyone can answer for sure - - except for maybe the PFBC. I've always said an interesting project on Penns and other large rivers in the state with a migratory trout population would be some sort of radio telemetry study. If nothing else it would provide some good insight on how exactly trout use the watershed.