NO MORE STOCKING!!!!!

I'll put it into the perspective of someone who doesn't live very close to any wild trout streams in PA.

I wouldn't have gotten into fly fishing, and if stocking stopped, it would be very difficult for me to keep up with it. I can hit exactly 1 stream in about an hour drive that has wild fish. My fishing would be cut down to about 25% at the most and I would probably give up trout fishing minus a few outings every year. That would suck.

Why do we "fly fishermen" always feel so priveliged? I know some fantastic bait anglers who catch and release, and are very talented. Also know that my kids wouldn't be able to trout fish for several years until they could handle a fly rod. We don't always like them, but what gives us the right to say that someone who fishes 1-2 weekends a year isn't allowed to do so any more. I see 1 Penguin game in person about every 2 years. Does that make me less of a fan? The high horse is a dangerous place to be because it's a bigger fall.
 
I'm all for stocking streams that cannot support naturally reproducing trout. But we stock many miles of streams that have good populations of wild trout and would be much better if they weren't being stocked and plundered every spring.
 
ryguyfi wrote:

Why do we "fly fishermen" always feel so priveliged? I know some fantastic bait anglers who catch and release, and are very talented. Also know that my kids wouldn't be able to trout fish for several years until they could handle a fly rod. We don't always like them, but what gives us the right to say that someone who fishes 1-2 weekends a year isn't allowed to do so any more. I see 1 Penguin game in person about every 2 years. Does that make me less of a fan? The high horse is a dangerous place to be because it's a bigger fall.
Click to expand...


Many states have got out of stocking streams altogether or greatly reduced it. That is one choice in trout management.

Another choice is to maintain a large hatchery program, such as PA's. There are pros and cons of both approaches.

And there are sincere proponents of these approaches, both in PA and in other states. Among anglers, and also within the fisheries management field, i.e. the fisheries management people who work for the agencies, and among those who teach fisheries management in the universities.

 
"good point, but i believe bait rods work with lures. if they want to bait fish they can fish ponds.

fly and lure guys couldn't take fish either, which i'm sure some people would not be happy about - but if the fishing was better the sacrifices would be worth it imho."

better fishing for whom? Telling people that they can no longer fish streams and only ponds is probably the dumbest thing I have ever head. I am moving more towards being "pro-dhalo" but shutting down all PA trout streams from bait fishing is about the most rediculous thing I have heard.
 
That would be the end of trout fishing if they stopped stocking.
Troutbert,do those states require a trout stamp ?
 
No it wouldn't.

What about the option of leaving stocking up to local governments? Counties and whatnot, instead of a huge, state ran program? Also, private sporting clubs wouldn't stop stocking just because the State stops. Ryan, your situation is one to consider, but I also get KenU's point. KenU and I both know a stream here that has a solid population of natives, and yet is stocked over. It makes me nervous because the stream gets POUNDED the first few days. There are some bigger brookies in the stream, and I hate to think of them being harvested along side the stocked bows. Not to mention the amount of trash I find myself picking up after opening weekend.
 
ratgunner wrote:

Troutbert,do those states require a trout stamp ?
Click to expand...

I don't know the license requirements of the various states.
 
SAS,

Not sure that would be the best idea either. If it is county by county, then would lower populations counties see less stocking. For instance, Potter county. I imagine Potter makes more money on the opening weekend of trout than any other day of the year, in conjunction with deer, bear, and turkey openers. The attraction to this area if there were minimal stocking opportunities could be detrimental to their economy.

I go up there with other R&R things on my mind, but others may go up just to fish.
 
I don't live in Potter, so I'm not going to guess on their local economy, but here is a county where many of us would say the LAST thing they need is stocked trout!

I do doubt they make more money on the first day of trout than they do on deer season, etc.
 
I'm all for stocking streams that cannot support naturally reproducing trout. But we stock many miles of streams that have good populations of wild trout and would be much better if they weren't being stocked and plundered every spring.
Click to expand...

KenU, that is a VERY different proposition than what the OP suggested.

Mike Richardson, FWIW, not that I would support this to begin with, but if they did stop/significantly slow stocking and make everything C&R, I wouldn't support it all being ALO. I probably wouldn't support AT C&R on a statewide basis either, but it would pique my interest.

Here's what I would support:

Expand the class A criteria, to include current class B's and perhaps even some C's. IMO these are viable wild trout sport fisheries. Class A's already can't be stocked, with a very few exceptions, so that doesn't have to change.

Then make all class A's AT C&R. Everything else is ok as it is.
 
Noone said that there would be no bait fishing..... I say just reduce Creel limits and actually spend revenues on stream enhancements...... Those streams less than an hour away would get less pressure water quality would rise dramatically..... And so would fishing...... Only you couldn't kill as many and the ones you did catch might actually have been born in that watershed...... And wild trout are so much harder to catch chances are Creel limits may not even be met.... Personally I take so much more satisfaction in catching wild trout. It. takes a whole lot more to kill it than one you know was put in the water knowing it probably wouldn't survive more than a season.....
 
I don't support ending the hatchery program.

I think the ideal solution is to continue stocking waters that can't support wild trout.

And manage streams that do support wild trout in ways that maximize their wild trout populations.

That approach would provide good recreation, and be environmentally and fiscally sound.


 
SAS,

i was just saying that many of these resturants, bars, and such heavily rely on these days. I had talked to a bar tender who had said with out those 4 days they wouldn't make it, is all.

I think the county by county thing is a decent idea. I support the PFBC if they would help out co-ops a bit more. But areas such as State College, or Westchester would be able to have more income than lets say wharton or coudersport, in Potter county.

All in all I think we do a pretty decent Job. Personally i would like to se the limit down to 2. I don't mind artificial lure areas as much as I used to and agree with the fact that a bait guy "if they want to fish that area" could put on a spinner. the techniques would be just that same as bait fishing, casting is no different, tackle is no different, and I am warming up to that.
 
Ultimately, I think Troutbert's idea is best. I'm not against the state fishery program, just stop stocking over wild populations please.
 
ryguyfi wrote:
...I can hit exactly 1 stream in about an hour drive that has wild fish.
Click to expand...

Aint you ever heard of smallmouth, largemouth, bluegills, whatever, or don't you consider them to be fish? They are almost all wild.

Just sayin. Wouldn't bother me if they stopped stocking trout entirely. Well, at least not much.;-)

I realize it wouldn't make economic sense though.

 
PeterM

"i wonder what would happen if you made it no stocking, and C&R only ALO...apart from kids ponds..."

This appears to insinuate ending bait fishing on streams, and this is what I was referring to.

Sas,

What about stocking trout over wild populations, with modified tackle restrictions? barbless hooks and such.
 
Just seems to me IMHO.... the current state stocking program seems to feed on itself..... They stock cause the people fish..... And the people (some, not all) fish because they stock..... I just think there has to be a better way.....
 
All of the rules and regulations of the PFBC are found in a Chapter of the Pennsylvania Code entitled "Recreation." Keep this in mind. The PFBC was designated not only to preserve the resource, but also provide recreation. If 90% of the trout anglers are entertained by stocked trout, then why wouldn't we use the stocking process to protect our more precious wild resources?

The demand for trout angling by all methods and in a manner that allows a reasonable harvest in PA cannot be sustained by our wild resources. If it could, we would not stock. You can cut down allowable harvest and you can cut down on abundant trout opportunities in the Spring season, but you will also cut down on -- and cut out -- a lot of recreational anglers.

There is a happy medium. I don't care to defend the PFBC on always and everywhere reaching that optimum balance, but I think they do a pretty good job.

And I cringe when I see so much arm-chair quarterbacking from people who only have their own personal preferences in mind when they advocate certain management policies.
 
JackM wrote:
All of the rules and regulations of the PFBC are found in a Chapter of the Pennsylvania Code entitled "Recreation." Keep this in mind. The PFBC was designated not only to preserve the resource, but also provide recreation. If 90% of the trout anglers are entertained by stocked trout, then why wouldn't we use the stocking process to protect our more precious wild resources?

The demand for trout angling by all methods and in a manner that allows a reasonable harvest in PA cannot be sustained by our wild resources. If it could, we would not stock. You can cut down allowable harvest and you can cut down on abundant trout opportunities in the Spring season, but you will also cut down on -- and cut out -- a lot of recreational anglers.

There is a happy medium. I don't care to defend the PFBC on always and everywhere reaching that optimum balance, but I think they do a pretty good job.

And I cringe when I see so much arm-chair quarterbacking from people who only have their own personal preferences in mind when they advocate certain management policies.
Click to expand...
Jack I could not agree more. Great post!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top