Codorus Creek. Trophy trout
- Thread starter Billr
- Start date
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
My guess if its slot limit is they used this on penns with some success for wild invasive brown trout and their trying to increase their size in codorus usinthg a slot limit here too. They just had a bunch of AFB’s out on spring creek taking angling surveys asking about slot limit there too. They got a bone(growing huge wild invasive brown trout) and their running with it. Hope that answers question as to why not strict C and R.
Because the slot will finally allow the harvest of the abundant small wild BT from Codorus. The hope is that this will stimulate some growth in this length range and maybe produce some larger fish as a result. Also, the slot will protect the few larger fish already present from harvest. If, however, the slot being applied on selected waters was a serious attempt to increase harvest to the extent that it would have the population benefits described, the creel limit would have to be higher in order to attract more harvesting anglers and remove more slot size fish, which is what is needed.
I’m glad that you enjoy the fishery and perhaps there are more large trout in the special reg area since the establishment of the sculpin population there years ago, although I haven’t heard that large fish abundance improved. My standards (target) for large trout abundance in the special reg area were established by what was present (their abundance and size) outside of the special reg area.
Nymph-wristed
Well-known member
Mike, is this the reasoning behind all recent Slot Limit regulation changes from TT or a case by case thing? You reference protecting the big fish already present too? I am thinking of Northampton County, for example.
CodorusTUTom
Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 145
I'm a little skeptical that the slot limit will have any noticable impact, and so far there doesn't seem to be much harvest taking place. To me, the bigger issue has been the recent flow management which is basically: keep the flow at the absolute permitted minimum - period. I understand that precip has been below average for quite some time, but we've had dry summers before where higher flows have been maintained.
As a result, I believe that significant habitat is being lost as there are fewer deep holes, more silt deposit, etc. The trout are becoming concentrated in fewer areas where they have to share and constantly compete for the available food (see MD_Gene's comment above). It's certainly not an ideal situation for growing more large trout. Suitable spawning habitat is at risk as well. I believe that as long as these low flows persist, the creek will never be able achieve its full potential, and will not be the fishery it once was.
As a result, I believe that significant habitat is being lost as there are fewer deep holes, more silt deposit, etc. The trout are becoming concentrated in fewer areas where they have to share and constantly compete for the available food (see MD_Gene's comment above). It's certainly not an ideal situation for growing more large trout. Suitable spawning habitat is at risk as well. I believe that as long as these low flows persist, the creek will never be able achieve its full potential, and will not be the fishery it once was.
wgmiller
Well-known member
I know there have been quite a few discussions over the years on Codorus Creek in the tailwater section. As to why it hasn't been posted "C & R only", I'm under the impression it has to do with striking a balance between all interests involved (landowners, Codorus TU, anglers, etc.). I too would be in favor of just making the water C & R Only, but it's not that simple. As to the existence of some larger fish, I can attest to it, as I've seen them, but mostly during the early fall (pre-spawn).
In all honesty, I had to review the regs to make sure that my comments regarding trophy trout would be accurate. Some trophy trout stream sections were kept in the trophy trout program I suspect. For certain, the length limit was raised from 14 to 18 inches because anglers had frequently expressed that 14” was not a trophy and the name of the program was a misnomer.
Without knowing or figuring out which streams saw related reg changes statewide, it was clear from those in the SE law enforcement region, which includes parts of fisheries mgmt areas 5 and 6, and those in the SC law enforcement region, which includes parts of fisheries management areas 6 and 7, and maybe even a touch of 4, that the streams in those with which I am familiar and which were moved to the slot program were those with an abundance of small brown trout. I am thinking of Codorus, Monocacy, and Saucon.
A slot was much more appropriate than either trophy trout reg, past or present, and even though I think the creel limit in the present slot does not reflect a serious attempt to adjust or correct the small trout problems, it is a step in the right direction. It just didn’t go far enough and I doubt it will make a difference in the length structure of the populations. Maybe it has a chance of doing so in an urban/metro fishery, but I doubt it.
A low creel limit is not enough of an incentive to attract most harvesting anglers. Even in stocked trout fisheries in Pa the avg harvest rate is only 1 trout per trip despite the much greater incentive to fish for harvest oriented anglers. They are able to knock the stocked trout populations down considerably despite the low avg harvest because of the high numbers of anglers who fish these streams, something that will not be seen in the aforementioned wild trout streams (nor is is something that I think would be desirable, meaning that number of anglers).
Last edited:
Nymph-wristed
Well-known member
Thanks for the reply, Mike. The latter two have plenty of rogue stockers too... or stockers that have gone rogue, perhaps. I rarely see anyone keeping anything, as you noted, and certainly not in the special regs areas.
