Clarks Creek should meet reqs for a class A section

The Rodfather

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2023
Messages
296
City
Palmyra, PA
So I've been hearing rumors Clarks Creek would easily meet biomass requirements for class A designation in certain sections in the past but that PFBC wouldn’t list it because of situations like Freeman Run ect. With clubs stocking, they don't want to rock the boat.

Went to investigate and it really should be class A in the section I checked out, a damn shame PFBC won’t list it.

Any of you guys have similar experience or insight on this matter?


The Rodfather
Engagement Czar and Conservation Chair
Dauphin County League of Chubsmen
 
I’m sure it’s one of many. I can think of 2 right off the top of my head somewhat near me. One is a brookie stream and the state stocks rainbows over it - it’s full of brook trout. The other makes no sense because it’s not stocked at all for most of its length and it has plenty of wild brown trout. Both populations should be protected with catch and release regs and allowed to exist without competition from stocked fish.
 
So I've been hearing rumors Clarks Creek would easily meet biomass requirements for class A designation in certain sections in the past but that PFBC wouldn’t list it because of situations like Freeman Run ect. With clubs stocking, they don't want to rock the boat.

Went to investigate and it really should be class A in the section I checked out, a damn shame PFBC won’t list it.

Any of you guys have similar experience or insight on this matter?
Is the assertion that the PFBC surveys show that is Class A and they decided not to list it as Class A?

Or have fishermen been catching a lot of wild trout in certain sections and based on that think that the populations are probably above the Class A level?

You can ask the PFBC biologists for survey reports on Clarks Creek.
 
So I've been hearing rumors Clarks Creek would easily meet biomass requirements for class A designation in certain sections in the past but that PFBC wouldn’t list it because of situations like Freeman Run ect. With clubs stocking, they don't want to rock the boat.

Went to investigate and it really should be class A in the section I checked out, a damn shame PFBC won’t list it.

Any of you guys have similar experience or insight on this matter?


The Rodfather
Engagement Czar and Conservation Chair
Dauphin County League of Chubsmen
Instead of inquiring about a rumor here, why not first ask the appropriate AFM what the biomass (es) is/are in the Section(s) based on the most recent survey(s)? Additionally, you’ll need to learn if the stream Section(s) is/are classified as ST, mixed ST/BT, or BT to know whether the biomass(es) matches or exceeds the one required for Class A. Mixed and BT sections require 40 kg/ha for Class A; ST sections require 30 kg/ha for a Class A designation.

Troutbert is right as well in that you could just request the report if one exists and has made it through the sometimes lengthy review process or take a short-cut and do what I suggested.
 
Last edited:
Quite awhile back after catching more that a few wild fish in certain spots in Section 04 (C&R Fly Fishing Only), I contacted the AFM and we discussed it at length.

At that time, the AFM told me it hadn't been sampled in awhile but it wasn't a Class A biomass at past sampling sites.

I concur with Mike, instead of creating a tempest in a teapot, call the AFM and ask...

And while you are at it, tell him that Section 04 shouldn't be stocked or at minimum it should be re-designated as a STW section.

In the meantime, attached is a 20212 Clarks Creek Coldwater Conservation Plan
 

Attachments

The assertion is that it fishes like a dense class A in many places. That in itself is nothing you can take to the bank of course without data to back it up. However, a few things for those unfamiliar with Clarks to consider would be the following.

1. While I havent seen statistics, if they are even kept, anecdotally fishing pressure has decreased, partially a result of the greatly bemoaned deadfalls from the wooly adelgids.

2. Habitat complexity, leaf pack, and shelter has improved from the deadfalls. They have also scoured out better gravels where water goes under them in many places.

So if you combine the pretest probability that less pressure and more sheltering habitat can improve a fishery you can add on your longitudinal angling experience. If your longitudinal angling experience seems to suggest it has improved one arrives at the conclusion that there is a good chance(not definitive) that it has. It at least deserves an updated survey if it hasn't been done in the past few years. I mean christ we are surveying Freeman Run every 5 minutes it seems just because Brock wants to stock it as his pet project.

Now as for your mention of surveys, yes you can request them. However, more times than not you get ghosted or ignored by PFBC and have to file an RTK which I am not opposed to doing. That all considered, often times PFBC hasn't surveyed certain sections in years or decades. They could lean on the old surveys as evidence its not class A. The lack of recent surveys may seem happenstance but what I am suggesting is that not surveying would have a good chance of being on purpose based on PFBC's reccent behavior surrounding controversy of stocking class A's. If you don't have an updated survey, you don't have to update the classification.

I once was told a member of PFBC staff was scolded for planning a survey of a certain stretch of the Yellow Breeches because of the blow back it would cause if it got stocking protection as a class A.

Forgive me if I dont trust PFBC to do the right thing.

This brings me to the point of the OP: The reason I am inquiring here is exactly as you say the surveys are not very recent and I am wondering if anyone else is seeing the same thing up there. Also with everything going on with Freeman Run and making the class A exemption happen in a smoke filled executive directors room instead of leaving the responsibility with the board there is a lack of trust right now created with the angling public and I am just looking for answers.

I have and will continue to reach out to PFBC abd AMF to try to get answers, but the track record and lack of transparency is not promising in this regard.



I do appreciate the discussion so thank you for that.
 
Clark’s seemed pretty barren today until we got up to below the gun range. Most of the water was extremely shallow with frequent piles of hemlocks. Got better farther upstream. Loaded with stocked browns acting wild and crazy. They were not crazy for anything I threw at them.
 
So I've been hearing rumors Clarks Creek would easily meet biomass requirements for class A designation in certain sections
Which Section(s) are you referring to? Sections 02, 03, 04, and 05 are stocked. FFO is 04.
 
Back
Top