Mike wrote:
Good opportunity to compare a fallfish with its closest relative, the creek chub. Anglers often mistakenly call fallfish chubs. Picture 4 is a fallfish; picture 6 is a creek chub. When fallfish are present, stream temps are seasonally marginal for wild trout at that location or not far downstream. That doesn't mean that wild trout won't be present, but it does mean that the temps are seasonally borderline.
Temperature problems in summer combined with low flow and suboptimal habitat prevent Hay Creek's wild trout population expansion to much of the the stocked trout section, except in very low densities or during the cooler months. A fairly good population of wild trout exists in the limited areas of good to excellent habitat (good physical habitat, fairly good seasonal temps). On average, the stocked section's habitat and seasonal temps are not conducive to supporting a good wild trout population, as evidenced by the trout population and fish community composition, thus the stream continues to be stocked.
Interesting stuff Mike. Since I was a kid, I’ve never really paid much attention and called both fallfish and creek chubs just plain old “chubs”. So fallfish inhabit more warmwater or borderline coolwater habitats, and chubs can be found in more of a coolwater stream that may be also suitable for wild trout. Interesting, I will now pay more attention to the chub/fallfish populations in the streams I fish.
I went to the FBC site to get more info:
http://www.fish.state.pa.us/pafish/fishhtms/chap11.htm#creekch
As far a Hay Creek, I do catch quite a few wild trout, but I would say most of my fishing on the middle section of the stream (the open area along 82) is done during the cold-water months. There are sections that hold a decent amount of wild fish, and many of the wild trout seem to inhabit the ATW section in the spring. Perhaps they move into the ATW from the upper class A section when the water temps are suitable and/or move into the section for spawning.
We had this discussion before, while perhaps I over estimate the length of Hay Creek as a Class A stream, at the very least, it would make a perfect DHALO section, especially along the closed section of 82, since it’ open the public with plenty of parking and the stream temps and habitat are near ideal to hold trout most of the year. Right now it’s fished heavily when the stocking occurs and is not utilized much by anglers the rest of the year. I know, there’s a lot of pressure to keep it open for catch and keep guys, but there are many anglers out there looking for a decent place to catch some fish that’s not dependent on a recent stocking.
Mike, I believe the “masses” are on MY side in this case, since the recent PFBC trout anglers survey showed that SR areas are very popular among trout anglers, and a Hay Creek DHALO would surely be a well-utilized stream all year-round. Also, since the Tully is the only SR in Berks County, another SR in the county is would be a good thing since Hay would take some pressure off the Tully, which is frequently complained about by many anglers as been too crowded. The catch and keep guys would have their chance to harvest, just a little later in the year. Also, creating an SR area on Hay would help stretch out the limited number of trout that can be raised and stocked by the FBC. Further, the mortality of wild fish that inhabit the stream would be lower without bait fishing, and C&R regulations for most of the year would save a lot of wild fish. In other words, everyone, including the fish would win! Just sayin’………again.
Thanks for the info Mike.