jifigz
Well-known member
Of course it is affected by stocking. But how badly? I don't think all that much.
Or I should say.... I'm satisfied.
Or I should say.... I'm satisfied.
wildtrout2
Well-known member
Sounds like another stream that shouldn't be getting stocked, if it's got the decent wild brown population that's been mentioned.
L
lycoflyfisher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 1,133
I think the impacts of stocking on a large, fertile limestone influenced creek with an abundant forage base such as Kish, Yellow Breeches, lower Fishing Creek, Bald Eagle below Spring Creek are very different than stocking on a small wild trout stream like Little Bear, Hyner Run, Linn Run etc.
J
JeffP
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 739
That was kind of my question. Maybe the size and the limestone influence make it less susceptible. Then again Penns wild trout numbers went way up after stocking was mostly ended. I guess the real question is the cost in terms of what the Kish has going now. How much does tradition matter?
jifigz
Well-known member
To me? It matters little. To the majority of the population of 45,000 that call MiffCo home, it matters a lot.
If you wanna try to fight the fight, then have at it.
If you wanna try to fight the fight, then have at it.
T
troutbert
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 10,080
Same with Fishing Creek, Spring Creek, and the Little Juniata River. The populations increased greatly after stocking was ended and harvest was restricted. On Fishing Creek the population tripled. On Spring Creek it doubled in 7 years.
On Kish Creek and Bald Eagle Creek you could expect similar results as the characteristics of these streams are similar.
But if the landowners got mad and closed off access, that wouldn't be a win.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
As far as stocking reform I would say there are people contacting their elected reps right now telling them the financial waste and ecological harms of the trout hatchery program statewide are unacceptable . I think its as simple as join them in reaching out. Also contacting governor through his website is another avenue if your serious about getting something done.
Pick any or all of the following issues
Hatchery expenses> revenues from license sales, refusal to **** sown hatcheries/cut trout as PSU audit recommended, $27.5 million dollar tax payer bailout to fix their hatcheries in 2020 with the GG2 Grant funds, jacking up licenses to cover trout hatchery program and pricing people out of fishing.
Can mention any of the ecological harms i
mentioned in my article plus hellbenders and concerns about log perch, darters, and other species.
www.flyfisherman.com
You will see this topic on the news soon as well if you live in south central PA area
…good time to call your elected officials and tell them you want stocking reform and a PFBC that doesn’t ignore fisheries science succeeding in neighboring states.
Pick any or all of the following issues
Hatchery expenses> revenues from license sales, refusal to **** sown hatcheries/cut trout as PSU audit recommended, $27.5 million dollar tax payer bailout to fix their hatcheries in 2020 with the GG2 Grant funds, jacking up licenses to cover trout hatchery program and pricing people out of fishing.
Can mention any of the ecological harms i
mentioned in my article plus hellbenders and concerns about log perch, darters, and other species.
Pennsylvania Isn't Doing Enough for its Floundering Native Brook Trout - Fly Fisherman
Disjointed habitat improvements won't save Pennsylvania's brook trout. We need watershed-wide management, and we need to stop stocking invasive species.
www.flyfisherman.com
You will see this topic on the news soon as well if you live in south central PA area
…good time to call your elected officials and tell them you want stocking reform and a PFBC that doesn’t ignore fisheries science succeeding in neighboring states.
J
JeffP
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 739
I have no desire to do that. I thought you were a bit rough on Shaefer for saying what most on here think. You said you tell it like it is, but you only did in your last post.
I get the culture thing and I wasn't discounting it.
jifigz
Well-known member
I was to the point but I don't think mean. Someone who barely knows the stream is up in arms about it being stocked. I can tell he barely knows the stream because he didn't know the narrows was stocked. There are other things I could say to highlight the ignorance observed to Kish, but won't because not everything should be aired out on a public forum.I have no desire to do that. I thought you were a bit rough on Shaefer for saying what most on here think. You said you tell it like it is, but you only did in your last post.
I am in favor of ending all trout stocking in PA. Heck, especially on any and all wild trout streams. I used to make my cause for this on Kish known but have relaxed on the issue.
Mr. Schaefer, if you were offended or upset, then my apologies. I'll even fish Kish with you sometime if you want.
Changing that one getting stocked is not gonna be easy.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
From Coffee Run down to Hungry Run - 103.25 biomass estimate.
T
TYoung
Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2009
- Messages
- 463
Having some stocked trout can help protect the wild fish from the early season catch and keep fishers. Freshly stocked trout are much easier to catch than wild trout. The key to minimizing the negative impacts that stock trout have on wild fish is to place the stockies in the areas that early season catch and keep fishers tend to fish. If the fish are stocked close to opening day, they will still be schooled up in the well known stocking areas and easier to catch. I think this management strategy would work best on wild brown trout streams in more developed areas that attract catch and keep fishers early in the trout season.
silverfox
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,589
That "may" be true for wild brown trout but not brook trout. The consensus of the brain trust is that brook trout are the easiest to catch and, therefore, easier than stocked trout to catch. If that logic holds, then stocking over wild native brook trout must have a significant negative impact on the brook trout, either from harvest or accidental mortality.
It's been a mixed bag with brown trout and stockings. Some streams achieved Class A status while being heavily stocked. Others became much better after the cessation of stocking, as troutbert mentioned. Also, Mike wrote an article several years ago that indicated that brown trout faired better than brook trout in the presence of stockings, or rather, that brook trout populations responded more favorably to the cessation of stocking than brown trout did.
The question is, what would the angling/harvest impact be in the absence of stocking? The concept that stocked trout "protect" wild trout assumes that the same number of anglers would fish the stream if it weren't stocked. I don't believe that's true in most cases.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
I tend to agree with this, I'm not positive many of the catch and keep, opening day crowd would harvest trout at all if not stocked.
Many either aren't aware of wild trout or care to fish for them, based entirely on their usage and harvest the remainder of the year.
J
JeffP
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 739
So Kish's West Branch has a higher biomass than Penns? Am I missing something? Is Hungry south of Reedsville? And is that estimated biomass including the stockers? It is interesting to see that list with the numbers. Perry Furnace run must be a heck of a stream.
Last edited:
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
I always laugh when these fisheries brimming with brown trout get exceptions for class A stocking protections because its just a perfect example of how badly the public has been socially conditioned to fish for domesticated animals. To the point that high class A biomass does little for them without the presumed universal entitlement to trout stockings. Stocking Kish creek not the hill I’m dying on but just a comical microcosm of angler expectations created by PFBC statewide.
In fact i’d hazard a guess PFBC does not want to survey parts of the yellow breeches and other popular stocked streams because they would feel their only option is to just keep making these exceptions for class A’s instead of addressing angler expectations they created.
In fact i’d hazard a guess PFBC does not want to survey parts of the yellow breeches and other popular stocked streams because they would feel their only option is to just keep making these exceptions for class A’s instead of addressing angler expectations they created.
Last edited:
