
jifigz
Well-known member
Of course it is affected by stocking. But how badly? I don't think all that much.It's not safe to assume that it's not affected by stocking.
Or I should say.... I'm satisfied.
Of course it is affected by stocking. But how badly? I don't think all that much.It's not safe to assume that it's not affected by stocking.
It's not safe to assume that it's not affected by stocking.
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?Of course it is affected by stocking. But how badly? I don't think all that much.
Or I should say.... I'm satisfied.
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.Then again Penns wild trout numbers went way up after stocking was mostly ended.
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.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.
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.![]()
Does anyone know what biomass of wild trout they find in surveys of Kish Creek?
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.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.
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.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.
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.
From Coffee Run down to Hungry Run - 103.25 biomass estimate.