The_Sasquatch
Well-known member
My expectations are pretty low as far as catching goes. I just miss even walking/hiking those streams.
Lancaster County Brook Trout
- Thread starter JeffP
- Start date
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 7,470
Speaking of the Furnace Hills specifically, those streams fished like junk (and were full of sand) prior to the 2011 flood event. Looking at my notes, they all started to improve in 2012, and (temporarily anyway) had much better habitat after the floods with the sand cleaned out of the stream channels. I’d say my fishing on these streams peaked in 2014-2016 or so - double digit fish days were normal and I had a couple 30 or 40 fish type days in there, and then they began to decline as they filled back in with sand. IMO they’re back to where they were prior to 2011 now. I took lots of skunks or just a fish or two here or there outings on those streams back then, and since about 2020 or so, that’s the norm again. I think the other regulars who fish that area would generally support a similar timeline and experience. You timed your move well Squatch. 😉
The_Sasquatch
Well-known member
yeah...I did fish one of them this past May (trib to Hammer-you know). I skipped a lot of the water, but the pockets and pools I did decide to fish all had trout, though. And while I didn't keep notes, I know for SURE I had a double digit day. I was happy with that, but also-yes. A lot of other holes I remember were basically silted up. Which, again, I expected. I saw the beginnings of that happening even before I moved. It's just gonna happen, I think, given the geology of the area.
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 7,470
Admittedly, I haven’t fished that particular one in probably 10 years. It’s steeper than just about all the others, so it may deal with the sandstone geology a little better than the rest. Either way that’s about as good of an outing as I’ve heard about in that area in recent years, and far better than any of mine. My last “good” outing was on Shearers, in September 2019. But it’s produced a skunk and a 2 fish outing, in really good conditions since. I’m largely done with them for the time being, unless I have a big time crunch and a big itch to get out, and can’t get to anywhere further from home.
If you are seeing a long trend down in trout populations the cause is not geology because the geology has been essentially the same for thousands of years. The geology may make it more vulnerable than many other areas to negative effects from disturbances, though. But the root cause of the decline is those disturbances.
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 7,470
Agree, but floods to varying degrees are also “normal”. The geology of these particular streams (highly erodible red sandstone) causes more transient conditions that create significant changes to the habitat than most streams. My first hand familiarity with them dates back to about 2008 or so. In that time they were full of sand, and fished poorly prior to the floods of 2011, then the habitat greatly improved following the flood of 2011 (all the sand got moved out of the stream channel), and they improved. They then slowly refilled with sand and fishing slowly declined consistent with the habitat loss. There are holes with boulders in them that are knee to waist high full of sand now. To the point the boulders are buried. Would’ve never known that had the flood in 2011 not moved all the sand and exposed the boulders. Those boulders = habitat.
I can’t imagine this is the first time this process has played out on them. Will be interesting to test this theory if they again improve after the next big flood event. Who knows where/when in these cycles they were last surveyed, but it would’ve made a big difference in the survey results. I would have guessed all of them to have been Class A in 2014-2016 or so. Right now, I can’t imagine any of them are, even the ones listed as such.
wgmiller
Well-known member
This was hands down the best fish I ever caught in Segloch, and it was back in 2021. I've gone pretty far up and never gotten into brookies. I agree that it really suffers the effects of "high water" events and in many ways they serve as a cleansing for the stream. At the rate we're going, it could be a while before we see one of those events again.
dc410
Well-known member
In the late 90’s - early 2000’s Segloch Run was a solid Brook trout stream, now it’s totally a brown trout stream. I wish I would have kept better records to be able to define when that major transition occurred - but I didn’t.
They’re still there.
As for the first brown trout that I ever saw in a Segloch Rn survey, it was 15” long. It was memorable not only for its size in that small stream and in comparison to all other trout in the stream, but also because it was the only brown trout seen in two electrofishing passes in that 300 m+ sampling site. At that point I was wondering from where that fish could have come because I had assumed that the downstream dam was impassible. I’m thinking that was early to middle 1990’s.
Last edited:
From what has been posted so far, the most recent catches of brookies in the Segloch was maybe mid nineteen teens. Hard to believe that was 20 years ago. I think my last Brookie was around that time and was also the time I caught a Tiger. Does anyone know if any of the recommendations from the watershed study in 2004 study have been implemented? And is that really the last time this stream was surveyed? As I have stated numerous times, development though not intense has impacted these streams and destroyed their resiliency to natural events. Death by a thousand cuts. In particular it seems homes built on the headwaters and the construction of small ponds has occurred. While that might not be the death knell for Brookies in a Poconos stream, it is for streams that flow at 600-foot elevations that flow into warmwater streams. This has happened on Shearers, Segloch, and the tributary of Hammer that Sasquatch mentioned. I was pleasantly surprised to hear of his double-digits catches there. I talked to one other very skilled fisherman who fished that one maybe last year and really struggled to find 2 fish. That stream has an open warmwater pond damming a very small stream flows into the branch closest to 322 and pours out mud and silt whenever it rains. I have also heard that there is a small pond at the headwaters of another branch stocked with warmwater species. Add in the intense salting that takes place on that mountain along with the herbicide they spray and the future does not look bright for our state fish struggling to hold on in these remaining places.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 7,470
I’ve definitely caught Brook Trout in Segloch in the last 10 years still. Not trying to argue that the Browns aren’t becoming more and more common, only that there are (or were) Brookies still present more recently than some posts suggest. It’s been a few years since I’ve fished it, but I am certain I was still catching at least some Brookies in the mid to late 2010’s. This was in the lower SGL stretch, below the bridge.
I suspect that the one of which you are speaking is not the brushy one that I am thinking about at the moment, which based on a recent survey at the historical sampling site at its mouth has lost its ST, at least in that segment, since about 2008. Even in appx 2008 it was a surprise to find ST there based on the bank erosion beneath the overhanging multi-flora rose, habitat, and sediment. Hammer, on the other hand, adjacent to the trib, had a fishable, somewhat attractive BT population with a few ST fingerlings mixed in. Had I lived in the area I would have fished it for the BT. Abundance was just enough to keep it interesting when combined with the length distribution.
Last edited:
So you guys are telling me that during the deluge that was May and early June last year that these streams didn't receive enough rainfall to at least partially clean them out and rid their substrate of muck? I am not familiar with the creeks at all. I have never fished them, and I probably never will.
raftman
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2012
- Messages
- 970
I also noticed a HUGE decline after that crazy flood in September of 2018 really ripped up a lot of good habitat on Hammer.
Maybe that’s why the AFM remarked about the collapsing embankment somewhere along the SGL road that closely parallels part of Segloch. Sediment lost/sediment gained.
Makes sense.
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 7,470
Higher water events tend to move the sand around to varying degrees, but only the 2011 event really scoured the stream beds clean, in my tenure with these streams. (Admittedly I didn’t fish any of them in 2025, so I can’t firsthand say what 2025 did to them, but my gut is they’re still full of sand.) They’re kinda unique streams (for PA) with this geologic quality to them. They’re not worth driving to fish, but fish any of them once and you’ll get it. What looks like dirt, or rock even, literally dissolves into sand if you get it wet. Think like when you take a clump of dry sand at the beach in your hand and put your hand into water. Similar effect.
I fished the brushy one in October. There were actually a few areas where I thought I would find a fish or two maybe a chub. Nothing. That multiflora rose was a *****!
Your wet sand in the hand is a close parallel to that of the streams’ substrates coming off of the Furnace Hills. Its volume in the streams, its color (not white), and its consistency is substantially different from that occasionally found in headwaters of some streams in NC, NE Pa, and Schuylkill Co. Sand is not considered to be very good spawning substrate for ST, but somehow the ST manage to pull it off in such streams.
That reminds me also of their surprising spawning success when I first saw it in a Schuylkill Co stream where substrate, including the the interstices, was locked up by thick layers of iron precipitate and only the very edges of the stream margins had some iron colored, somewhat loose gravel. Apparently, some ST have not read the text book that describes where they can and where can’t spawn successfully.
Last edited:
