Little Lehigh 1/8/08

[troutfly21]

I have been away from the site for a couple weeks, been busy hunting instead of fishing, but it seems that I missed a topic that I have some pretty strong feelings about... I was born and raised in Allentown, and though I'm not old enough to remember the REAL "good old days" of the LL, I did start fly fishing there in the early 90's. The fishing was hard when I started (it was never an easy stream), but I have had many great days on the Heritage strech of the LL since. I didn't fish there much while I was away at college, but when I returned in 2003, it wasn't the same stream. Developments had sprung up practically along the banks and the pressure was even worse than before. I can definitely relate to the fellow who said that there were people waiting for people to leave...it was unbelievable. I think that a lot of the problems that the LL has now are a direct result of both heavy pressure and mass development. Has anyone else noticed how every time it rains, the LL is practically unfishable??? While other streams in the area clear up pretty much the next day or never get bad to begin with, the LL is still a mess. I think that all those developments have created more stormwater runoff than the LL can support while being a prime trout fishery. I think that can explain the siltation problems that were referred to in another post. The other problem is the pressure...never seen anything like it... I'd hate to let the cat out of the bag, but doesn't anyone know that there's about a half a dozen other good streams in the area?? I could go on for a while and it wouldn't make much of a difference, especially in the development and runoff situation, but I can and do give the LL a break with a bit of regret... It's a sad story, but I've moved on to different streams. Now that I think about it, I sound like a lot of deer hunters in the state. Given some time and rest, like humans with a cold, nature usually recovers well. Hopefully with some time the LL will see some relief from pressure and maybe get back to seeing some more fish and hatches along the way.

 

[JackM]

Two points of discussion being suggested have been points I have often got entangled in controversy because of my views. They both have to do with excess fishing pressure:

First: if you go to a stream and encounter excess fishing pressure, your presence there is contributing as much as anyone else to the excess pressure-- go elsewhere to relieve the pressure.

Second: often, but not always, excess pressure exists because the people frequenting the stream do not know of anywhere else to fish or think there are no other streams worthy of their attention. The unwritten policy of never mentioning streams that are not "well-known" contributes to this "problem." Sharing information about lesser known streams can spread the pressure.

Have at me.

 

[afishinado]

I’ve fished the LL since the early 80’s. I often travel the NE extention of the Turnpike visiting family up north, and it’s a short ride off the exit. Since there’s no wading all that’s needed to fish is a rod and a box of flies. In the past, I’ve always enjoyed sight fishing on the stream for wary wild trout. The stream has seen its ups and downs with respect to the fish, hatches and pressure. I, like the other posters, have never seen the fish population and the hatches so low, and the angler population so high.

In the past few years I assumed that the water was stocked by the hatchery on the stream since most of the fish caught are no doubt hatchery raised fish. I was not aware that the fish were there because they had escaped from the hatchery during high water. Recently, I believe that the attraction to anglers has been lots of easy fish to catch.

The stream now seems to rise quickly and become muddy even during a moderate rainstorm. I would also guess that to be due to excessive storm drain runoff from development and lack of proper riparian vegetation. Many sections of the stream are choked with silt. The very worst I have witnessed on the LL is on the Wild Cherry Lane section of the stream off Lower Macungie Road. You’ll find yourself knee deep in muck throughout most of that section.

I believe that the metamorphosis is nearly complete. The LL has evolved from an historic wild trout stream teaming with hatches, to yet another marginal stockie stream ruined by development and neglect. IMHO.

 

[tabasco_joe]

JackM wrote:
Two points of discussion being suggested have been points I have often got entangled in controversy because of my views. They both have to do with excess fishing pressure:

First: if you go to a stream and encounter excess fishing pressure, your presence there is contributing as much as anyone else to the excess pressure-- go elsewhere to relieve the pressure.

Second: often, but not always, excess pressure exists because the people frequenting the stream do not know of anywhere else to fish or think there are no other streams worthy of their attention. The unwritten policy of never mentioning streams that are not "well-known" contributes to this "problem." Sharing information about lesser known streams can spread the pressure.

Have at me.

Don't disagree but the LL Heritage section has some attractions that will always draw a heavy presence of FFer's. It is on city park land which has a large number of parking lots. So accessability is easy. It has manicured lawns along it's course so fighting streamside vegitation is less of a problem than most streams. IMO this is a big factor in winter where some streams require wading to get some casting room. In the spring and early summer it has interesting scenery. Certainly not solitude but oddly quiet for being in a large city.

 

[JeffS]

This thread has lost its muster, but it also made me re-activate my PA Fly Fish password.

It is true that the Little Lehigh is not what it once was. This was made evident by a visual assessment conducted on the stream this past year by The Wildlands Conservancy and LLTU. It showed that 56% of the stream is in poor condition. An overview of this assessment can be found on The Conservancy’s website.

Although the stream needs improvement and help from concerned anglers, there is still a tremendous amount of fish in the Little Lehigh. I do not fish the special reg sections on a regular basis, but I do fish its open water about 70 times a year. I can tell you that I have had numerous days this past year when I have caught over 20 fish in a day. Good and bad times on the stream are not dependent upon floods washing hatchery fish into the stream, midges aren’t the only flies that comprise a good hatch, and all three species of trout continue to reproduce throughout different sections of the stream. To the stream’s credit, I saw more spawning beds this fall than I have seen in the past few years.

I will agree that fishing the stream at this time of year is extremely frustrating. It has been that way for as long as I can remember. It seems once the fish are done spawning and the winter “algae bloom” comes there are no fish in the stream. Believe me - this is not the case.

Yes, the stream needs work, but there are plenty of wild fish still thriving in the Little Lehigh. LLTU, The Little Lehigh Fly Fishers, Wildlands Conservancy and some of the 40 people lining its banks on a given day need to join together to improve this fishery.

Obviously, if 40 people are on the banks of the LL they must believe, or know, that there are trout there to be caught. Considering this, it amazes me that people want to “write off” this stream or “move on to” other streams because they can’t catch numerous fish whenever they show up. How many streams do you “write off” or “move on to” before you have nothing left?

If you enjoy fishing the Little Lehigh check out the LLTU website and contact them. Let them know you’re interested in improving the stream. Call Rod at the Fly Shop and do the same.

 

[Dances_With_Brookies]

I believe you are referring to some of my previous comments...I wrote off the stream for three reasons. For one, I no longer live nearby. Two, I do not like fishing with crowds. Three, the last two times that I was there, I found my fellow anglers to be very rude. Unless I miss a guess, these reasons are enough to keep like-minded people such as myself away. Since then, I have found much enjoyment hitting lesser known Class A streams where I do not have people burning holes in my back while they wait for me to leave "their spot." You can apply this reasoning while trying to determine why I do not fish the C&R area of Yellow Breeches which happens to be 15 min. from my current residence...

Just so we are clear, when you say "writing off"-this should not be construed as though I feel the fishery is biologically dead as others may be implying because they have a bad outing. There are plenty of fish in the stream and I have rarely had a bad outing-40 fishermen present or just 5....Even if I lived back at my old house, I still would not fish it for the reasons given though I would most likely still be a member of LLTU and helping any way I could as that is what this sport is about. Truth be told, these days you would be more apt to find me on Trout Creek off of Dixon St. if I were still in the area but that is just me and my preference...

 

[afishinado]

JeffS wrote:

"Although the stream needs improvement and help from concerned anglers, there is still a tremendous amount of fish in the Little Lehigh. I do not fish the special reg sections on a regular basis, but I do fish its open water about 70 times a year. I can tell you that I have had numerous days this past year when I have caught over 20 fish in a day. Good and bad times on the stream are not dependent upon floods washing hatchery fish into the stream, midges aren’t the only flies that comprise a good hatch, and all three species of trout continue to reproduce throughout different sections of the stream. To the stream’s credit, I saw more spawning beds this fall than I have seen in the past few years."

"Yes, the stream needs work, but there are plenty of wild fish still thriving in the Little Lehigh. LLTU, The Little Lehigh Fly Fishers, Wildlands Conservancy and some of the 40 people lining its banks on a given day need to join together to improve this fishery."



I may be mistaken, but I believe that the LL used to be listed by the PFBC as a Class A wild trout stream at one time. It is now listed as ATW and stocked. (See Lehigh County FBC map). From what I can tell from the fish I catch in many sections of the stream, it is stocked throughout its length with the exception of the Heritage FF section. (See FBC stocking list). In addition to the FBC stocking, I believe that the Queen City hatchery releases fish in each section and/or the stocked fish into the Heritage section of the stream and comprises most of the fish caught.

I can attest that the stream held a large population of wild fish in the 80’s and part of the 90’s, but wild trout, at least in my experience, and based on the stocking list below are few and few between on the LL. The PFBC and the QC hatchery are stocking over wild fish throughout the stream. I agree that the stream needs some TLC, but stocking it certainly suppresses the wild trout population. Does the LLTU support or oppose stocking the stream?


Lehigh County FBC Map

FBC Stocking list

 

[afishinado]

JeffS and others,

I reread my post and apologize for the confrontational tone it took. It appears that you are one of the anglers that care about, and do whatever you can to help the LL. Good for you, good for the LL, and good for all those who enjoy fishing there.

My frustration is with those who claim the LL is currently a wild trout fishery when in reality it is an ATW and one of the most heavily stocked streams in PA. Each section is stocked 3-4 times a year; spring and fall by the FBC, and supplemental stockings are done by the QC hatchery operating on the stream. Nearly all the fish caught on the LL are stocked trout. The Heritage (FFO CR) section is not listed on the FBC stocking list, but it is stocked above and below and it is populated almost entirely by hatchery fish.

I do realize that the stream runs through the city park and is primarily used as a put-and-take fishery, and I do support stocking and also sometimes fish on marginal streams that do not have the ability to support wild trout. In PA there are thousands of miles of streams, and yet there are precious few streams that can support wild trout. I believe that the LL is, or maybe was one of them, but those of us that are aficionados of wild trout are in the minority.

 

[JackM]

afishinado wrote:
In PA there are thousands of miles of streams, and yet there are precious few streams that can support wild trout.

I do truly admire your enthusiasm for wild trout, but inaccurate statements and hyperbole do not make a good case for the causes you are trying to advance.

The truth is that there are well over 1,000 miles of Class A wild trout waters alone in the Commonwealth.

 

[afishinado]

Jack,

Since you brought it up there are actually 2,763 miles of viable wild trout streams (see attached PFBC report), and as you pointed out 1,000 miles of Class A stream miles out of the 45,000 miles of streams and rivers in PA. Roughly 6% of PA's streams contain wild trout and 2% are class A.........a "precious few" in my book.

We should try to hang on to every mile of wild trout water and work to expand wild trout populations to more streams - IMO.




PFBC report

 

[JackM]

Basing the percentages as you do on all "45,000 miles of streams and rivers in PA" is again a misleading argument in my opinion. The vast majority of flowing water is warm-water habitat. The fact is that Pennsylvania has a very large amount of wild trout streams of high-quality as recreational fisheries. As I implied initially, I admire your desire to "hang on to every mile of wild trout water and work to expand wild trout populations," but trying to do so by exageration and misinformation is not the right way - IMO.

 

[troutfly21]

Again, I've missed alot of these posts, and had a lot to catch up on... I wanted to respond and support what JeffS wrote about the quality or rather the quantity of the fishery. There are A LOT of fish in that stream. It is true that just because you don't see them doesn't mean that they're not there. I don't really think the number of fish has gone down, and I don't know exactly what shape the natural reproduction rate is in, but I was commenting more about the general fishing conditions on the stream in my last post. The fish are there, and I still enjoy pretty good success there some days, but I think a lot can be done to improve the fishery... I think that it was protected and did really well for a while and then I think that is was let go for a while and kind of forgotten because of how good the conditions were. I guess I'm saying that its past glory was taken for granted in a way. Also...about the pressure, and to comment on what JackM had to say, I do understand that if I continue to fish there, I am contributing to the amount of pressure and therefore, don't really have much of a right to complain. It is for the very same reason that I've only been there a few times in the last couple years...and mostly on days that very few anglers would venture out.

 

[afishinado]

Jack wrote: “As I implied initially, I admire your desire to "hang on to every mile of wild trout water and work to expand wild trout populations," but trying to do so by exageration and misinformation is not the right way - IMO.”



Jack, I would like to add to my exaggerations and misinformation:


“Brook trout are the canary in the coal mine when it comes to water quality,” said Gary Berti, Trout Unlimited’s Eastern Brook Trout Campaign Coordinator. “The presence of brook trout in a watershed indicates that water quality is excellent. Declining brook trout populations can provide an early warning that the health of an entire stream, lake or river is at risk.”

From the PFBC site:

” Brook trout populations have been eliminated or greatly reduced throughout more than 70% of their historical habitat in Pennsylvania. These results reflect the condition of brook trout across their entire Eastern range, according to an assessment released today by Trout Unlimited and a coalition of state and federal agencies.”

The brook trout’s historic range and abundance has been considerably reduced throughout the east coast, including Pennsylvania. Habitat and water quality degradation caused by urbanization, acid mine drainage, acid deposition, and poor land use practices have contributed to the decline.”

“Brook trout historically thrived across Pennsylvania, with the exception of areas in the extreme western and southwestern portions of the state. Today, brook trout have been eliminated from 34% of their historic habitat in Pennsylvania, and they are greatly reduced in another 39% of habitat that formerly supported brook trout.”


Jack,
Indeed in PA there are many warm water fisheries in the 45,000 miles of streams in PA - coldwater habitat is harder to come by and should be conserved – that’s my point. The facts are stated above. Yes we are blessed with many miles of wild trout streams in PA – but far fewer than in the past. The point is to make all aware that wild trout streams should be protected and preserved.

Also, I catch a lot of fish too on the LL and other stocked streams, but I don’t lose sight of the fact that these fish have to be artificially stocked in order to maintain the fishery, when not that many years ago the stream had a healthy population of wild trout. Catching 20 or 30 stocked fish in a day on a stream is not really a testament to its health.

 

[JeffS]

afishinado –
Thank you for the apology, but I didn’t consider your post offensive.

I just took a look at the links you provided in your post and I am not sure if they give an accurate picture of the Little Lehigh. Take a look at the link below from the PFBC website. It shows the amount of wild fish that were found in the Heritage Section of the LL a few years ago. In addition, a few years ago I posted some information on this site from the PFBC that showed how many wild trout were in a section of water above the Heritage Special Reg area. The wild trout biomass above the hatchery was three times the Class A criteria. The reason this water was not re-classified was due to poor young of year reproduction. Obviously, this is a concern and another reason why anglers need to lend the stream a hand.

The LL really does support more wild fish than people think.

http://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/fisheries/afm/2003/5_08-11llehigh.htm

 

[troutbert]

Second: often, but not always, excess pressure exists because the people frequenting the stream do not know of anywhere else to fish or think there are no other streams worthy of their attention. The unwritten policy of never mentioning streams that are not "well-known" contributes to this "problem." Sharing information about lesser known streams can spread the pressure.

Only a very small percentage of trout stream mileage in PA is crowded. Even on the Little Lehigh, only the special regs area is really crowded. Areas both upstream and downstream have decent numbers of trout, but are far from crowded.

Even though people complain about crowding, many fishermen actually LIKE to fish in crowded conditions. But you won't hear them admit that. But it's true.

I agree (as someone who lives near a few famous streams) that the policy of mentioning only famous streams, but not others, just compounds the crowding problem.

Go check out Mudlick Run at your earliest convenience.

 

[Chaz]

First of all the LL is a wild trout stream that is stocked, hatchery is part of the problem not the solution. 50 % of the fish in the hatchery pool area are wild brown trout as you get further away from the hatchery the fewer stockies you will see. At issue on the LL is run-off and with the development of the water shed we see more run-off.
The continuous channelization of the stream in the park doesn't help either. Channelization speeds up the erosion process and this only exacerbates the problems the stream has.
The most recent survey of the creek shows a 160 kg/ht population of wild brown trout in a 3 mile sectin from the covered bidge upstream.

 

[Chaz]

As far as stream mileage in PA, there are approximately 83,000 miles of streams and rivers in PA. There is over 7,700 miles of water with reproducing wild trout in 3100 stream sections, which is less then 10% of the water. When the first Europeans arrived nearly all of this water was cold water, the only warm water stream streams in PA were large rivers, and many streams in SW PA where the top predator were smallmouth bass, in nearly all of the other streams for the Schuylkill River northwest of Philly to Lake Erie and most points in between the Brook Trout was the top predator. So any stream that has a reasonable chance of being restored, that is any stream that is near to the lethal temperature of trout, should be prioritized by groups for restoration. You could base this on many different points of degradation, and whether or not public access is an issue.

 

[wreinhardt]

With reference to Chaz comments on the most recent survey in the Heritege section yielding a fish population of 160 kg/ht, I would like to know when the survey was conducted. It was earlier posted that the state shocked the section in July of 2003. It is not possible to compare the results of the surveys due to different parameters being reported.The 2003 survey reported total nunmbers of fish found while the"most recent" survey gives results in kg/ht. Also, while the 2003 survey gives somewhat impressive numbers, I personally feel that during the 4 1/2 years that have transpired since then, there has been significant deterioration of the Heritege section. There has been an explosion in the development of the area around the upper fly stretch with a huge housing development on a hill overlooking the stream fueling the siltation problem. I feel that this is a major factor in the decline of the fishing in the Heritege section. A few years ago, I was fishing in the upper fly stretch, when all of a sudden the stream turned chocolate brown with logs, branches, and other assorted debis came floating down. Fortunately , I was not in the creek at that time. It turns out that some joker was in the process of building a large home virtually on the banks of the river upstream, and the contractor was bull dozing excess soil and other debris right into the river! In light of what's going on, it is no wonder the river cannot maintain itself. Just my opinions.