DomR
Well-known member
Why can't you fish for shad???
Outdoor News Commentary: Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission should cut back on trout stocking
- Thread starter FishTales1
- Start date
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Touche.
They no longer reach nearby portions of the west branch, the state should stock more.
DomR
Well-known member
Institute a shad stamp. Get it on a PFBC agenda.
Or…..and this might be new concept for some, but we could only put fish in places that they will survive for more than a few weeks, and not promote the truck chasing culture that the PFBC has wholeheartedly embraced.
ROVERT
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2013
- Messages
- 298
With rare exception, I don't fish streams that don't have natural reproduction. That said, if the stocking program ended tomorrow, I think it may have consequences that many are overlooking. It would likely have a negative impact on all of our fishing experiences.
Sure, some people will just stop fishing for trout when the opportunity is no longer within 15-30 minutes of their residence. Not all will stop, though. Pressure will increase on the wild trout fisheries.
At face value, I don't support stocking over wild fish. In reality, though, isn't it likely that those stockers actually protect some wild fish? Especially in small streams, when the catch and keep angler intent on getting his limit hits the stream, he likely spooks the wild fish and harvests the stocked. If there are no stocked fish, will he not adapt and learn to harvest the wild fish?
Reducing rather than retiring the stocking program will have the same effects just to a lesser extent.
People want to fish for trout. Making it easy for them might not be the worst thing for both the wild fish and those of us who pursue wild fish.
FWIW, I do not support stocking over native brook trout populations at all. In an ideal world, we wouldn't have any stocking programs. In a nearly ideal world, maybe only some fingerling stocking would occur. The world we live in is far from ideal. Unfortunately, we can't just go by the science and ignore the societal aspect. Those must be carefully balanced by resource management agencies.
Someone is always going to be upset. Those who are upset are almost certainly overlooking some aspect of the the situation. Here's an example. I think there should be be no brook trout harvest or stocking allowed in PA. Given the difficulty that rainbows seem to have reproducing in our state, they should be the only trout stocked in order to protect native brook trout and wild brown trout strains. I'm sure I'm missing something.
Sure, some people will just stop fishing for trout when the opportunity is no longer within 15-30 minutes of their residence. Not all will stop, though. Pressure will increase on the wild trout fisheries.
At face value, I don't support stocking over wild fish. In reality, though, isn't it likely that those stockers actually protect some wild fish? Especially in small streams, when the catch and keep angler intent on getting his limit hits the stream, he likely spooks the wild fish and harvests the stocked. If there are no stocked fish, will he not adapt and learn to harvest the wild fish?
Reducing rather than retiring the stocking program will have the same effects just to a lesser extent.
People want to fish for trout. Making it easy for them might not be the worst thing for both the wild fish and those of us who pursue wild fish.
FWIW, I do not support stocking over native brook trout populations at all. In an ideal world, we wouldn't have any stocking programs. In a nearly ideal world, maybe only some fingerling stocking would occur. The world we live in is far from ideal. Unfortunately, we can't just go by the science and ignore the societal aspect. Those must be carefully balanced by resource management agencies.
Someone is always going to be upset. Those who are upset are almost certainly overlooking some aspect of the the situation. Here's an example. I think there should be be no brook trout harvest or stocking allowed in PA. Given the difficulty that rainbows seem to have reproducing in our state, they should be the only trout stocked in order to protect native brook trout and wild brown trout strains. I'm sure I'm missing something.
Mikey2006
Well-known member
Are people advocating for the complete end of stocking? I read the article and didn’t see anything that would suggest that. He even said “stocking has a place”
I never remember him saying anything about ending stocking completely on here before he got banned either. I thought it was always about ending the practice of sticking over wild fish.
Maybe no stocked trout streams have to be removed at all. I don’t know how much money is spent stocking fish in natural reproduction streams, but it would save a lot and make a whole lot of sense if they just stopped doing that and made no changes to anything else. And if they were still over budget, they could remove an in season stocking or two on some waters, or stock less fish overall. Spread out over all the stocked waters we currently have, the decrease in fish would be less noticeable. And at the end of the day it’s the right thing to do regardless of how people would react to it, not just because native and wild populations need protection, but also because they are spending money they have no right to spend on trout stocking
