Steelhead in the Delaware River?

[RLeep2]

>>Better idea might be a trial of Atlantic's in the Erie Feeders. imo>>

If they're gonna do that, they better develop a strain that can travel on land. By the time the powers that be finally decide there are enough steelhead and browns in the creeks, where are the salmon going to lay in the creek?

The only place I can think of is out on the bank...

What a clust... aww, never mind...🙂

 

[RLeep2]

If memory serves, NJ once proposed a Kings or Coho program for the D. I forget which. The notion didn't float for very long before dying a rapid and well deserved death.

I think this steelhead idea deserves the same.

 

[sandfly]

The big "D" has some sea run browns, some years better than others. I have never caught or heard of any above Easton though. most of the sea runs I have caught were below new hope wing dam and scudders falls. A few were in the 10-12 lb. range. kenny schram, I and few others fished for them for years. They are still around but i will not give out any more info.

N.J. has tried salmon and steelhead on and off for years, nothing ever happens. The Big D" is not conducive to them. To warm, not the right geography for them. Same for Atlantics.

 

[skeeter]

Just to vent, whats wrong with what we got! The D is bottom line the healthiest fishery and waterway in the eastern US! What else could you ask for? It has the best tailwater fishery in the US, it is a superb small mouth fishery, it has an recovering shad and striped bass population, and the best and maybe not the least the atlantic sturgeon is making an impressive comeback. And from a sport fishing perspective, pound for pound, IMO, shad fight better than pa mut steelhead, and they're native. If anything, I think the current issues of drilling shale-water quality, water usage, invasives (mud snail, rock snot, asian carp, zebra mussels to name a few) and watershed sustainability should be the subjects of conversation and should be talked about until there is nothing else to talk about.

 

[jayL]

I love the D as well, but I think it's very far from the best tailwater fishery in the US. Very far.

 

[midnightangler]

I love the D as well, but I think it's very far from the best tailwater fishery in the US. Very far.

I assume he meant the eastern US.

 

[skeeter]

My apologies, thought that could be implied. For argument sake, I say in the US it is top 5 because of public access. As for the fishery top 10.

 

[TUNA]

1) Upper Delaware River (NY, PA)
Threat: Gas drilling
The Upper Delaware River provides drinking water for 17 million people across Pennsylvania and New York. Unfortunately, this clean water source is threatened by natural gas extraction activities in the Marcellus Shale, where chemicals are injected into the ground creating untreatable toxic wastewater. The Delaware River Basin Commission must not issue permits for gas drilling in this watershed until a thorough study of impacts is completed. Congress must also pass the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009.

I agree with skeeter, except about the best tailwater in the US. We should focus more on maintaining and continuing the fishery that already exists. I've never even been there, but from reading books and talking to other anglers, it seems like a very fine waterway to me.



Source: http://www.americanrivers.org/newsroom/press-releases/2010/americas-most-endangered-rivers-2010-6-2-2010.htm

 

[gulfgreyhound]

Best tailwaters fishery:Most any bottom release TVA Lake.
Delaware is a special case due to the propose gas drilling that needs to be regulated or better yet stopped.Like the gulf oil spill,we'll pay for it mentality, after the damage is done and who knows the long term effects.

 

[sight_nymph_17109]

Jay,
During good hatch periods and when the flows good, the experience might change your ranking the D. It has many problems and if the flows can be managed a little better, it will be scary good. The crazy hot summer hasn't helped things and temp around Lordville exceeded 80 several times. I'm sure there's been some mortality due to stress and temps that has flown under the radar.

GG,
No mention of the White or Little Red as top tailwater in US? That's even closer to your neck of the woods.

There's probably too many great tailwaters to mention.
Big Horn
Green River
White River
Delaware
quite a few in the Smokies
take your pick in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, etc.

We've got a good one here, let's not f it up. To the Lehigh lovers, it's close to being a dud like the Tully. Better tailwaters that should get new release plans and better attention... Kinzua and Raystown.

 

[jayL]

I don't doubt that it's one of the best streams in the US, but I have been to the bighorn. It's otherworldly compared to the D. It really must be seen to be believed. Consistent 30+ fish days, with none under 16 inches. That was all day, every day. It keeps me awake at night.

And I have yet to fish some of the other famous western tailwaters.

I would love to see the delaware become that good, but it's not there right now.

 

[RLeep2]

>>Better tailwaters that should get new release plans and better attention... Kinzua and Raystown.>>

I'd be against doing anything of the sort to the Allegheny. It's already a good trout fishery almost all the way to Oil City, you just have to pick your times.

When they put the dam in up there (nearly 50 years ago), they raised hell with a first class smallmouth fishery all the way to Tionesta by monkey-dinking around with the releases every year to fill the reservoir for boating, etc. It's just in the last decade or so that it has mostly come back.

Enough is enough.

If they do anything with that dam, what I'd like to see is for them to take it out. I know that's kinda radical and will never happen, but that's what I'd like.

 

[trowpa]

RLeep2 wrote:

If they do anything with that dam, what I'd like to see is for them to take it out. I know that's kinda radical and will never happen, but that's what I'd like.

I'm not a fan of Dams. I'd sooner them all be taken out and lose the tailwater fisheries. Sure - i'll fish below them and take advantage of the trout fisheries they can create. But given the choice, i'd rather we (as a species) stop damming up all our rivers and making artificial situations.

Gosh i'm sounding like a radical these days on the forum. Guess I'm a dreamer at heart.

 

[JackM]

Flood control, irrigation, power generation and municipal water supply on the one hand, better fly fishing on the other hand. Surely a tough choice for most people.

 

[sight_nymph_17109]

The dams can do all of the things Jack lists... if properly managed.

Jay,

This is from Border Waters site:

Main Stem "Species: Brown, rainbow & brook trout. Smallmouth bass, walleye, shad and some strippers. Rainbows average 14 inches, Browns about 17 but lots over 20 on dries."

East Branch "Species: Browns, rainbows, brookies and smallmouth bass. Rainbows average 12", browns 16", lots of browns in the 20+ " class, some brookies, 10" average."

My understanding is that the Brown average 17-18" and the Bows are 1-16" through the entire system. In the spring, we really didn't take but a handful that were less than 17" in either species.

 

[RLeep2]

>>Flood control, irrigation, power generation and municipal water supply on the one hand, better fly fishing on the other hand. Surely a tough choice for most people.>>

Different fly fishing, to be sure. Perhaps not always better.

On days like today when I'm in full war bonnet mode, the flood control argument doesn't carry much weight with me.

For the question arises: What manner of halfwit would site a city on the low ground where 2 rivers come together?

And the answer comes: Only the sort of halfwit arrogant enough to believe he has both the means and right to bend nature and free flowing rivers to his will. We certainly have the means. Sometimes, I'm not so sure we have the right.

But then the war bonnet comes off and I realize what is, is.

I don't have to like it though..

 

[jayL]

sight_nymph_17109 wrote:
The dams can do all of the things Jack lists... if properly managed.

Jay,

This is from Border Waters site:

Main Stem "Species: Brown, rainbow & brook trout. Smallmouth bass, walleye, shad and some strippers. Rainbows average 14 inches, Browns about 17 but lots over 20 on dries."

East Branch "Species: Browns, rainbows, brookies and smallmouth bass. Rainbows average 12", browns 16", lots of browns in the 20+ " class, some brookies, 10" average."

My understanding is that the Brown average 17-18" and the Bows are 1-16" through the entire system. In the spring, we really didn't take but a handful that were less than 17" in either species.

6000+ per mile?

I'm sorry. I know you love the D. I think it's great too. But it is not the bighorn. I am certain that numerous other people that have experience with both can attest to that. I stepped out of the car with zero experience at the place, and caught numerous 20" class fish within the first three hours. That lasted multiple days. While waiting for the shuttle to be set up, I'd often take a dozen casts with buggers from the boat ramp. It often produced 4-5 17-20" fish before I even put my waders on. It's otherworldly.

Perhaps it could be closer if/when flows are better managed, but it's not the case now.

 

[sight_nymph_17109]

6000+ fish per mile................. hope you like fishing shrimp & cress bugs. Does me NO GOOD!

I was talking to Josh about a MT trip for next year. Big Horn was always #1 the list. No longer. It's going to be Missouri River or Henry's Fork. A monkey can catch fish on nymphs. I'm going to catch them the way I want to... providing the fish are on the same sheet of music. Please see video. Smoke break will be required afterward.

 

[jayL]

There were rising fish everywhere, and crazy black caddis and hopper fishing.

But you do realize that post invalidates your rant about frog water and elitism, right? :-D

 

[sight_nymph_17109]

Have you watched this video? I think not. You can't tell me that's what you saw on the BH. Look at all of this lovely "frog water"

No you don't!!! I can show you 100 successful nymph fisherman and 70 of them aren't good casters. They can read water, catch fish, etc. I don't think you could say the same for dry fly guys.

Why is it that a dry fly fisherman will fish nymphs and not complain but a nymph guy is forced to fish dries and the pampers need changed in 5 minutes?