The Good, the Bad, and the Unexpected

IMG_0366.jpeg

Jiggermortis
 
jifigz said:
Also, there is lots of large, woody debris in these streams, and it is getting worse all the time. I hate large woody debris.
Click to expand...
Are people not noticing the good habitat spots (pools and cover) created by large woody debris (LWD)?
 
troutbert said:
Are people not noticing the good habitat spots (pools and cover) created by large woody debris (LWD)?
Click to expand...
Do I notice the good spots? Yes and no. When I see numerous logs laying completely across the stream, here is what I see: one or a few very small little plunge pools on the downside of the logs, and I see a large, flat pool on the upside of the logs, which is often filled with detritus/silt. I also know that I am going to have a very hard time fishing this structure, and that I will either have a hard time climbing over the obstacles, or I'll be annoyed trying to leave the stream and go around the obstacles through thick forest cover.

Regardless, I hate LWD. One of my favorite things about fishing Colorado last year was the wide open streams with snaky bend pools. There were no trees to navigate around or over, and there were a ton of trout.
 
troutbert said:
Are people not noticing the good habitat spots (pools and cover) created by large woody debris (LWD)?
Click to expand...
Actually I think people are starting to notice the good habitat spots being destroyed by manmade LWD. Since it removes pools and cover in the long term. It’s a fisherman first, resource last type of thing. Helps for a little, then harms for a long long time.
 
Same thing with culvert pipe removals. In my lifetime in central Pa I have only had 5-6 creeks that I regularly fish get significantly worse, in my whole lifetime.

These were all caused by only two things. LWD projects or culvert pipe/dam removals. These two things are responsible for 100% of the trout population reduction problems I have noticed in my area.

It is sad to hear about the water problems near Philly caused by urban sprawl. What kills me is all of the trout stream destruction in north central Pennsylvania is done by us flyfisherman, the volunteer groups with grant money and T.U. We cut our ear off to spite our face.

It isn’t talked about or broadcast. But when you live in potter, Clinton, Lycoming, Sullivan, tioga counties. ……. And this is a tough pill to swallow. Nobody likes realizing the truth…..
Volunteer groups and T.U. Are our pollution. They are our droughts. They are our urban sprawl. They are our destroyers of native brookies. They are the destroyers of habitat. They are the destroyers of streams. They are responsible for 100% of the stream destruction and trout population reductions I’ve noticed in my area the last 20 years. Every single creek I noticed that went belly up was a creek that had one of those two projects on it.

@troutbert ….. to be fair most people live somewhere, where they have seen projects impacting and improving trout streams. I’m just not one of them. But I’m always open to learning.

@troutbert What Brook trout creeks do you know of, that have improved from LWD?

@troutbert what Brook trout streams do you know about, that have improved from culvert pipe removal?


Feel free to Dm me.
I wasn’t able to think of any.
 
5footfenwick said:
Same thing with culvert pipe removals. In my lifetime in central Pa I have only had 5-6 creeks that I regularly fish get significantly worse, in my whole lifetime.

These were all caused by only two things. LWD projects or culvert pipe/dam removals. These two things are responsible for 100% of the trout population reduction problems I have noticed in my area.

It is sad to hear about the water problems near Philly caused by urban sprawl. What kills me is all of the trout stream destruction in north central Pennsylvania is done by us flyfisherman, the volunteer groups with grant money and T.U. We cut our ear off to spite our face.

It isn’t talked about or broadcast. But when you live in potter, Clinton, Lycoming, Sullivan, tioga counties. ……. And this is a tough pill to swallow. Nobody likes realizing the truth…..
Volunteer groups and T.U. Are our pollution. They are our droughts. They are our urban sprawl. They are our destroyers of native brookies. They are the destroyers of habitat. They are the destroyers of streams. They are responsible for 100% of the stream destruction and trout population reductions I’ve noticed in my area the last 20 years. Every single creek I noticed that went belly up was a creek that had one of those two projects on it.

@troutbert ….. to be fair most people live somewhere, where they have seen projects impacting and improving trout streams. I’m just not one of them. But I’m always open to learning.

@troutbert What Brook trout creeks do you know of, that have improved from LWD?

@troutbert what Brook trout streams do you know about, that have improved from culvert pipe removal?


Feel free to Dm me.
I wasn’t able to think of any.
Click to expand...
What evidence/data/etc. do you have that proves these creeks went "belly up"? What does that exactly mean?

Could a culvert pipe provide everything that is needed for a booming trout population?
 
How is a culvert pipe hole that different from a lunker log? It is man-made, one is metal and one is wood. I would think both would favor large browns to ambush Brookies.
And while I agree that most man-made devices are bad, I think many of the streams where devices were placed were already going downhill to some extent and sportsman’s groups tried to “fix” them.
Lastly,Jifigz says he likes the bend pools in Colorado but doesn’t like large woody debris. It seems to me LWD is what creates most bend pools at least in eastern streams. Granted many of our streams have been channelized with a road next to it which limits both the size of the bends and the pools.
 
The topic being discussed is large woody debris and its effects on trout stream habitat.

The culvert removal topic is a totally different topic. It's a worthwhile topic but should be in a separate thread.
 
I disagree that LWD creates bend pools, unless we are talking about root wads and logs only extending part of the way across a stream. I do think those scenarios create bend pools, but when logs jam and dam the entire stream, I don't see or notice it creating a bend pool. It creates a big *** silty dam on the upside and plunge pools below. I hate plunge pools, too.
 
hemlock said:
What evidence/data/etc. do you have that proves these creeks went "belly up"? What does that exactly mean?

Could a culvert pipe provide everything that is needed for a booming trout population?
Click to expand...
Just my own fishing data for the last 38years.

Belly up =got worse , the creek is not worth fishing. Adult fish are gone. Browns have now taken over Etc. etc. etc. in my opinion belly up is all of these and that is what I am describing. The only creeks that have gotten worse in my 5-7 county area are the ones with grant money, Tu. or dcnr projects on them. The only ones. And none of them were headed downhill until the project started.

Yes a culvert pipe can be and is often the entire fully maturing and adult sized population of brook trout in an entire stream. Without it you have often destroyed the entire stream. No wintering hole. No summer hole. No protection from drought. No protection from predators.

Trust me I wish it wasn’t so. But it’s every creek ruined they do it on that I know of. All of therm.

@hemlock what brook trout streams do you know of in north central Pa that have benefited from culvert pipe removal?

Feel free to Dm me
 
troutbert said:
The topic being discussed is large woody debris and its effects on trout stream habitat.

The culvert removal topic is a totally different topic. It's a worthwhile topic but should be in a separate thread.
Click to expand...
That’s fair, sorry Troutbert.
 
riverwhy said:
How is a culvert pipe hole that different from a lunker log? It is man-made, one is metal and one is wood. I would think both would favor large browns to ambush Brookies.
And while I agree that most man-made devices are bad, I think many of the streams where devices were placed were already going downhill to some extent and sportsman’s groups tried to “fix” them.
Lastly,Jifigz says he likes the bend pools in Colorado but doesn’t like large woody debris. It seems to me LWD is what creates most bend pools at least in eastern streams. Granted many of our streams have been channelized with a road next to it which limits both the size of the bends and the creek.
Click to expand...
It acts as a migratory barrier.
It increases depth every time.
It provides a wintering home to avoid anchor ice.
It provides protection from predators without giving said predators a perch to sit.
It favors brook trout over brown trout.
It provides colder temperatures for the creek and down stream.
It provides additional food.
It allows trout to reach a much larger size.
It increases chances for reproduction.

These are the only differences I could think of off the top of my head. I’m sure there are many more.
 
So that little Brookie stream has a larger carrying capacity because of a pipe hole? the east branch of podunk brook that had a road built across it with a pipe in the 1800s has been improved by this manmade structure? I have often seen nothing but flat featureless stretches below the large plunge pools created by culvert pipes. I would think it would make the entire population more exposed to fisherman predation in these pools. Trout easily targeted by “road fisherman”.
I guess I could see where other manmade changes to the watershed could make the pipe hole theory true.
 
riverwhy said:
So that little Brookie stream has a larger carrying capacity because of a pipe hole? the east branch of podunk brook that had a road built across it with a pipe in the 1800s has been improved by this manmade structure? I have often seen nothing but flat featureless stretches below the large plunge pools created by culvert pipes. I would think it would make the entire population would be more exposed to fisherman predation in these pools. Trout easily targeted by “road fisherman”.
Click to expand...
Yes that’s the problem. Remove the pipe hole and now the entire micro watershed is flat and featureless.

Without the holes, there is no population for the fisherman to target.
 
jifigz said:
Do I notice the good spots? Yes and no. When I see numerous logs laying completely across the stream, here is what I see: one or a few very small little plunge pools on the downside of the logs, and I see a large, flat pool on the upside of the logs, which is often filled with detritus/silt. I also know that I am going to have a very hard time fishing this structure, and that I will either have a hard time climbing over the obstacles, or I'll be annoyed trying to leave the stream and go around the obstacles through thick forest cover.
Click to expand...
This could not have been said better. There's beneficial LWD and then there's TOO MUCH LWD.
 
So it makes a better fishing stream but not necessarily a better stream?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages

Share this page

Back
Top