Waters with the Biggest Potential

[sixfootfenwick]

I fished Bowmans Creek up in the State Gamelands before they started liming and stocking. (The L&S treatment.) There were native brook trout up there.

And I fished it since the liming and stocking. I think the numbers of native brook trout are way down now.

Regarding big potential specifically for brook trout, Bowmans Creek up in the SGLs, and Mosquito Creek and its tributary Gifford Run are way up there because those are sizeable waters for brook trout streams.

What is your thoughts then?

What is the potential if it is left to be infertile?
How can you bring the brook trout to proliferation and expansion if the water chemistry isn't fixed?

 

[tomgamber]

That's crap. You've been espousing nothing but the 2nd paragraph as your main goal all along. Explicitly. I'm starting you think to like having a problem more than you want a solution. So fake. So funny

 

[troutbert]

What is your thoughts then?

What is the potential if it is left to be infertile?
How can you bring the brook trout to proliferation and expansion if the water chemistry isn't fixed?

I fished here before there was any liming or any stocking. And the brook trout were there.

There is liming being done on Gifford Run. The stocking starts at the liming station and goes downstream. If you start at the liming station and go upstream, the brook trout there.

So the brook trout do not need the liming on Mosquito and Gifford. There is no mine drainage here (except the very low end of Mosquito Creek at Karthaus).

The bedrock geology and soils are naturally very infertile. So the streams were always infertile. That is their natural condition. It's true that acid precipitation made the streams more acidic than normal. But the brook trout still were present in these streams and do well because there is no competition from brown trout.

The brook trout lived there without liming, and acidity of precipitation is decreasing.

The lime it then stock it approach is very harmful to the brook trout populations in these naturally infertile watersheds.

I don't think that liming a naturally infertile watershed and stream is "restoration."

The situation is very similar on upper Bowmans Creek. It's a naturally infertile watershed. The brook trout were there before any liming was done. And it was not being stocked. They limed it, then they stocked it. And the brook trout population took a hit. It's a travesty. And upper Bowmans is on public land. And the great majority of Mosquito Cr and Gifford Run are on public land also.

Compare this to how brook trout are managed in Shenandoah Park, which is also a naturally infertile geology area.

 

[silverfox]

That's crap. You've been espousing nothing but the 2nd paragraph as your main goal all along. Explicitly. I'm starting you think to like having a problem more than you want a solution. So fake. So funny

I’m simply questioning why issue #2 is always ignored. It is not my “main goal.” I’d love nothing more than for more to be done, so no, I don’t like having problems. No need to make it personal.

 

[silverfox]

I fished here before there was any liming or any stocking. And the brook trout were there.

There is liming being done on Gifford Run. The stocking starts at the liming station and goes downstream. If you start at the liming station and go upstream, the brook trout there.

So the brook trout do not need the liming on Mosquito and Gifford. There is no mine drainage here (except the very low end of Mosquito Creek at Karthaus).

The bedrock geology and soils are naturally very infertile. So the streams were always infertile. That is their natural condition. It's true that acid precipitation made the streams more acidic than normal. But the brook trout still were present in these streams and do well because there is no competition from brown trout.

The brook trout lived there without liming, and acidity of precipitation is decreasing.

The lime it then stock it approach is very harmful to the brook trout populations in these naturally infertile watersheds.

I don't think that liming a naturally infertile watershed and stream is "restoration."

The situation is very similar on upper Bowmans Creek. It's a naturally infertile watershed. The brook trout were there before any liming was done. And it was not being stocked. They limed it, then they stocked it. And the brook trout population took a hit. It's a travesty. And upper Bowmans is on public land. And the great majority of Mosquito Cr and Gifford Run are on public land also.

Compare this to how brook trout are managed in Shenandoah Park, which is also a naturally infertile geology area.

I don't think liming directly in the stream is a good solution, regardless. If the stream is attaining, but there is some acidification impact, riparian liming would be a better approach. The goal should be to restore soil base cations to benefit the entire ecosystem. Not just some temporary fix to allow the stocking of nonnative fish. That's not "restoration" or "conservation."

It's worse when you consider that, if left alone, the acidification issue will mostly correct itself over time, and we're left with a naturally infertile, slightly acidic condition that maintains brook trout but likely prevents the ingress of other species.

I'm really surprised DCNR signed on for any of this (if it's occurring on SF or in the wild area). It's completely counter to the discussions around this same issue I've had with them about other similar watersheds (where direct liming was immediately written off). Given the wild area designation, I'm even more surprised. What's worse is that a group of people has taken ownership of a place that is supposed to be held in the public's interest, and they're doing things that are counterproductive to the purpose of a wild area, to support activities that only benefit that group, possibly at the expense of the natural system.

The entirety of Mosquito and its tribs should be a WTS.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

I fished here before there was any liming or any stocking. And the brook trout were there.

There is liming being done on Gifford Run. The stocking starts at the liming station and goes downstream. If you start at the liming station and go upstream, the brook trout there.

So the brook trout do not need the liming on Mosquito and Gifford. There is no mine drainage here (except the very low end of Mosquito Creek at Karthaus).

The bedrock geology and soils are naturally very infertile. So the streams were always infertile. That is their natural condition. It's true that acid precipitation made the streams more acidic than normal. But the brook trout still were present in these streams and do well because there is no competition from brown trout.

The brook trout lived there without liming, and acidity of precipitation is decreasing.

The lime it then stock it approach is very harmful to the brook trout populations in these naturally infertile watersheds.

I don't think that liming a naturally infertile watershed and stream is "restoration."

The situation is very similar on upper Bowmans Creek. It's a naturally infertile watershed. The brook trout were there before any liming was done. And it was not being stocked. They limed it, then they stocked it. And the brook trout population took a hit. It's a travesty. And upper Bowmans is on public land. And the great majority of Mosquito Cr and Gifford Run are on public land also.

Compare this to how brook trout are managed in Shenandoah Park, which is also a naturally infertile geology area.

I don't disagree with anything you said here.
I was under the impression Mosquito Creek suffered from AMD impairment also.

Is this wrong?

 

[silverfox]

I don't disagree with anything you said here.
I was under the impression Mosquito Creek suffered from AMD impairment also.

Is this wrong?

There are no known discharges up in the watershed. The 2 blue dots are sample stations but those don't have anything to do with AMD. They're to establish base conditions up in the watershed to measure impacts down at the mouth. Red triangles are AMD discharges.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

There are no known discharges up in the watershed. The 2 blue dots are sample stations but those don't have anything to do with AMD. They're to establish base conditions up in the watershed to measure impacts down at the mouth. Red triangles are AMD discharges.

View attachment 1641229656

So it is seriously being limed just for the stocking, I mean why else do it?
That is just unacceptable.

 

[silverfox]

So it is seriously being limed just for the stocking, I mean why else do it?
That is just unacceptable.

Good question. I'd like to know the answer as well. It has low pH, but as troubert said, it's geology/natural.

 

[pcray1231]

Mosquito has wild browns. I'd say it's 99.9% brookies, but it is not allopatric.

No, I've never personally caught a brown there, it's been years since I've fished it. But a good friend has, showed me a pic, it was clearly a wild brown trout, and told me where he caught it, and I believe him.

 

[sixfootfenwick]

Mosquito has wild browns. I'd say it's 99.9% brookies, but it is not allopatric.

No, I've never personally caught a brown there, it's been years since I've fished it. But a good friend has, showed me a pic, it was clearly a wild brown trout, and told me where he caught it, and I believe him.

Is that a requirement for it to be managed for brook trout?
The discussion isn't if it is allopatric, it's how do we keep it's potential as a prominently brook trout stream.

 

[pcray1231]

I didn't say it was a requirement. Someone said they didn't think there were browns in it, and I merely said there were. Not in any way implying that changes the way it should be managed.

I recall that it was up there around where several streams meet, including Gifford, but I don't recall if it was below or above that confluence. And that was probably 10-15 years ago, I only remember because I was mildly surprised he caught a brown up there.

 

[silverfox]

I forgot about this: https://mosqcreek.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Mosquito-Creek-Watershed-Restoration-Project.pdf

The lime is placed directly in the stream, allowing the stream flow to erode, dissolve, and distribute the sand downstream. The effect is to raise the pH of the downstream water sufficiently to support stocked trout.

Some of what was done I agree with (riparian liming with spreaders/aerial liming), and some of it I don't (liming the stream to support stocking).

Most concerning is the vague references to "improving fish populations." Somehow I doubt native brook trout are the goal. Given the stocking, I just don't have a lot of faith that things are being done for true "restoration" purposes.

 

[troutbert]

I don't disagree with anything you said here.
I was under the impression Mosquito Creek suffered from AMD impairment also.

Is this wrong?

Acid mine drainage comes into Mosquito Creek only in the very lower stretch, just above Karthaus. From the Quehanna Highway bridge to the mouth is dead from AMD. I didn't measure, but that's probably 1 mile or less.

The rest of Mosquito Creek (and it runs quite a long way) has no AMD at all.

 

[Roofin' Trouter]

Acid mine drainage comes into Mosquito Creek only in the very lower stretch, just above Karthaus. From the Quehanna Highway bridge to the mouth is dead from AMD. I didn't measure, but that's probably 1 mile or less.

The rest of Mosquito Creek (and it runs quite a long way) has no AMD at all.

It looks better than it did 40 years ago. I seem to remember an orange tinge back then.
Are you familiar with Elk Creek (St. Mary's/Ridgway)? I stumbled upon a link to the watershed assessment for Elk Creek recently on St. Leo's Trout Derby Facebook page. Its an interesting read that outlines many problems. Figured if you're familiar with Mosquito you might be interested in checking it out.

 

[Swattie87]

The published PH studies on the Mosquito watershed, which are now approaching 20 years old, suggested there were portions of the watershed, but not all of it, with PH’s above 6. Namely the lower end of Gifford, presumably below where it was being limed. This is high enough to sustain Browns. Again, not the whole watershed, but part of it. And this was 20 years ago. The PH’s are probably even higher now. With the stocking, I suspect, and as pcray appears to have confirmed, that there is at least some token population of wild Browns already there. As the water continues to improve through continued liming, and the general decrease in acid precipitation, you can probably expect them to expand.

It’s funny though. Anecdotal reports on the Mosquito watershed suggest that before the acid rain issues took hold, it had a wild Brown Trout presence in it already. 50 or more years ago. Acid rain wiped out the Browns, and reduced the Brookie population, but Brookies apparently were able to hold on in certain locales in the watershed. Kind of ironic.

 

[Fish Sticks]

That's crap. You've been espousing nothing but the 2nd paragraph as your main goal all along. Explicitly. I'm starting you think to like having a problem more than you want a solution. So fake. So funny

The solution is just what fisheries scientists recommend and its working in maryland, WV, and other states. Its not some impossible task to create a large well connected resilient brook trout population, its quite simple. No solutions is perfect but this would be orders of magnitude’s better than what we have now.

1. C and R on brook trout(most water sheds like this get alot of angler pressure but i would agree with silver fox public educational value is paramount)

2. Watershed level management (~100 contiguous miles seems to be working)
So no stocking invasive species in that whole watershed for the most part or at all. (Certainly not 60k like kettle.)

3. Allow unlimited harvest on invasive trout
Heavily fished streams with angler buy in could help shift that balance somewhat giving the brook trout a better chance.

Oh and by the way its not even free it saves Boku bucks on stocked invasive species production which is what PSU said is what PFBC is risking financial insolvency over.

 

[troutbert]

Are you familiar with Elk Creek (St. Mary's/Ridgway)? I stumbled upon a link to the watershed assessment for Elk Creek recently on St. Leo's Trout Derby Facebook page. Its an interesting read that outlines many problems. Figured if you're familiar with Mosquito you might be interested in checking it out.

I've driven along Elk Creek above Ridgway, but I don't know much about it. I checked out the watershed assessment and it is very thorough.