WPSU Documentary "Healing the Red Mo" was just released last month and highlights the recovery activities currently underway on Moshannon Creek, with an emphasis on how various Penn State disciplines are getting involved. Much of the attention that Moshannon Creek is getting recently is due to the adovcacy of the Moshannon Creek Watershed Association.
WPSU Documentary "Healing the Red Mo"
- Thread starter stecal
- Start date
jifigz
Well-known member
When the Red Mo is finally clean, it is gonna be one helluva brown trout stream..
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Can you explain?
I'm curious why you say that. Habitat?
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
That would certainly help
I'm curious also. "Please show your work", as our teachers used to say.
I'm pretty sure that hatchery trout will be stocked after they clean it up, because that is what has happened at other places.
But what wild fish will be there seems hard to predict.
jifigz
Well-known member
Really? No, it's not hard to predict at all. It's going to be like Penns, the Little J, etc. In Moshannon state forest, the stream is big with gorgeous habitat. Almost every stream that enters it already has wild trout, and browns are in the system. I have no doubt it will be just like Penns. It's a large, gorgeous stream with a wild setting and public land. It will be predominantly browns with brookies thrown in the mix.
I'm talking about the section near the riding trails, with the AFT on the other side of the crick.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
What I wondered is not so much if brown trout will be there, they certainly would be and the most likely to dominate, I just wondered what your reasoning was.
My question has to do with the effects of the mitigation measures. They say 1000's? of mine drainage source points enter the watershed. That seems like a lot, is it really that many?
Either way, if it's hundreds or thousands, those source points are collected like in the video and go through the oxidizing process to clump the metals and make them fall.
Won't this warm the water?
Mine drainage tends to be very cold. Will this affect the temperature of the watershed and make some mileage unsuitable for trout?
jifigz
Well-known member
I'm sure parts of it would be warm. But, dang, this one has a lot of potential. And I'm only speculating. I can't cute evidence or anything. I'm speaking from my gut on this stream's potential and future.
tomgamber
Well-known member
Josh, I'm picking up what youre throwing down. I think you're gonna get more pushback for suggesting, "just like Penns" than facts or data.
jifigz
Well-known member
That's fine. I can handle that. I also know it's only speculation. Even the video said something along the lines of if they reclaimed or cleaned up three specific mine drainages, the stream would be mostly healed. Yes, that's probably not what they said, but it was something along those lines.
We know trout come back in AMD reclaimed waters, even browns, so I don't think I'm being too farfetched. It might not be in the next 50 years, though. Who knows? 🤷🏿♀️
Hopefully this important effort gets funded and moves forward quickly. This is the kind of Conservation work that should a top priority in PA. Also hopefully the PAFBC and local governments will work ahead to ensure public access along the entire length so the area benefits from fishing and tourism as the stream improves.
jifigz
Well-known member
Moshannon Creek Watershed Association is already doing a lot of great work.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,958
Here’s what I think is likely to happen. I’m not saying this is EXACTLY what will happen, but after observing recovery efforts in half a dozen or so similar watersheds to the Red Mo (fairly large, mostly forested, freestone systems with AMD issues severe enough to render the main stem of those watersheds lifeless, or nearly lifeless) I think this, or something close to it, is the most likely outcome. All those other watersheds have followed a very similar recovery path, and I don’t see why Red Mo would be any different.
Also, the below is likely to happen whether or not you stock the watershed once it reaches a point in recovery where it can support stocked fish, which, regardless of species generally have less acidity tolerance than stream bred fish of the same species. Yes, the watershed is also already being stocked on the Black Mo side. And yes it probably should NOT be stocked, now, or after AMD remediation. Different conversation for a different place and time, and thread.
Once the Red Mo is capable of supporting stocked fish, I think it’s likely it will be stocked, regardless of whether it should be. It’s a fairly large freestone stream with good public land access. I’m sure there will be high demand from local anglers to see it stocked, and I don’t readily see a scenario where that’s not catered to in today’s PA Trout angling culture.
As recovery efforts begin, you will first see Brook Trout begin to repopulate the main stem, downstream of remediation points, and where thermal conditions allow for it. Yes, AMD remediation does have a general cooling effect on the water in the Summer. The water coming from the mines comes out at roughly 50 deg or so, the same as a true limestone spring. Yes, it warms some by the time it is treated and ends up back in the stream, but, this water is cooler than the water would be if it was flowing normally on the surface, and not artificially trapped below the surface in the mines. The net effect is cooler water. The upper WB Susky, and some of the systems in Skuke Co. clearly demonstrate this. You can end up with fairly large freestone streams, larger than you’d expect otherwise, with temperatures capable of supporting wild Trout.
From when remediation efforts start, usually targeting the largest AMD discharges first, most bang for the expense buck, you’ll see Brook Trout show up (re-colonizing from elsewhere in the watershed) in relatively low numbers mind you, fairly quickly. Within a couple years. The Brook Trout population in the main stem (again where thermally viable) will grow, and you’ll have a period of time, perhaps 5-20 years or so from when remediation efforts begin, where there will be a decent, or even good, wild Brook Trout fishery for a while. Then, as the average PH continues to improve, the Browns will start to show up. (Brookies have better acidity tolerance than Browns, by roughly 0.5-1.0 in PH value.) Again from elsewhere in the watershed where they are already established. The Browns are already there in numerous tributary streams on the Red Mo side, and most of the wild fish in the Black Mo, below the dam anyway, are Browns. They’re there, and when conditions in the main stem of Red Mo allow for it, they will show up. Once they do, the takeover is relatively quick. Within a period of about 5 years or so, you will go from catching all Brookies, to mostly Browns.
Stocking, IMO, will only expedite this takeover, as wild Browns seem to deal with being stocked over better than Brookies do.
This is all good. A recovered stream is still a huge win. Both for the Red Mo itself, and all downstream waters. But yes, I agree with Josh, in time, the Red Mo will likely be a pretty a good wild Brown Trout stream, based on similar projects to date in PA waters.
Also, the below is likely to happen whether or not you stock the watershed once it reaches a point in recovery where it can support stocked fish, which, regardless of species generally have less acidity tolerance than stream bred fish of the same species. Yes, the watershed is also already being stocked on the Black Mo side. And yes it probably should NOT be stocked, now, or after AMD remediation. Different conversation for a different place and time, and thread.
Once the Red Mo is capable of supporting stocked fish, I think it’s likely it will be stocked, regardless of whether it should be. It’s a fairly large freestone stream with good public land access. I’m sure there will be high demand from local anglers to see it stocked, and I don’t readily see a scenario where that’s not catered to in today’s PA Trout angling culture.
As recovery efforts begin, you will first see Brook Trout begin to repopulate the main stem, downstream of remediation points, and where thermal conditions allow for it. Yes, AMD remediation does have a general cooling effect on the water in the Summer. The water coming from the mines comes out at roughly 50 deg or so, the same as a true limestone spring. Yes, it warms some by the time it is treated and ends up back in the stream, but, this water is cooler than the water would be if it was flowing normally on the surface, and not artificially trapped below the surface in the mines. The net effect is cooler water. The upper WB Susky, and some of the systems in Skuke Co. clearly demonstrate this. You can end up with fairly large freestone streams, larger than you’d expect otherwise, with temperatures capable of supporting wild Trout.
From when remediation efforts start, usually targeting the largest AMD discharges first, most bang for the expense buck, you’ll see Brook Trout show up (re-colonizing from elsewhere in the watershed) in relatively low numbers mind you, fairly quickly. Within a couple years. The Brook Trout population in the main stem (again where thermally viable) will grow, and you’ll have a period of time, perhaps 5-20 years or so from when remediation efforts begin, where there will be a decent, or even good, wild Brook Trout fishery for a while. Then, as the average PH continues to improve, the Browns will start to show up. (Brookies have better acidity tolerance than Browns, by roughly 0.5-1.0 in PH value.) Again from elsewhere in the watershed where they are already established. The Browns are already there in numerous tributary streams on the Red Mo side, and most of the wild fish in the Black Mo, below the dam anyway, are Browns. They’re there, and when conditions in the main stem of Red Mo allow for it, they will show up. Once they do, the takeover is relatively quick. Within a period of about 5 years or so, you will go from catching all Brookies, to mostly Browns.
Stocking, IMO, will only expedite this takeover, as wild Browns seem to deal with being stocked over better than Brookies do.
This is all good. A recovered stream is still a huge win. Both for the Red Mo itself, and all downstream waters. But yes, I agree with Josh, in time, the Red Mo will likely be a pretty a good wild Brown Trout stream, based on similar projects to date in PA waters.
jifigz
Well-known member
Ya ever hike the AFT? It is probably my favorite PA backpacking trail. The first time I ever hiked it was in March. There was snow on the ground, but it was melting, and the streams were just raging and gorgeous. The "Red Mo" looked magnificent. Immediately, images of some back country wilderness trips along its banks to catch trout were springing into my mind.
That stream will definitely be a keeper. Hopefully I get to fish it before I'm dead.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,958
Portions of it, yes.
And yes I agree. We’re roughly the same age, and I had the same thought as you while typing up that response.
Let’s plan a vacation day 15 years from now to check it out. 😛
jifigz
Well-known member
You're on. Ill pencil you into my calendar. Say, May of 2040? lol
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,958
Works for me.
