A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"rb608" wrote in
:


"Greg Pavlov" wrote in message
I've seen really ****-poor behavior from father-son "teams."

That's for sure. Some of the most disturbing behavior I've seen while
fishing is some asshole father teaching his son to be an asshole just
like dad.

Joe F.




When we were float stocking, we had a father/son duo cast a spinner right
into our float bucket.

Scott

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Ken Fortenberry wrote in
om:

Scott Seidman wrote:

When we were float stocking, we had a father/son duo cast a spinner
right into our float bucket.

What is "float stocking" ?


That's walking stockies up and down a stream from the truck, instead of
just dumping the stockies off any old bridge.

The idea is to try to keep all the stockies (especially two-year olds) from
being pulled out of the water the day they're put in.

Not sure if it works, or if its worth doing, but there you go.

Scott

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Scott Seidman wrote:

Ken Fortenberry wrote in
om:


Scott Seidman wrote:


When we were float stocking, we had a father/son duo cast a spinner
right into our float bucket.

What is "float stocking" ?



That's walking stockies up and down a stream from the truck, instead of
just dumping the stockies off any old bridge.

The idea is to try to keep all the stockies (especially two-year olds) from
being pulled out of the water the day they're put in.

Not sure if it works, or if its worth doing, but there you go.


Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Willi wrote in
:



Scott Seidman wrote:

Ken Fortenberry wrote in
om:


Scott Seidman wrote:


When we were float stocking, we had a father/son duo cast a spinner
right into our float bucket.

What is "float stocking" ?



That's walking stockies up and down a stream from the truck, instead
of just dumping the stockies off any old bridge.

The idea is to try to keep all the stockies (especially two-year
olds) from being pulled out of the water the day they're put in.

Not sure if it works, or if its worth doing, but there you go.


Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.

Willi




Yes. I have one such creek within 45 minutes of me. Parts are stocked,
but there are impenetrable barriers between stocked and unstocked
sections. Part of this wild section is catch and release, artificials
only. Believe it or not, a wild part with almost no access is three
fish, any size, any method during trout season, C and R artificials only
outside of trout season. This sections regs are a compromise, after the
DEC had 3 fish any size any method 12 months put up there.

There's a trib to this creek that is also unstocked with pretty
restrictive regs.

As an aside, NY is starting a two fish limit for fish over 12". This is
interesting, because the real motivation (though some in the DEC deny
this) is to try to keep two year old stockies in the water a little
longer. It's a little funny how they're managing for stockies.

Scott

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"Willi" wrote in message
...

Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.


Yes there are. Each state is different but I can speak to WI, MI, GA, MO,
and NC as each having differing regs based on stream categories. But
stocking is a widespread practice as you have read. One of the many
reasons, and there are some good ones, is that many marginal streams need to
be stocked to "keep them off of the good streams"

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Willi

Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.

Willi


there are hundreds of miles of wild trout water in north carolina,
wherein no stocking takes place. in fact, there are several streams in my
own knowledge which contain wild fish and are not managed or regulated at
all. it's like they are "under the radar".

yfitons
wayno

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:23:38 -0700, Willi wrote:

Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.

GA has some trout streams that are not stocked (although they were
originally stocked 40 years ago or so). The ones I know of are
artificial only and have mostly wild brown and rainbow. One also has a
16" size limit.
--
Charlie...

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"Wayne Harrison" wrote

own knowledge which contain wild fish and are not managed or regulated at
all. it's like they are "under the radar".



many of the places I visit in Cali-screwedup have wild populations in
streams that are stocked

it seems that the stockers go near the bridges and don't live long enough to
get that far from them. If you walk a ways you start to take wild fish,
walk further and you start take decent sized wild fish ... in streams with
general regs. My knees and ankles have gotten so painful, I don't visit
these places much ... hurts too damn much :-(( .... but they are still
there, and not that hard to find

sometimes ( not often) I think 'special regs' work against the fishery. I
remember when only the Conservancy on Silver Creek was C&R, most of the rest
2 fish 16 " min, I think. The Conservancy would be elbow to elbow, the
graphite hatch extremely heavy, Sages and Scotts flapping everywhere , but
down in the non-C&R water you'd have the place to yourself, true local
FFers, and maybe once in a long while, but rarely, a guy looking for dinner.

nothing seems to increase fishing pressure as much as 'special regs,' I
recently mentioned to a fly shop owning buddy that a certain local spot has
hatches good enough that with FF only C&R regs the fish might get big enough
and smart enough to make it really great .. his reply?. " I hope it never
happens, you wouldn't be able to find a place to park because of all the Bay
Area guys that would be there if the regs were changed." .... he has a point

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"Larry L" wrote

sometimes ( not often) I think 'special regs' work against the fishery.
I
remember when only the Conservancy on Silver Creek was C&R, most of the
rest
2 fish 16 " min, I think. The Conservancy would be elbow to elbow, the
graphite hatch extremely heavy, Sages and Scotts flapping everywhere , but
down in the non-C&R water you'd have the place to yourself, true local
FFers, and maybe once in a long while, but rarely, a guy looking for
dinner.


doh, forgot a sentence ... this one:

Now, the area that used to provide solitude is as crowded as the Conservancy
AND it's a trend that started the very year the regs changed to C&R down in
the willows, too

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Larry L wrote:

Now, the area that used to provide solitude is as crowded as the Conservancy
AND it's a trend that started the very year the regs changed to C&R down in
the willows, too

I've had some great days in the Willows in late October and November
when I've seen maybe two other fishermen. There's even some dry-fly
action, and the nymphing and streamer fishing is better than in the
summer. I suppose the fish are hungrier and they aren't pounded and
spooked all day long.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"rw" wrote

I've had some great days in the Willows in late October and November
when I've seen maybe two other fishermen.

I've never been there that time of year ... Or, for the Brown Drakes in
early season .... maybe somedayG


Ever fish the ????? canal ? .... my mind is drawing a blank on the name ....
you cross it about where you cross the Wood when you are heading south
towards Twin Falls ....... rip rap lined and ugly beyond belief G but it
used to fish great with a scud

I'd run down there and catch a couple most trips and ( shh ... don't tell
anyone ) eat them ... My guess is that the drought has destroyed the
fishery, for the time being .... Richfield, or Richvale ... something like
that ..... old brains take longer G

opps I see sun shine better go for my bike ride ... trying to fight my huge
gut ( it's winning :-(( ) and bad knees and have to stick with non impact
exercise ..... just do it, Larry

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Scott Seidman wrote:




Yes. I have one such creek within 45 minutes of me. Parts are stocked,
but there are impenetrable barriers between stocked and unstocked
sections. Part of this wild section is catch and release, artificials
only. Believe it or not, a wild part with almost no access is three
fish, any size, any method during trout season, C and R artificials only
outside of trout season. This sections regs are a compromise, after the
DEC had 3 fish any size any method 12 months put up there.

There's a trib to this creek that is also unstocked with pretty
restrictive regs.

As an aside, NY is starting a two fish limit for fish over 12". This is
interesting, because the real motivation (though some in the DEC deny
this) is to try to keep two year old stockies in the water a little
longer. It's a little funny how they're managing for stockies.


Colorado used to "manage for stockies" too. Their change in policy was
an unexpected benefit of Whirling Disease. When the hatcheries got WD,
the State stopped stocking catchables in the vast majority of the
State's waters. I think that the fishing has improved since stocking was
stopped. I'm concerned that now that the State has cleaned up the
hatcheries, they will go back to massive stockings of catchables. So far
that hasn't happened.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Larry L wrote:


nothing seems to increase fishing pressure as much as 'special regs,' I
recently mentioned to a fly shop owning buddy that a certain local spot has
hatches good enough that with FF only C&R regs the fish might get big enough
and smart enough to make it really great .. his reply?. " I hope it never
happens, you wouldn't be able to find a place to park because of all the Bay
Area guys that would be there if the regs were changed." .... he has a point


Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:25:43 -0700, Willi wrote:



Larry L wrote:


nothing seems to increase fishing pressure as much as 'special regs,' I
recently mentioned to a fly shop owning buddy that a certain local spot has
hatches good enough that with FF only C&R regs the fish might get big enough
and smart enough to make it really great .. his reply?. " I hope it never
happens, you wouldn't be able to find a place to park because of all the Bay
Area guys that would be there if the regs were changed." .... he has a point


Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.

Willi




The Ontario fishing community has a definite meat mentality so you
immediately cut out a huge swath of the angling public when you go
C&R. Only a very tiny portion of Ontario's water is C&R so it isn't
much of a blip on the collective minds of our anglers. The only
rumbling I've heard was the introduction of C&R into some steelhead
and smallie water on the Grand. The meat fishing locals are blaming
the fly fishers for that one but it was actually the GRCA and MNR with
the "Heritage Waters" status of the Grand. I wasn't aware of any
politicking for expanding C&R by fly fishers but some of the fly shop
owners might have been involved. The smallie population has been in a
serious decline of late so the C&R regs will help it to rebound.
Should be really nice in about five years.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

found a founding fish
 

jeezus, i am stunned that the deafening sound of the gloating that
emanated from the boat wasn't heard all the way to boone. of course, was
it was mixed with the incessant criticism of my every movement on the
water, the sound might have been a bit difficult to decipher... g

it was a nice 3-4 pound fish caught on an ultralight spinning rig. i
think jim set the drag purposely loose so he could guffaw accompaniment
as it sang for 5 minutes.

jeff

Wayne Harrison wrote:

"Jeff Miller" wrote in message
news:vXm_b.13016$iB.1742@lakeread06...

went shad fishing yesterday with pj... the first shad of the season (for
my boat) was caught... but, not by me. dammit..


i am *amazed* that i haven't yet had a phone call on that little trip...

yfitp
wayno

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Willi wrote:


Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.

in nc, probably related more to difficult access issues than the regs...
my experience is that *most* anglers are lazy or driven by convenience.

jeff

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:25:43 -0700, Willi wrote:

Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.

In GA they have fewer anglers, but probably more fly fishermen. Most
of the fishermen I run into on non special reg streams are fishing to
keep fish.
--
Charlie...

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"Larry L" wrote in news:Air_b.78434
:

nothing seems to increase fishing pressure as much as 'special regs,'

I tend to agree. It doesn't make any difference what the special regs are,
in fact. If it's singled out in the regulations circular, it will get
added pressure

Scott

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Jeff Miller wrote:


Willi wrote:


Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.


in nc, probably related more to difficult access issues than the regs...
my experience is that *most* anglers are lazy or driven by convenience.


That's true anywhere.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

well, perhaps...but special regs in nc don't equal more anglers, as you
suggest. so what do you think makes the difference... more effete
fukkers in the west?

jeff



Same thing I see in Colorado. When I brought that up here a couple of
years ago, people from back East thought I was nuts. I don't know if
things have changed, but according to what they said, special regs
waters back East have fewer anglers.



in nc, probably related more to difficult access issues than the
regs... my experience is that *most* anglers are lazy or driven by
convenience.



That's true anywhere.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Jeff Miller wrote:

well, perhaps...but special regs in nc don't equal more anglers, as you
suggest. so what do you think makes the difference... more effete
fukkers in the west?


Definitely one way to put it and maybe more accurate than you intended!

Most of the people in Colorado that are out just looking for a meal go
to the reservoirs. Lawn chair fishing for stocked fish. Since they
stopped stocking catchables in the streams and rivers, it's unusual to
see people keeping their catch even in areas where it is allowed.

Many of our most productive streams and rivers have special regs on
them. Some were very productive before special regs, some became more
productive after special regs were implemented and some aren't
particularly productive. In general, special regs waters have higher
fish populations and bigger fish. It's not a hard and fast rule but it's
a good generality. We have many thousand of miles of streams and rivers
in the State that hold trout. Choosing to fish those with special regs
helps people choose where to go without much work. It's also the special
regs waters that get the play at fly shops, magazines etc.

Gierach wrote about one of the rivers in my neighborhood, the St Vrain
River (actually it's a "river" that's really a stream). The St Vrain is
a pretty piece of water in some stretches that has decent fishing.
However, IMO, there are quite a few others in the same area that have
better fishing. It never got alot of pressure in spite of being
relatively close to Denver. Then the State decided to give it some type
of special designation. Almost overnight, the river became VERY popular.
After about a year, the State changed their mind and decided the St
Vrain didn't deserve the designation. The crowds went away and now it's
the same that it ever was.

A similar thing happened to a section of my home river when I lived in
the mountains. This was a very fine stretch of water with a high
population of good sized fish. However, it was ignored by most people in
favor of more famous waters in the area that had special regs on them.
Special regs were put in place a couple of years ago and now this
stretch of river is VERY popular and crowded.

My home river river has several sections of special regs water. I seldom
fish them because that is where the fishermen are concentrated and I
think the fishing is better in many of the parts that aren't so heavily
fished. I think Charlie Wilson would say the same thing about his home
river.

I'm not against special regs waters. They're a great tool for fishery
management. However, here in CO, I seldom fish them because of the crowds.

Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Willi wrote:

snipped

I'm not against special regs waters. They're a great tool for fishery
management. However, here in CO, I seldom fish them because of the crowds.


it sounds more like a tool for angling population management.

wally

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

ezflyfisher wrote:



Willi wrote:

snipped


I'm not against special regs waters. They're a great tool for fishery
management. However, here in CO, I seldom fish them because of the
crowds.


it sounds more like a tool for angling population management.

Clearly, the optimal policy is to make only the worst rivers "special
regs" waters. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

rw wrote:

Clearly, the optimal policy is to make only the worst rivers "special
regs" waters. :-)


clearly, the grass dun grow under yer feet.....

wally

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

ezflyfisher wrote:



Willi wrote:

snipped


I'm not against special regs waters. They're a great tool for fishery
management. However, here in CO, I seldom fish them because of the
crowds.


it sounds more like a tool for angling population management.


That is a side benefit. They concentrate the anglers into only a few
areas leaving more water for the rest of us.


Willi

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Ken Fortenberry wrote in
What is "float stocking" ?

Filling a raft or boat with stockies and dropping them in sparingly
while drifting downstream. I have assumed this was common everywhere
but it is a very affective way of spreading out the fish while
stocking. Very effective for streams that are put and take due to
higher temperatures in the summer but are hit hard in early Spring.
They last a bit longer past the opening weeks of trout season.

In my earlier years of fishing evolution as I was learning to fly fish
I was blessed by such a stocking on Lower Pine Creek in North Central
PA. I had made my way down into the "Grand Canyon" for a week long
camping trip thinking it had to be awesome fishing. The first morning
as I awoke and hit the bushes to drain some absurd odd amount of
liquid refresments the night before, a float went by stocking the
nicer holes just around camp. I thought I was in heaven that week,
just learning how to flyfish, and of course doing very well.

In the subsequent year or two after that, I found that this stretch of
River was too far south for most self sustaining trout populations and
that without those float stocks through the canyon, no decent trout
population would exist in the camping area at all since the trucks
couldn't make it down into the canyon.

I have since learned that this is a fine trout stream, I just needed
to go about 30-40 miles north of this area, where natives do thrive,
but this is definetly a place for float stocking trout, if one can not
live by smallmouth alone.

Mike

A Plea for help & a head's up (long)
 

Willi wrote

Are any streams or rivers "back east" managed for self sustaining
populations? By that I mean no stocking with the populations protected
by more restrictive regulations.

Willi


Sure you've fished a few of them included parts of Penn's C&R section
but not really exclusively since stockies will run up from below. In
PA there are other creeks that recieve no stocking, but are teaming
with native fish. The problem we do have here in the East is that
there just isn't enough fertile water to sustain native populations.

Even though many streams in say New York or PA are a hundred miles or
more away from the Great Metropolis, the water is/was devasted by misc
problems from Acid rain, to polution, from factories supporting the
cities, to mining from over-forresting, to over-fishing. We do see
some streams recovering over the most recent decades, but very
recently there seems to be a push to return back to the old ways. Not
sure who to blame, but it's not any one person or group.
Environmental controls are being relaxed, and we seem to be making
some of the same mistakes again. I don't know if enough people will
get "it" before it's too late in the East. You also have morons like
the ones trying to relax the fishing regulations again. Some of the
changes are good, and I have no problem with put and take in areas
where the fish will not reproduce anyway if the masses need that sort
of thing, or with bait fishing in regulations areas, but there is
definetly a place for management by C&R, or other means.

It's good to see the management moves out west as someday the same
issue will arrive on your doorstep. Probably not within our lifetime
or maybe even our grandchildren's, but the population will rise, and
what once seemed to be limitless fishing paradise will be squeezed and
pushed to it's limits. I'm sure you must already see it around the big
cities, and in the "gold medal" sections of the famous streams. If
good management is not used you will lose some valuable streams before
everyone gets "it".

The Finn

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Charlie Choc wrote

In GA they have fewer anglers, but probably more fly fishermen. Most
of the fishermen I run into on non special reg streams are fishing to
keep fish.

Here, here, and they will move right in and pick off the native
populations if they are allowed to take fish in special reg sections
in the future. There will always be a native population in the more
fertile streams, but the population will not be as safe when all types
of fishing take place. My thought is that many fish survive in
special reg sections of the East not only because of limits, but
because they can survive by keying on foods other then what is drifted
by them by every Joe Angler daily. In Fly Fishing Only regulated
streams I have seen huge fish only come up to the top in perfect
conditions, say for a Green Drake hatch where the size of the fly
justfies the risk. Most other times I'm sure they are chasing
baitfish, crayfish, and chewing on some worms as those are for the
most part "safe bets". Not to say that they are truly that smart, but
genetically the fish that practice these habits survive in these
sections. This can be proven by fly fishing some of the mostly bait
fished areas, you generally can have a better day then the bait
fisherman, niot taking anything away from them, but just because those
fish aren't aren't as cautious with an artificial fly.

I have no bias against any particular type of fisherman, but if C&R
isnt enough maybe creating specialzed sections would help? Ie. Bait
Fishing only, in addition to the artificial lures only, or Fly fishing
only sections. It would be tough to see some of the stretches go, but
the bait fisherman do have the same rights as anyone else.

The Finn

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"just al" wrote

Move west young man. The attitude is different out there...somewhat.

Perhaps looking for the more remote rather than "easy access" streams are
the future of angling hobbyists?



Yeah move West everyone, that's the ticket...

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

"Mark W. Oots" mark_ctc@(delete this)ameritech.net wrote:

This actually reminds me a great deal of my day spent trying to fish Hickory
Run last August. The garbage, noise, screaming kids running through the
stream, tripping over my line as they went....sigh

Mark



But did ya catch anything!! that's the challenge at Hickory Run!!

Mike

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Willi wrote in message news:

I'm not as familiar with eastern waters as I am with those in the
Rockies, but it seems to me that there are numerous waters back east
that are being stocked that could be better managed with less stocking
and possibly more restrictive limits. Montana did a series of studies on
the effects of stocking in waters that have good natural reproduction
and found that the stocking of catchables actually reduces the number
and size of the fish in those waters.

Willi


Well sure, rub in that expansive trout paradise!! Why did they start
stocking in Montanta anywho?? Must have been those Easterners moving
West.

Mike

A Plea for help & a head's up (long)
 

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

Ken Fortenberry wrote in

What is "float stocking" ?

Float Stocking is polluting the river from a boat or raft.
Ernie

A Plea for help & a head's up (long)
 

Scott, I was a charter member of the Catherines Creek TU chapter close
to 30 years ago. Our first effort was to plant a couple of thousand
trees bankside and the second was to convince the farmers to keep
their livestock from eradicating the streambanks. Any update on
what's going on with that stream? I started fishing that stream
somewhere in the mid-sixty's the 1st of April of course. I can't ever
hear that that stream supported year round trout but rather lake-run
spawners. Bill in VA.

A Plea for help & a head's up
 

On 26 Feb 2004 22:05:00 -0800, (Michael
Makela) wrote:

(snipped)

I have no bias against any particular type of fisherman, but if C&R
isnt enough maybe creating specialzed sections would help? Ie. Bait
Fishing only, in addition to the artificial lures only, or Fly fishing
only sections. It would be tough to see some of the stretches go, but
the bait fisherman do have the same rights as anyone else.

Heresy, but I like the idea. Fair is fair.

--

rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
Often taunted by trout.
Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

A Plea for help & a head's up (long)