New DFG Stocking guidelines

[rayfound]

New DFG Stocking Rules

2 pdfs listing waters to be stocked and not stocked. Through 2010.

Of Note:

Kern River and San Gabriel WF and EF are both on the NO STOCKING list.

What impact do you think this will have on wild fisheries? Will the bait dunkers hike further, or just go elsewhere? Will some of them see the great fishing in special regs areas and take up artificials and C&R?

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/stocking/

[Eric]

Thanks for the info and link Ray. I would think that the kern is in trouble. Fishing brings in lots of money for that town. I wonder if they will let private companies stock the river? The wild trout fishing on the kern is in for big hurt!!
Eric

[Flyjunkie]

New DFG Stocking Rules

2 pdfs listing waters to be stocked and not stocked. Through 2010.

Of Note:

Kern River and San Gabriel WF and EF are both on the NO STOCKING list.

What impact do you think this will have on wild fisheries? Will the bait dunkers hike further, or just go elsewhere? Will some of them see the great fishing in special regs areas and take up artificials and C&R?

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/stocking/

The Bummer Ray, is this... The Folks who frequent the Kern between Memorial Day & Labor Day weekends, who leave their Bait containers and Trash all over the Place.. will probably start poaching in the Wild Trout/ Special Regs stretch above the Bridge... Besides cleaning out the Wild trout from the Bridge down to Kernville.... Unless the DFG makes it's presence Known along the River alot more... (Issuing Tickets and Following up on them).. I seriously Doubt all them Folks are gonna see the Light and come over to Our way of Looking at things... (Thought a Handful probably will...). Unless there is Full Blown Enforcement along the North Fork things will probably get Jacked up...

I hate to be Negative about this, but having watched mentioned Folks for Years.......They will likely put a Heavy strain on the Population with their "My Limit, My limit" attitude...

[rayfound]

I'm hopeful we will see a huge increase in the number of streams with Special Regulations for Wild Trout, though I haven't heard anything indicating that. Otherwise, the 5-trout limit now = 5 wild trout, instead of 5 pellet pigs.

There are many streams that currently exist as wild fisheries, but lack the special regulations (maybe not needed because they are a chore to get to). I'm afraid those will come under huge pressure because baiters are unable to get their limits on the places they are used to fishing, and will work harder to find 5 fish to bring home. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe more fish will go to reservoirs and the baiters will follow - I sure hope so.

[Benny]

This is great news and I was really hoping they would stop all the stocking programs where native fish were found.

What impact do you think this will have on wild fisheries?

The impact on wild fisheries will be for the better! The DFG has been credited with producing better fisheries for the longest time, but this is false. All they did was cause harm by introducing non-native hatchery fish with the stocking programs. Without the stockings, the wild fish populations will not have to compete for food or habitat. No more genetic defects from interbreeding! Just think no more disgusting looking fish with beat to crap fins or noses. The survival rates for wild fish fry will increase due to less predation. I really think wild fish populations will increase big time without the stocking programs.

Will the bait dunkers hike further, or just go elsewhere?

I have already seen some of the comments on the fish killing forums. They still have plenty of other places to target the stocked fish. For the most part they did not loose much as far as places to be able to make a killing so to speak. I doubt they will hike further to find fish to keep and consume or use as fertilizer in the garden.

Will some of them see the great fishing in special regulations areas and take up artificial and C&R?

Only they can make the decision to make the switch. In a perfect fly fishing world there would only be a handful a fly fishers at anyone time on the river lake or stream. I for one hope they stick with what they already do. I just feel as though this sport is getting just a little to popular and it’s sometimes hard to get away from crowds even when you hike 8 miles one way.

[Barrie Mann]

Unfortunately this decision will impact the Kern River Valley economically initially. One such outfit that will suffer is the Fly Shop in Kernville because many of the clients there have been schooled to catch stockers and release them. Catching stockers on a fly is relatively easy so a whole school of fly fishers have emerged thinking it's easy to take rainbows on a fly. Those individuals will now have to go further afield to catch fish. I suspect that you will see the guide(s) from that shop also venturing further afield and may try to guide on the eastern Sierra and possibly the Kings. Just my speculation. I also agree that the DFG needs to up enforcement activities but I suspect that won't happen because they will feel no need to do so. They are only changing the stocking pattern not the regulations so the limits will remain and the only special reg section is still above JD Bridge.

[fflutterffly]

From an environmental point no stocking might be an excellent remedy. If we were in a glass jar, if there were no poacher, if people .... we could go on. As we all know the majority of the Catch and Descease anglers #1 will have no clue that this is in effect, #2 don't think about the consequences and finally #3 may not even care. If this is the case than beware those who climb the steep stairs to wild trout there will be an impact. Now more then ever there needs to be a patrolling force on the Kern that is Volunteer as the FRVC. I think it important to the extreme to position someone at the top of the stairs and 'remind' people going down that it is a C&R area, as well as monitor the ones coming out, radio in hand. But than again I'm of a Kiosk station just outside of Riverkern where people pay for their wilderness passes, parking permits and register there diaper producing babies with a pre-paid diaper pick-up fee.

I'd like to see the private camping ground companies, ie Frandies and the others, participate in an aggressive way by instructing visitors to do C&R until 2010. If we don't have this type of control no one will be finding fish or few at best.

[StevenOjai]

It would seem to me that if areas are not stocked and, by de facto, become Wild Trout habitat, that those areas should be mandatory C&R. Why would any fishery manager accept "taking" fish when there is no allowance for "putting" fish back in? Lake Isabella will be stocked, bait fishermen would be welcome there. I'd love to see the entire Kern above Lake Isabella as an established Wild Trout stream. I think the fishing will actually be better for it. I also sense that people enjoy the river for values outside of the fish. They enjoy camping near the water and will continue to come for the cool breeze along the river. River rafting will continue and you can still take a dip. I think that a C&R policy will also bring a needed respect towards the river by individuals that come to frequent it. Some might even become flyfishermen.
Steve

[Rockstar Fisherman]

This has been needing to be done, but we all can probably expect some lousey fishing for many years on some waters until the regulations change (if they do), and also see increased traffic on the already protected waters. I think our secret spots are going to be more closely guarded from now on as well. I hope this works out, and don't be expecting more $$ for enforcement, less stocking means less hatcheries, which means less $$$ the state has to budget to DFG since "they wont be needing it." I like to think I'm wrong about the $$ part but I doubt it based on how this state works.

[Benny]

Yes Craig, this is all about restoring our "native" salmon, steelhead and trout populations.
Oh and other wildlife that is/was affected by the non-native fish stocking program as well.

[Gary C.]

I wish that I had as optimistic an attitude that many of you seem to have. Everyone keeps focusing on the Kern but this suit concerns the entire state. I believe that the frogs and toads weigh in just as heavily as the native fish with the group that filed the suit. I think that they will want to remove all fish from Sierra lakes and streams that did not historically have fish. That would mean the end of Cottonwood lakes and just about every other high sierra lake along with most of the streams. Enviromentalists have been chiping away getting the fish completely removed from streams and lakes for years now. What do you think that this is going to do to the rest of the Sierras?
Gary C.

[Gary C.]

I was in a rush getting off from work when I posted above. Cottonwood Lakes was probably not a very good example of what I was trying to say. They are probably one of the few eastside lakes above 9,000ft that I think would stand a good chance of keeping there fish.
Gary C.

[Rockstar Fisherman]

Upon reading the PDF files, most of the waters I fish will be safe, a few popular ones, including some that I fish will suffer, but all in all it's not that bad. I think it's for the better, but some new regs are definately needed. It is possible for them to change, I can remember the bad limits were higher when I was a small kid.

And no I don't think this was about money, but do any of you really think that DFG will gain more money for enforcement by ceasing a few areas to stock?? I know I'm pessimistic about this, but....What do you guys think?

[Sheriff Joe]

Craig, I feel what you're saying. But I gotta say that anything that the stocking truck can reach is not, by my definition, "remote waters." I think the really high alpine streams and fish are what Gary is worried about. I do think that we would be better off spending the money on patrolling and enforcement. Plus, writing tickets begats more cash. I just worry about the potential for eradication of fish in places that were historically stocked, but aren't anymore, and have reproducing populations of awesome fish. Like the places where I spend every summer. Lake Wanda, towards the top of Muir Pass, is covered in yellow-legged frogs, and just downstream is a crazy golden stream (Don't worry-I'm not outing this place. Go hike your butt up there and you've earned it.). Cost benefit analysis to any one of us chooses keeping the fish 100-1, but we're a biased bunch of grouchy bastards. We need to focus on keeping the wild places truly wild. And I think that means leaving them alone as much as possible, except to fools like us who truly take the time to go enjoy these places.

[Flyjunkie]

Regarding More Money for the DFG To enforce the Regs..... I am all for that, but I fear with the Economic Status of the State.. the "Criminals" in Sacramento will try anything to steal Money from the DFG for the Budget and their Own Pet projects... If we could get a Law passed that All Money raised from Licenses and Fines paid STAYED with the DFG then it would be Great..

Please understand Me, I am not a Negative Person, but I've seen what The State will do with Money that is Supposed to be Earmarked for a Certain dept. ... they'll take it away for their Pet projects or some other Purpose then What we, the Voting Public, Feel it should be for and Paid with that in mind....

I honestly Hope Everything works in Our Favour... but I will watch with a Distrusting eye......