Rivers and "some" fishing

[cdevine]

Finally made it out with a little break in the weather over to the east side. (East walker). Fortunately that area gets a little shadow but, The winter that won't end continues to drown much of the north/central state. This AR on top of 20 feet of snow is no bueno. S.Lake, 50, 88 over carson pass was an absolute mess. River running down the highway on top of rocks, mud, and debris. Be safe if you have to drive. S. Fork American was absolutely incredible around that area where those cabins sit off 50. Not sure if they are still there after what I saw. (see pic)

EW flows kicked up big time. 376 CFS. Haven't been that high in at least 4 hours and honestly I don't expect that to change this year. Bridgeport Res. should be fullest in 10 years come spring. High water tactics. Fish the edges and quiet slots. Deep. Be careful wading at all. Conditions are still messy. 8-12 inches of snow on the ground near river on CA side. Not easy getting around. I didn't see another person on the water. Fishing was slow but not terrible. I picked up some grabs on both streamers and indo nymph normal winter patterns.

Very limited options these days. Truckee blown out again. Has to be the 3rd time or so in last 6 months its gotten over 4k+ cubes. Good long term for the river though. 12672126731267412675 Maybe LT if you have x country skis or snow shoes.. That is what I'm thinking.

[Mark Kranhold]

Awesome! Thanks for the post and happy someone is getting to fish!

[Frank R. Pisciotta]

Very limited options these days. Truckee blown out again... Maybe LT if you have x country skis or snow shoes.. That is what I'm thinking.

cdevine-I concur on your assessment on the big Truckee river. As for the LT, IMO, it should be closed to winter angling...give the trout a break. Prior to this year the LT trout have been hammered for 4+years. This drought-cycle can happen again where they'll be harassed 365 days again.

I'm seriously thinking of having a petition at the Pleasanton Fly Fishing show in my booth (Truckee Guide NetWork) that will collect names of those who feel the same way. Anyone on this board who'd like to take a lead/assist/advise on this matter...please privately e-mail me.

Frank R. Pisciotta
www.cyberfly.com

[cdevine]

cdevine-I concur on your assessment on the big Truckee river. As for the LT, IMO, it should be closed to winter angling...give the trout a break. Prior to this year the LT trout have been hammered for 4+years. This drought-cycle can happen again where they'll be harassed 365 days again.

I'm seriously thinking of having a petition at the Pleasanton Fly Fishing show that will collect names of those who feel the same way.
anyone on this board who who like to take a lead in assisting me...please PM me.

Frank R. Pisciotta

Thanks Mark.

Frank, I will come see you at Pleasanton. I missed last year but I plan on attending this year. I don't fish LT much. (Between 5-7x a year and always on weekdays) Crowds aren't my thing. But in a normal winter how many people really fish it once that road is closed? I don't know that answer just asking. Maybe locals hike in? Between 2012-15 that place took a beating because of no snow. I was just thinking it would be cool to snow shoe in. Mainly for the exercise!

Most winters I was fishing truckee in Nevada but that option has been killed by the drought and river blowouts. It will be back but it took such a beating compared to CA side.

[Frank R. Pisciotta]

Thanks Mark.

Frank, I will come see you at Pleasanton. I missed last year but I plan on attending this year. I don't fish LT much. (Between 5-7x a year and always on weekdays) Crowds aren't my thing. But in a normal winter how many people really fish it once that road is closed? I don't know that answer just asking. Maybe locals hike in? Between 2012-15 that place took a beating because of no snow. I was just thinking it would be cool to snow shoe in. Mainly for the exercise!

Most winters I was fishing truckee in Nevada but that option has been killed by the drought and river blowouts. It will be back but it took such a beating compared to CA side.

Cdevine--I'm "old school" and harken to the day when we had a "general" season. In that era the fish had a break for 5 months. The BT is a long enough river, the LT is way shorter in the special reg section and can sustain less angler impact.

No doubt, great exercise on snow-shoes or cross-country boards...merely 5-6 miles before one can reach the LT. As for winter, maybe you haven't seen it as readily as us "locals" do, but during reasonable snow years there is quit a few mechanical devices venturing-in... and fishing. Granted it is lesser impact than the general season, nevertheless, the trout are still pressured. "Close the LT in winter" is my mantra....and has been such since it was opened to winter-time angling in 2008.

Frank R. Pisciotta
www.cyberfly.com

[Gregg]

I fished the LT a number of days last winter when the flows were healthy. Random midweek, weekend, etc. Most I ever saw out there was one other person, almost all other days was just me and Ash. I've towed a couple people out of there when they slipped off the road and into a snowbank, it's damn near impossible for most to get back there. Maybe I missed all the snowmobiling anglers.

[Ralph]

Frank-
I was personally approached by the Department and asked my input regarding opening the LT to year round fishing. My knee jerk reaction was to say, "No, give the river a break." I was swayed by the argument that this would be an Adaptive Management implementation with formal "frequent angler input" to assess how the year wide open season was being received and that the river was going to be closely monitored to assess any adverse impact. In the 9 years since the regulations have been in place have you, or any other anglers of whom you are aware, been contacted by DFW for formal input? Has Cal-Trout, TU Truckee, TU Sierra Sac, or the local fly clubs been approached for input? Have you noticed an increase in DFW surveys to assess the biological or environmental impacts of the regulations?
I haven't wet a fly on the LT in many years (and have no plans to ever do so again) so perhaps there is "frequent angler input" and "close river monitoring" and I'm simply not aware of it.

[cdevine]

Frank-
I was personally approached by the Department and asked my input regarding opening the LT to year round fishing. My knee jerk reaction was to say, "No, give the river a break." I was swayed by the argument that this would be an Adaptive Management implementation with formal "frequent angler input" to assess how the year wide open season was being received and that the river was going to be closely monitored to assess any adverse impact. In the 9 years since the regulations have been in place have you, or any other anglers of whom you are aware, been contacted by DFW for formal input? Has Cal-Trout, TU Truckee, TU Sierra Sac, or the local fly clubs been approached for input? Have you noticed an increase in DFW surveys to assess the biological or environmental impacts of the regulations?
I haven't wet a fly on the LT in many years (and have no plans to ever do so again) so perhaps there is "frequent angler input" and "close river monitoring" and I'm simply not aware of it.

The one thing I know about the LT and the BT for that matter... There might be people fishing but there aren't many catching. (I've been in both parties plenty of times) And I would argue using 6-7x out there is far worse than fishing pressure. Stressing a fish beyond repair is a recipe for death.

But back to topic. I don't have a strong opinion either way. I really don't fish it enough personally and when I'm out there like I said its been on off times and I usually only see another person or 2. Personally I would rather see places go all C&R than have times of the year when you can legally keep fish like on the NV Truckee and CA East Walker. That makes no sense to me.

[Frank R. Pisciotta]

Ralph, I'm a bit techno-challenged so I'm hoping this is an accepted protocol of responding to your post:

Frank-
I was personally approached by the Department and asked my input regarding opening the LT to year round fishing. My knee jerk reaction was to say, "No, give the river a break." Admittedly it may be a knee-jerk...without science. I was swayed by the argument that this would be an Adaptive Management implementation with formal "frequent angler input"...angler boxes still there; seldom see anglers filling out the forms personally I've been remiss and to assess how the year wide open season was being received and that the river was going to be closely monitored to assess any adverse impact. In the 9 years since the regulations have been in place have you, or any other anglers of whom you are aware, been contacted by DFW for formal input? Personally, I haven't. Has Cal-Trout, TU Truckee,I believe some Truckee members know my opinion TU Sierra Sac, or the local fly clubs been approached for input?I'm still active in TTFF, the group you founded; they been receptive to my input. Have you noticed an increase in DFW surveys to assess the biological or environmental impacts of the regulations? Not that I'm aware; but Sam Sedillo @ TU in Truckee; would have more info on an interesting project on the LT
I haven't wet a fly on the LT in many years (and have no plans to ever do so again) so perhaps there is "frequent angler input" and "close river monitoring" and I'm simply not aware of it.I, agree, but like you i'm unaware.[/QUOTE]

[Darian]

I'm not familiar with the boxes mentioned in this post but am on other places. Voluntary completion of the forms is not necessarily high volume. I'd like to know how often those survey forms are completed and returned and the boxes restocked with new forms. I can't say for sure but maybe anglers just don't fill out a survey form when they're done fishing (too tired or just don't have faith in DFW using the info, etc., etc.).

If my impression is correct, maybe an alternative to consider for DFW is to conduct surveys at fishing clubs or use on-line fishing bulletin boards, like this one to conduct surveys. Something to think about....

[Ralph]

I'm not familiar with the boxes mentioned in this post but am on other places. Voluntary completion of the forms is not necessarily high volume. I'd like to know how often those survey forms are completed and returned and the boxes restocked with new forms.

For three or four years Lisa and I would collect the angler surveys on the Truckee and LT and keep the boxes filled with blank forms. It was pretty easy to see how few people actually filled out the surveys. We would empty the boxes on Friday and collect on Monday. Perhaps 6 forms would be filled after an entire weekend of anglers. It seemed most forms were filled by people who were thrilled by their day's fishing and wanted to share their experiences and those who had a terrible day and wanted to vent. Regulars and guides didn't ever bother. It is passive, easy, and cheap but it is not a great way to gather valid public opinion. I'd love to think differently but I doubt anything was ever done with those surveys. Kind of like guide license daily report forms. I figured they would have been entered in some sort of data base on a computer. But I figured wrong. I went to DFW to get some information on the Yuba fishery for SYRCL and all the forms were simply put in boxes. Half the forms were at one office and the rest had been moved to storage in Sacramento and it took many phone calls to find anyone who had a clue where the forms were. It is very safe to say that I was the first person to actually read them after they had been mothballed. The information gained on the survey forms is largely garbage and forms themselves have become a kind of garbage. This was 14 years ago, maybe something has changed. Do the current angler surveys ask about angler thoughts on the year 'round season?

[Morgan]

CA needs to get with the times and manage their/our waters better as far as catch/release. There is no need for anglers to keep 5 fish a day or have a 10 fish bag limit in their freezer that will seldom get eaten.

[cdevine]

CA needs to get with the times and manage their/our waters better as far as catch/release. There is no need for anglers to keep 5 fish a day or have a 10 fish bag limit in their freezer that will seldom get eaten.

Ralph/Frank-

I'm guilty of not bothering to fill out those forms. (I do the steelhead one and that is about it). Shame on me I know but it sounds like in hindsight they don't do much with the info so I guess I don't feel so terrible. And is anybody surprised? When is the last time you have seen a fish and game person on a stream or been asked for a license? I fish a lot and its been 25 years for me!!

The boxes are still there on the LT. I want to say at both the middle and upper lots. Not sure about whether they are stocked though.

Morgan- totally agree with you. It pains me to see "stringers" of fish that most likely get tossed in the trash. Being in the high country and having a brookie or 2 is one thing. But are you surprised? We've been taught to consume in our society.... All things. Its a wide spread issue. Sad really.

The rain is depressing me... Can't believe I'm saying that.

[yankeefanbob]

CA needs to get with the times and manage their/our waters better as far as catch/release. There is no need for anglers to keep 5 fish a day or have a 10 fish bag limit in their freezer that will seldom get eaten.

I agree 100%....... I fly fish for the pure sport,beauty and thrill of it! Catch & Release properly executed will keep our rivers healthy and filled with those fish that"ll be there next time you wet your fly.....

[Ralph]

CA needs to get with the times and manage their/our waters better as far as catch/release. There is no need for anglers to keep 5 fish a day or have a 10 fish bag limit in their freezer that will seldom get eaten.

The vast majority of California anglers don't fly fish or practice catch and release. License sales are what keep DFW afloat. If we were to shut fishing to those who use bait or fish to eat, we will upend California fisheries management entirely. There is room in this state for many types of fisheries management. Some might argue that there is "no need" to kill fish and others will argue, quite convincingly, that there is "no need" to torture fish if you aren't going to eat them. I don't think it is wise to go down that rabbit hole.

[yankeefanbob]

The vast majority of California anglers don't fly fish or practice catch and release. License sales are what keep DFW afloat. If we were to shut fishing to those who use bait or fish to eat, we will upend California fisheries management entirely. There is room in this state for many types of fisheries management. Some might argue that there is "no need" to kill fish and others will argue, quite convincingly, that there is "no need" to torture fish if you aren't going to eat them. I don't think it is wise to go down that rabbit hole.

Right or wrong.....just my feelings and point of view!!

[Morgan]

The vast majority of California anglers don't fly fish or practice catch and release. License sales are what keep DFW afloat. If we were to shut fishing to those who use bait or fish to eat, we will upend California fisheries management entirely. There is room in this state for many types of fisheries management. Some might argue that there is "no need" to kill fish and others will argue, quite convincingly, that there is "no need" to torture fish if you aren't going to eat them. I don't think it is wise to go down that rabbit hole.

Im not saying we need to resort to making all streams purely catch and release. But more so lowering the limits to make them more practical. Say like the East walker where it's I believe one or two fish over 16 or 18". Make em like pyramid lake. Thus limiting the take, not neccesarily making them zero limits.

[John Sv]

In addition, fisheries managers use slot limits, take of some species over others, and limited take as a management tool.


The vast majority of California anglers don't fly fish or practice catch and release. License sales are what keep DFW afloat. If we were to shut fishing to those who use bait or fish to eat, we will upend California fisheries management entirely. There is room in this state for many types of fisheries management. Some might argue that there is "no need" to kill fish and others will argue, quite convincingly, that there is "no need" to torture fish if you aren't going to eat them. I don't think it is wise to go down that rabbit hole.