discontinaution of stocking Walleye in the kinzua dam twers

did you know that they stopped stocking walleyes in the kinzua dam tailwaters?   

According to a Regional Rep in Tionesta the commission is conducting a three year experiment where they discontinue stocking and see what happens to the population.  Indeed, we've all been noticing that the walleye fishing isn't what it once was.  I've fished it during early june for over three years strait and there really is a big difference.

we are concerned that the combination of heavy pressure and harvest and competition between trout fingerlings and walleye fingerlings ill greatly hurt the fishery.
enclosed is my letter.  I'm hoping that others how care about this fishery will join us in fighting to save the fishery.  with just a little stocking there would be one of the best walleye hotspots in the state-- and best of all, easy shore access. no $300 boatride, or $10,000 boat, required.
------------------------------------------------------
I am an active fishermen of the Kinzua Dam Tailwaters.  I have learned recently that you have discontinued walleye fingerling stockings.  I have noticed a decline it the quantity of walleye within the fishery and concerns about continuation of the current stocking policy.   If Walleye were no longer stocked within the tailwaters we are concerned that the walleye population would be greatly reduced.  The Kinzua Dam tailwaters is a unique and valued place for walleye, with a large amount of shore access including a handicapped fishing pier.  It also moderates water temperature and oxygenates the walleye, this in turn makes the tailwaters a uniquely fertile waterway for the coolwater walleye.   We are concerned that a number of factors will make it difficult for walleye to be sustained at current population levels.  These include: ·       

• Heavy angling pressure (especially in the summer) ·       
  
• Heavy harvesting rates among fishermen ·       
  
• Competition between walleye fingerlings with the trout fingerlings ·       
  
• Highly variable spawning rates due to variable spring water levels  

While it is understandable that the fish commission would seek ways to minimize stocking of warm-water fish for budgetary reasons, we offer the following alternatives to an elimination of walleye stocking ·      

• An across the board reduction of walleye stocking throughout the state ·       
  
• A reduction of trout fingerling stocking ·     
  
•   A “walleye” stamp to raise money ·      
  
•  A tournament or taxes on local tournaments. ·       
  
• Altering the trout stocking from rainbow trout (which do not reproduce in the waterway) to brown trout (that do).  Which thus should reduce the amount of needed trout fingerlings to maintain current trophy trout population density  

 I also think that the following measures could also protect the walleye population. ·      

•  Altering harvest from 5 fish /angler/day to 3 fish /angler /day ·       
  
• Increasing the legal size limit from 15 to 18” ·       
  
• More enforcement of fish regulations in this area  ·       
  
• Restrictions during walleye spawn.  Specifically, eliminating angling during april (as is the case in many trout waters) would reduce hooking mortality  

While none of the former provisions would be popular, sportsmen would support tough choices designed to maintain walleye populations during funding difficulties.   The current special regulation and stocking of trout within the Kinzua Dam Tailwaters have created a unique and marketable trout fishery.  The same combination of shore access, cool waters and fertility also could build a unique and marketable walleye fishery.  Annual stocking of trout fingerlings already greatly adds to the trophy potential of all the predator gamefish.  With a resumption of stocking,  kinzua could become one of the states best shore fishing hot-spots for walleye

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

if you wish to write to the commission please feel free to pm and I'll send it to the guy who's started our letter writing campagne.  also you can check out his thread at gg, it is found at
http://www.grizzlygary.com/threads/10533-Walleye-Stocking-or-Lack-Of

incidentally terry is one of the best walleye anglers in that part of the river... so you know when A guy who spends 250+ nights on the river, and obsesses about catching walleyes, is noticing a definite decline, that it is more than just tough conditions or a string of bad luck.

Open up those bottom gates with a wadable flow and it'll be the best trout river this side of the Mississippi.

they are prob doing away with it so they can make their paychecks bigger with the fishing license we buy each year and the stamps we pay for less eye stocking more money in their pockets

i have fished the tailwaters for years and i am not from the area. i have often heard certain areas that fish thrive in the stories of the local people not wanting outsiders.
Well if you think about it ,those people walk out their back door and within minutes have the greatest fishery and naturally they don't want to lose it. What i do is fish where i want and
gain the knowledge I need and throw most of what i catch back after pictures. i never rely on a tackle shop or anyone else to give me information. All you need is the water. It would be nice for a tip
but in life I have found that no one inside or outside the room i am in gives a **** about me. The Allegheny river as i most proudly classify "the beast of the east"  It can be the most rewarding experience and
turn around  and be the most challenging frustration on the planet. Looking forward to the fall . i remember a few years back going on a september night and fishing my favorite lure. An hour after nightfall
a 23 inch brown and 1 hour later another trout that got off and i could not control that fellow. When i started on the river years ago there was a young fellow who had eyes like an eagle and caught muskies like most people
catch sunfish.

jolie,
I recall PA's daily creel on walleye being 6 per day not 5.  I think you are getting it confused with NY.  Also, are you suggesting these changes statewide or asking that they only be applied to Section 7 on the Allegheny river (from the tailwaters to the confluence with the Conewongo)?  You will have a tough row to hoe if you are trying to reduce walleye stockings statewide just so this area can get a few and if you are trying to reduce overall daily creels to 3 from 6 statewide, I think you will get zero support.  And to even mention "no fishing" during April seems a little too extreme to me.  There is already back lash from many anglers that don't fish for trout but are locked out of their favorite lakes/streams during certain closures.  If you shutdown an entire section of the river I think the backlash would be severe and would only hurt your efforts. 
 
I am not trying to put you down or anything, just offering a different point of view from someone who is not local to that area but has fished it extensively and knows the true beauty of the area you are trying to protect. 
 
As I recall, they are only trying this as an experiment and if things aren't working out (walleye not reproducing naturally), they will be returning to the stockings. 
 
A better approach may be to create a sportsman organization or club that has a main goal of providing supplemental stockings of walleye in this section of the river.  All profit from yearly dues can go towards paying for fingerlings and fundraisers; tournaments and "buttons" can be sold to supplement the yearly dues of club members.  Rather than trying to get regulations changed, this may be a more palatable approach and it has been done successfully here in the SW for trout.  Even if the PFBC starts up the walleye stockings again, this would still be a good idea IMO and only improve the walleye fishing on that section of the river.
 
The club I belong to stocks walleyes almost every year on the Yough.

ORIGINAL: eyesandgillz

jolie,
I recall PA's daily creel on walleye being 6 per day not 5.  I think you are getting it confused with NY.  Also, are you suggesting these changes statewide or asking that they only be applied to Section 7 on the Allegheny river (from the tailwaters to the confluence with the Conewongo)?  You will have a tough row to hoe if you are trying to reduce walleye stockings statewide just so this area can get a few and if you are trying to reduce overall daily creels to 3 from 6 statewide, I think you will get zero support.  And to even mention "no fishing" during April seems a little too extreme to me.  There is already back lash from many anglers that don't fish for trout but are locked out of their favorite lakes/streams during certain closures.  If you shutdown an entire section of the river I think the backlash would be severe and would only hurt your efforts. 

I am not trying to put you down or anything, just offering a different point of view from someone who is not local to that area but has fished it extensively and knows the true beauty of the area you are trying to protect. 

As I recall, they are only trying this as an experiment and if things aren't working out (walleye not reproducing naturally), they will be returning to the stockings. 

A better approach may be to create a sportsman organization or club that has a main goal of providing supplemental stockings of walleye in this section of the river.  All profit from yearly dues can go towards paying for fingerlings and fundraisers; tournaments and "buttons" can be sold to supplement the yearly dues of club members.  Rather than trying to get regulations changed, this may be a more palatable approach and it has been done successfully here in the SW for trout.  Even if the PFBC starts up the walleye stockings again, this would still be a good idea IMO and only improve the walleye fishing on that section of the river.

The club I belong to stocks walleyes almost every year on the Yough.

+1.. this is a very good detailed reply.  let me address things one thing at a time.

•   I don't limit out often... but ABSOLUTELY we are suggesting changes only to the affected stream it would be ridiculous to change state regs based off of one river.  We think that if stocking reductions are made permanent, only harvest restrictions with good enforcement, can keep walleye density up.
• A reduction in walleye stockings across the board, is offered because I think the driver might be the commission's inability to continue to stock walleyes at current levels.  Basically, I am asking "Why us?".... why does pymy, the lower alleghany, the zoo above, lake author and so on, keep their walleyes and we lose ours. The tailwaters is not a big place, for its size, it has incredible pressure on walleye.
• No fishing during April, wouldn't make people happy.  yes, I know.  Kinzua has a very long tradition in staying open year round. 

As I said about that section, none of those changes would make sportsmen happy.  Given the amount of people I see on the water, though what would be even MORE unpopular is for one of the population of one of our major gamefish to crash.  Tough decisions might HAVE to be made.  Thus the list is a brainstorm on ways to preserve walleye populations should the commission have to cut back on walleye stocking.

• About the return of stocking.  well, we hope. but lets face it. they wouldn't experiment if they weren't seriously considering it.  Keep in mind we've heard Nothing about it.  Talk about conspiracy theories.  What if they stopped stocking trout without so much as even mentioning.  We worry that the secrecy is actually very bad.  If the commission can discontinue stocking walleyes without so much of a complaint.  Isn't that make it a much easier decision than other cuts to walleye stocking?  moreover this is bad for all of us.  What if the commission discontinued stocking walleyes in the pymy.  Its a long list?  When would you guys figure it out?  What if the commission decides that walleye stocking isn't as important as other fish.  there'd be tons of anglers affected. I'm disturbed that the commission can with no publicity discontinue stocking a popular gamefish in a heavily fished river.
• 
  
• Also not included in the letter, is that fact that none of us (and they are among the most avid tailwater anglers there are) have ever seen a shocking or netting.  There's not been a listed survey for 10years.  What kind of shoddy science to make an drastic ecological change without making assesments???  What kind of scientist makes a change then doesn't measure anything???  Its not much of an experiment.

I like the last comment about forming a club that stocks.  There's people up here with clout to help us organize.  There's already several tournaments up here.  the major organization is DAV.  how popular would we be to undermine the fund-raising for disabled veterans?? 

Its really the sense of fairness drives us.  They have altered regulations and stocked thousands of fingerlings to support the trout fishing; why is it that we must lose stocking of the other very popular gamefish.  Its not a trout versus walleye.  but fact is there protecting trophy trout, why can't they protect the trophy walleye population as well.

I think that if we can get the clout to have them build an entire fishing pier for us, that we can get them to resume stocking or make tough decisions to protect the fishery.  You know the fishing pier came to be, because the electric plant stopped letting anglers fish the wall.  Those were nearly universally walleye anglers.  The pier has no value to fly fishing trout anglers. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so again please consider writing.  If you ever have or would someday like to walleye fish the tailwaters now is the time.  there are so few little eyes along the shore this year.

If I remember correctly they stopped stocking all of the major river systems several years ago to check on the progress of natural reproduction in the big systems. I believe it was to be a several year experiment to see if the walleyes can reproduce on their own and keep the population at fishable levels.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think this is a test across the state as part of the resource first policy...

ORIGINAL: **commander**

ORIGINAL: indsguiz

My goodness Loopy!  Are you actually suggesting  that they should allow very cold water to escape from the dam and be oxygenated!   Why then people would actually come there to fish downstream and that would result in a parking problem.  But you are very right.  Look at the Cumberland in KY or the rivers in Arkansas.

i may be wrong as i have only fished there a handful of times but it sure SEEMS like the locals and even the local businesses do not want anybody else fishing there. just sayin'

There's SO much to say.  but this remark I think needs to be answered.

as a local myself, I strongly disagree that locals or local businesses do not want people to be fishing at the tailwaters.   I feel strongly that the locals (and espacially local business) have proved that they welcome anglers, with the creation of the fishing pier.  I know I myself have answered many questions about Kinzua.  We're far friendlier , as locals, than most of the people we run into at the tailwaters.  its actually not a big place.  Sometimes I think we get blamed unfairly by kinzua's flaky fishing.  Even the best local anglers, can have a great hour then fish for many hours and maybe other trips without so much of a bite. This part of the alleghany isn't incredibly fertile.

so I ask you, why is it that you feel that local anglers or businesses want you around?  the local business that cater to camper actually live or die from summer tourists.

the comment you replied too,  particularly perplexes me.  Dam discharge IS NOT a local decision. and its not in the hands of a local business.  I've been told they do that to preserve bass populations. but for the sake of trout, walleye and northern pike. it would all be better from the bottom gates. 

sportsmen of all stripes are notorious for keeping stuff to themselves.  Its never personally in our best interest to blab.  Some of us do so to be nice and welcoming.  just sayin'

 Clubs stocking it  (Eyes) could back fire on the test results. I think the no stocking it for a few yrs. is a good thing & see how Mother Nature takes care ov things on her own. If it don't work out they can always stock it again. Win, Win in my book.

crappy

jolie,
 
Just to give you some evidence that it wasn't just the tailwaters section of the Allegheny that was singled out...
Sounds like they have been checking sections of the river for y-o-t-y walleye pretty regularly and have seen encouraging results in some sections.  Maybe the tailwaters section just isn't that great of habitat for spawning and maybe they will continue to stock after the statewide experiment is completed.  For my relatively few trips out on the lower Allegheny, I have caught quite a few small eyes which seems to provide some evidence to back-up the PFBC claims in this article about encourging signs of natural walleye reproduction in other pools of the Allegheny.  
 
"Walleye resolutions

I've been researching this some & don't necessarily see it as a bad thing...
Here's a good (5 page) article on PA's walleye management plan & findings so far.
http://www.pagameandfish.com/fishing/walleyes-fishing/PA_0409_01/index.html

Seems like they are making an honest effort to study walleye reproduction in the rivers, and are seeing encouraging results.
The study couldn't be done if stocking was continued, and I believe they will resume stocking in the sections showing dwindling numbers. Stocking where natural reproduction is adequate to sustain populations would be counter productive, wouldn't it?
While I understand your frustration with the situation, I don't think it's the end of river walleye fishing in PA.
We've gone through a rough patch at pymy as well (some of us), but IMO next year will show the benefit of continued research & changes in stocking practices.

WOW!  been keeping up with this article and it just sounds like you are complaining because of the trout stocking versus the eye stockings? Are the eye's what you primarily fish for? I am sure the individuals who target trout could write up complaints also.

The idea of charging for a stamp is absurd, as stated in an earlier post.

I am in favor of a "clubs" supporting a stocking program. The individuals who wish to target those individual species should take pride that they are making the population sustainable. A lake near my place has a program where someone can voluntary contribute to stocking the lake in excess of what the state stocks. It is working very well.

Maybe even a better idea. Catch and release.

OR.....
As it is in my area a lot of the mines/ gas wells have ruined or are ruining the streams and or lakes. Lets get those companies to pay to stock and rebuild the fisheries in place of those areas they have destroyed.

As for the experimentation why are you complaining? You want to make the fishery better but do not want to give it time to grow and be fruitful. It takes time to for the species to thrive. If the commission is not given time to evaluate and process the success of the experiment how will they know if the population is progressing or declining? How will they be able to measure the success of stockings if they keeping flooding the places with stockings?

excellent post i agree but as for walleye and not fishing in april after ice out give or take usually begining of april late march is when walleye action heats up so i have to disagree on that as for wadeable flow in front of the kinzu it would be f-in awesome to stand in front of a concrete wall with miles of lake behind it catching tropy trout as i do up sharsville in front of the ****, me being 21 i dont know alot but i know my fishing for the most part and i think it would be next to impossible to change the rules, regulations on just 1 part of the allegeheny dont get me wrong jolie your post was very eye opening and very thurough excellent job

we got some very good news.  Terry made a contact to the PAFBC about it and this is what happened
"Encouraging news.....
I just got off the phone with the PFBC and they are very interested in what we have to say. He told me that 4 or 5 years ago they were finding a good number of fry and they implemented this study to see. Basically they will never know until they try kind of idea and it does make sense.
But they are in the process of making a walleye plan and they asked me if I and anyone else in this area would be willing to be a part of the walleye work group that they are going to form. I am definitely interested in being a part of this. If any of you, want to be a part of this- PM me and I will get you the info. They are going to email and snail mail me information so if you PM me I will send you the info as soon as I get it.
They said that they are very appreciative of our concerns and definitely want our input. he said, the bottom line is, they work for us and they want our info. So here is a good chance to voice our opinion to the PFBC. (Terry aka "UBERTRACKER" on grizzlygaries forum)"

This folks is what we really want.  A chance to state our case to the commission and a chance to part of the process.  While we understand that we are working with a beaucracy, being part of a "walleye work group" allows us the chance to make sure that the PAFBC has all the information to make a policy that is FAIR.  We all understand that the commission has potentially some tough decisions to make.

this also is a good opportunity to organize a little.

If there is a local stocking effort from a yet unorganized fishing club,  This walleye working group might be the group of sportsmen whom can make it happen.

Yes I am upset a little about what the commission did, but its all water over the bridge.  I am confident that the commission will find that walleye has taken a beating.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no one really replied to the feeling that locals don't want tourists fishing the zoo.  any care to comment?  Know more than ever, local anglers look to our tourist friends to make sure that the local fishery here at the dam doesn't get the shaft. 

please feel free to pm me, if you might consider being part of the walleye working group.  I would imagine that anyone whom fishes for walleye in any waterway and wants representation at stocking and regulation changes should strongly consider joining.

I'll create a new thread when I get more information

I just started fishing the tailwaters last year and I'll say this...it's a challenge. I'm used to having good success on the streams that I normally fish. In the tailwaters I'm just hoping for a strike. I've caught a few (not many) nice Rainbows in the 16-18 inch range up there but what I really want is a big Brown. No luck yet but I know they are there. If I can catch just one lunker Brown it'll make it all worth it for me.

I wouldn't expect the locals up there to post on a public forum and say "go to spot x and use bait/lure x". I don't do that either. I've gotten some good tips from a few of the guys up there in private. They've been very helpful and friendly.