Following is the final installment in a three-part series on the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission’s trout-stocking program. A friend came to fish with me last spring and I gave him two choices: wild trout in an unstocked stream or stocked trout. He chose the first. We fished nearly two miles of a Class A Wild Trout Stream with nymphs and wet flies and caught about a dozen fish. All were native brookies and only two were slightly longer than 7 inches. Most were 4- and 5-inch fish. Bill’s an excellent fisherman; I’m average. We never saw another angler. ‘Come back in another six weeks or so,’ I told Bill, ‘and the stocked trout will have moved into this stream. You’ll be surprised at the difference.’ After lunch, Bill decided to switch to stocked trout, so that evening we fished the First Fork between Sinnemahoning and Stevenson Dam. There were lots of anglers on the stream and it seemed everyone was catching fish and having fun. I caught six trout on wet flies and Bill said he took 15 on nymphs and wets. He kept four, including one 16-inch brownie. Several days later he called to say he’d grilled the trout. ‘They were delicious,’ he said. ‘Even Karen liked them.’ Our First Fork experience may be endangered and so might similar outings for thousands of Pennsylvania trout fishermen. Pennsylvania’s trout hatchery production could decline by a million fish next year. If problems aren’t addressed, the eventual decline will be even greater. The problems are twofold. First, hatcheries need updated. According to the Fish and Boat Commission, at least six hatcheries require urgent attention while all 14 of the state’s hatcheries need upgrades over the next 10 years. The commission isn’t entirely blameless in this situation. Some of the problems such as those at Big Spring Hatchery are linked to them and they admit it. However, name-calling, finger-pointing, or threatening lawsuits won’t solve the problem. Better, it seems to me, to work with the agency that manages the resource. The cost to upgrade hatcheries is estimated at $25 million. Where will the money come from• Trout fishermen must pay their fair share. Doubling the Trout/Salmon Stamp to $10 from its current $5 fee may help, yet it won’t solve the problem. Instead, the PFBC and fishermen must look to the state and an investment of capital funds to undertake the projects. In 1996, Gov. Ridge’s IMPACCT Commission, a group of independent businesspeople created to improve the way government does business, found that natural resource agencies were making huge contributions to the state’s economy. The IMPACCT Commission said: ‘ … The commissions’ (Fish and Boat and Game commissions) combined budgets of $99 million generated $3.7 billion, or $37 for every dollar spent.’ Remember, the Fish and Boat and the Game commissions are funded through license sales. There are no tax dollars involved. Yet the Fish and Boat Commission estimates that $49 million in state sales and income taxes are generated annually through fishing and boating programs. Clearly, it’s time the state funded some of the needed infrastructure repairs. One possibility is to allocate a portion of existing revenue sources such as a percentage of the reality transfer tax. Another idea is to fund hatchery projects under the Commonwealth’s existing capital debt funding mechanisms such as state bonds. A combination approach might be feasible whereby bond monies were dedicated to fund the highest priority hatchery and dam projects in the near-term while a long-term stable funding source was dedicated to handle major maintenance projects. Ridge’s very successful Growing Greener Program may serve as a model of how combination funding programs can work. On the whole, the Commonwealth benefits from fishing and boating programs so it makes good sense for the Commonwealth to reinvest in the facilities that support those activities. The very same arguments that have been used for investing state monies in sports stadiums can be made in the case of fishing and boating infrastructure. While the direct benefit is to select populations, the spin-off and indirect benefits for local economies and the contributions these activities make to the overall quality of life are enormous. Another possibility would be to involve the private sector. Perhaps it’s time the Fish and Boat Commission began looking at private hatcheries as additional sources of trout for stocking. Hatcheries would have to meet strict criteria and requirements, but the PFBC could establish those through guidelines in a request for bid process. One of the positive developments during Ridge’s tenure has been the growth of watershed groups. They are sprouting across the state like April’s dandelions. Eventually, I’m convinced, most will succeed and they will provide fishing opportunities that haven’t existed for generations. Consider the Bennett Branch Watershed Association. When the acid mine pollution from Dents Run and other small streams in Cameron, Elk and Clearfield counties is finally eliminated, the 45-mile-long stretch from Penfield in Clearfield County to Westport in Clinton County will become one of the best brown trout streams in the state. But where will the trout to stock those waters come from if hatcheries are closed or production limited• All of this is based on the premise that trout fishermen want stocked trout. Which brings me to a second point. From what I’ve learned through compiling material for this series, there are well-organized groups voicing opposition to stocked trout. As Dan Schoonover of the Potter County Anglers put it: ‘Most trout fishermen are either indifferent or unaware of what is going on and what’s at stake.’ If that doesn’t change, if trout fishermen, sporting goods dealers, sportsmen’s clubs, local chambers of commerce and tourist promotions groups don’t let the Fish and Boat Commission and its elected representatives know how they feel about trout hatcheries, the trout stocking program will deteriorate. In the end, apathy’s reign will signal the end of trout fishing for the masses. The ‘Great White Fleet’ will be a memory. Dave Drakula is an outdoors writer based in Emporium, Cameron County.

---

Copyright ©2026— Trib Total Media, LLC (TribLIVE.com)

---