The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission held a meeting on Jan. 7 regarding a number of items, one of which was potential reviews to Policy 58 Pa. Code 57.8 which involves Class A wild trout streams and the consideration of requests for stocking.

According to committee member Kris Kuhn, who presented the proposal to begin the meeting, the proposal was intended to improve the process based on lessons learned while keeping exemptions rare and the wild trout resource first, and to speed up the trout stocking process in situations where criteria is met.

“The notice of stocking has been in effect for one year, and the current Class A policy in stocking has been in effect and utilized for considerations for four years,” Kuhn said during his presentation. “It’s timely at this point to evaluate which points of policy and criteria are working well and which need to be refined.”

Kuhn noted that if they do decide to take these steps and make changes, “we’ll continue to work with individual organizations and other entities using the information we received and lessons learned for a path to compliance with other regulations.”

A motion to approve the recommended changes was brought forth by committee member Bill Brock, and PFBC Commissioner Donald K. Anderson seconded the motion to bring forth to the full board of commissioners at the next meeting.

The motion was carried and will be addressed further at an upcoming board meeting.

Code 57.8a relates to Class A wild trout streams and criteria for stocking. As is noted by the Fish and Boat Commission, “it is the policy of the Commission to manage self-sustaining Class A wild trout populations as a renewable natural resource to conserve that resource and the angling it provides. Class A wild trout populations represent the best of this Commonwealth’s naturally reproducing trout fisheries. With rare exceptions, these stream sections are managed solely for the perpetuation of the wild trout fishery with no stocking.”

One change would be to change some of the language, such as ending the code with the following: “However, there may be circumstances that justify stocking a Class A wild trout stream section.” That change is ending with the word section.

The purpose was to help clarify language for anglers throughout Pennsylvania.

“I like what I’ve seen here and I’m in favor of it,” Anderson said.

One of the proposals was to allow the PFBC executive director to approve Class A trout stocking without approval of the board of commissioners, which is currently how it is done, if certain criteria are met. Board member Eric Hussar brought up a few concerns, however, noting that they already have a process that works and mentioned how he was afraid putting it in the hands of the executive director would take the process out of the public’s eye.

While numerous commissioners during the meeting brought up concerns about the expediency and the need for it, in addition to possible overstocking of streams and ecosystem damage, the proposal said that if something does not meet said criteria, it would have to go to the board of commissioners to vote upon.

“I’m just concerned this is a pathway down the road to something we didn’t expect. Without the board as a whole reviewing it and relying on a commissioner, I have a concern about that,” Hussar said.

The new plan would put it into the hands of the executive director; however, Brock disagreed with that concern brought up.

During comments, another concern that was brought up by the board of commissioners was how allowing it to go to the executive director to make a decision with trout stocking could possibly, at some point, eliminate the need for a board of commissioners regarding other situations.

The meeting brought forth an operational process for stocking exemptions if approved. That would include how stocking exemptions will be advanced to the executive director for consideration if any of the stocking criteria are met. If granted, the Bureau of Fisheries will stipulate the species of trout, number of trout and frequency of stocking to minimize the impacts to the Class A wild trout population.

Commissioner Charlie Charlesworth did not want an overstocking of trout in various streams, noting how wild trout should remain as wild trout.

The proposal said that stocking exemptions will be valid for no more than five years, at which time the need for renewal will be evaluated.

“Aspects of fishery management and biological management can change, so this is not something that’s in perpetuity, we want to be able to reevaluate these on a recurring basis,” Kuhn said.

Charlesworth disagreed with the proposal entirely during discussions between the commissioners and committee members.

Criteria changes that would be made were outlined during the presentation.

Among those possible changes included pre-existing fishing derbies and special use areas that were properly permitted by the commission and have a history of more than one past occurrence, which will have no change.

A time provision would be removed in the proposal as well to pre-existing private stockings on private property on Class A wild trout stream sections that were closed to public angling. That proposed revision would remove a time provision, which previously stated within one year of posting in the Pennsylvania Bulletin and closed to the angling public since 2010. It also clarified language and added consistency.

No extra exemptions were brought up during the proposal.