slightly below average (table 11), In general, the rates of catch in pounds 

 of fish per hour compare somev/hat r_Tre favorably, althoush oven in this 

 respect fishing in the study area Tra.s only about average (iniddlG third of 

 studies listed), 



''.'Vhen comparing rates of catch on lakes and reservoirs in the studjr area 

 v/ith those of other lakes and reservoirs (table 12), the reservoirs in the 

 study area fall within the lower taTO-thirds of other reservoirs listed, 

 both in numbers and in pounds of fish per houjr; thus, in general, they can 

 be considered slightly below a.verage, 



Co::iparisons of fishing pressure and yield of the llorth Fork Sun I^iver 

 with a varietj'' of other trout streams in I'ontana would be desirable, Un- 

 fortunateljA, the only streams on which comparable studies have been made 

 are the West Gallatin and Iladison Rivers, exceptionally productive waters 

 which are readily accessible to fishermen. Fishing pressure and yield de- 

 termined for a 2S-mile stretch of the ITest Gallatin in 1950 was 460 fish- 

 eriaan-days and 580 fish or 400 poimds of fish per mile (Fish and Wildlife 

 Service, lP51a); that for 93 miles of the !fadison River determined over 

 the period 1950 through 1952 was 231 fisherman-days and 535 fish or 494 

 pounds of fish per mile (Fish and ITildlife Service, 1953), 



Considering the entire 30 i.ailes of stream in the Ilorth Fork Sun River 

 study area, pressure and jdeld per mile v^^as 50 fisherman-days and 107 fish 

 or 43 pounds of fish. Although these values are lovr compared with those 

 of the foregoing streams, greater potentialities are suggested for the 

 llorth Fork Sun River v:hen comparisons are confined to the 8-mile middle 

 section of the stream. In this section, where access is comparable to that 

 of the lYcst Gallatin and ^ladison Rivers, the pressure and jdeld per mile 

 was 253 fisherman-days and 47S fish weighing 134 pounds (table 6), Except 

 for the smaller yield in pounds per mile, this 8-mile, readily accessible 

 section of the study area com.pared favorably with the "(Yest Gallatin and 

 Lladison, Vfere other portions of the llorth Fork Sun liiver equalljr access- 

 ible, pressure and yield of the rivsr as a v/hole probably would be con- 

 siderably greater. 



Although fishing in some sections of the ITorth Fork Sun River was 

 light, probably because of poor access, the existence of such isolated 

 areas is im.portant to a certain segment of the population, and there is 

 an apparent need for preservation of some areas in a more or less primitive 

 state. This is illustrated by the use made of the approximate 50 miles of 

 wilderness stream above Gibson Reservoir (17 percent of total pressure on 

 the ITorth Fork Sun River), This area v/as most attractive to nonlocal 

 poople, that is, those from the prairies to the east in I'ontana and from 

 the eastern States, Approximately 55 percent of the nonresidents (from 21 

 States, 20 of which vrere east of Montana) who v;ere contacted during the 

 study used the fishery above Gibson, About 86 percent of the fishing 

 above Gibson was by residents; however, excluding those individuals who 

 came from a radius of over 300 miles and were m.ostly nonresidents, about 



