Motivation for a special regulations and delayed harvest sections

[Corey Clift]

In the context of trout streams that are not stocked by the state, what motivates the designation of a Special Regulations section.  Case in point, the Hazel River vs The Special Reg section of the Rapidan.  What is different about the Rapidan that warrants special regulations whereas the Hazel river is only covered by the usual 6 less than 7".  Is this motivated by some biological aspect of the fishery? historical use of the river? some local landowner lobbying?

Along the same lines, what is the primary motivation for designating an area as delayed harvest section while others are just put and take?  The motivation for Delayed Harvest, in general, seems obvious; I am guessing it prevents the whole stretch of the creek being completely harvested within a short window after the stocking truck leaves allowing more anglers to have fun over a longer period of time.  But why designate one specific tailwater as delayed harvest while leaving another tailwater as put and take?

cheers

Corey

[N Elgas]

I use to stock accotink with DNR and had the oppurtunity to stock it with John  Odenkirk a few years back and asked him a similar question,  Delayed harvest in a tail water preserves the fishing experience.  Stocking stops in April,  but tail waters can hold fish longer than small streams and DH regs stay in effect until June.  Or in the case of a small creek like accotink,  it allows more anglers to enjoy the resource,  while still stocking less fish,  more cost effective in heavily populated or pressured areas.