If Scott's thread does nothing else, it surely confirms that fly fishers have many different ideas of what constitutes the "best" trout fishing. Nothing wrong with that. If we all had the same notion of excellent water, then we'd probably all be standing in the same stream with no room left for the trout.
Just for giggles, I thought I'd provide a slightly different perspective on the famous Central PA streams that Wbranch mentioned. On one hand, I'm inclined to agree that the Letort, Big Spring, and Falling Spring probably aren't as good as they once were. But nailing down exactly when those halcyon days were is also very subjective. It's easy to look back on the good old days through a pair of rose-colored binoculars that make things look grander and cheerier than they really were.
These days, we may not hear much about legendary fish like Ed Shenk's "Old George," or Ed Koch's 9 lb. Letort brown on a dry fly, or, the most legendary of them all, Don Martin's monster 15 1/2 lb. brown from the former Blue Hole at the head of Big Spring. But we should also remember that Marinaro famously characterized the Letort as a stream where a good day could involve catching a single fish. He also wrote (back in 1950) that half of the Letort was unsuitable for trout due to pollution. And yet there were still brook trout in the cress-beds at the head of the Letort in those days. When
A Modern Dry-Fly Code was reissued at the beginning of the '70s, Marinaro bemoaned the loss of his beloved mayfly hatches:
It is difficult for me to believe that such enormous changes could take place so rapidly in such a short space of time (hardly a decade) on waters that bore magnificent hatches of fly for thousands or even millions of years.
Today, the hatches still don't match those of Marinaro's recollection, and the stream has certainly endured other catastrophic pollution events, like the pesticide contamination in 1981 that many thought would toll a death knell for this historic stream. But, it is also no longer true that half of the stream is unsuitable for trout, and some stretches hold far more wild trout now than they ever did in Marinaro's day. In stark contrast to most other famous streams, the fishing pressure that Marinaro complained about in 1950 is probably not much heavier on the Letort today. Partly, that is due to Marinaro's masterful job of convincing anglers that catching Letort trout required supernatural skill. I often wonder if visiting anglers who come to see the legend are disappointed by finding a little, mostly urbanized creek or if they are just intimidated by its reputation. Either way, few spend the time to figure out how to fish it.
I have seen good and bad on the Letort over the years, but it has always been a stream that held a few big fish in some sections and lots of smaller fish in others. Personally, my favorite part is one of the less popular, small-fish sections. When I was still living in Boiling Springs, I fished that short stretch 14 times in 2004 and 2005, catching 208 wild browns and 1 wild rainbow, for an average of just under 15 trout per visit. I never had to worry about a skunking, and some days I was only on the water for an hour or so. In Marinaro's day, that section held no trout at all. I never spent a day on the Letort in those seasons when I didn't feel fortunate to have wild trout water so close to home. Given all it has been through and the rampant development that surrounds it, I still think the Letort is a pretty special place. But that's just me, and I can easily understand that it might not appeal to everyone. I know that some fly fishers take one look at it and think someone must be playing a joke on them. "C'mon," one guy said to me, "you can't expect me to believe that ditch is the famous Letort!" Different strokes....
PS--My sincere sympathies on your dad's passing, Lee. But welcome back; you've been missed around here.