A few months back I shared the news about having found another job, after losing one just a few months prior. Things are going pretty well as far as the actual work part goes, not too difficult from a physical standpoint and enough weekends to save my ass before it falls off. The really good news is that I got a fabulous 6 month evaluation (public employment..) and I am now a permanent staff member. In the summer of ‘98 when I fell apart, it never occurred to me that I might be where I am now. After all by the summer of ‘99 , I was barely walking and most days were about 2 hours long. Things just didn’t look all that promising, if you know what I mean. With a lot of adaptation, some pharmaceutical intervention and a little luck, I was able to crawl through the process of re-training, and then actually staying together long enough to find a job in a crappy job market. Dang. My ms has basically simmered and not boiled over for some time now. I am convinced that copaxone has made a big difference for me, as well as a lot of other stuff. A good marriage, I can still can ride a motorcycle (in fact just got a new one see 
http://colevalley.net/photos/bikes/03yam/yam.02.jpg), I still can fly-fish, and even go for walks in the park. Not that I haven’t had few days here and there where I felt like I had been dunked a vat of novacaine and beaten with a dead salmon, but overall I just have to say that I will probably look back on this time of my life as the good old days. Of course things won’t always be this rosy but for now , I will take it. — Jim S
In <news:wQvTd.599$C47.305@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, jim s said: > Not that I haven’t had few days here and there where I felt like I > had been dunked a vat of novacaine and beaten with a dead salmon,
Dude… some people would pay good money for treatment like that. :-)
Michael wrote: > In <news:wQvTd.599$C47.305@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, > jim s said: >>Not that I haven’t had few days here and there where I felt like I >>had been dunked a vat of novacaine and beaten with a dead salmon, > Dude… some people would pay good money for treatment like that. :-)
Don’t most of them live with their elderly mothers, on a lonely highway somewhere south of Austin, Nevada? — Jim Stinnett R1100Rs VTR1000 YZF R1 http://moto-rama,com
In <news:10wTd.602$C47.216@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, jim s said: > Michael wrote: >> In <news:wQvTd.599$C47.305@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, >> jim s said: >>> Not that I haven’t had few days here and there where I felt like I >>> had been dunked a vat of novacaine and beaten with a dead salmon, >> Dude… some people would pay good money for treatment like that. 
> Don’t most of them live with their elderly mothers, on a lonely > highway somewhere south of Austin, Nevada?
They only call those old ladies "mom" for the benefit of police and social workers.
We are all very happy for you and hope things continue to go well It sounds like good things are happening — may they continue Do not pass any around, but to cover all bases I have included — some cyber smoked steelhead — some cyber salmon jerky — five cyber pounds of dark chocolate because everyone on this newsgroup knows that dark chocolate is healthy for you You can be sure that we all recognize and appreciate where you are at now from where you used to be and everything that goes with it Congratulations — thanks for keeping us informed — may things continue to go well for you we all are all sharing in your good fortune — Larry Rather than building character, adversity tends to reveal it written using voice recognition software "jim s" <elkab…@colevalley.net> wrote > Of course things won’t always be this rosy but for now , I will take it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> — > Jim S
"jim s" <elkab…@colevalley.net> wrote I can still can ride a motorcycle > (in fact just got a new one see > http://colevalley.net/photos/bikes/03yam/yam.02.jpg), > Jim S
Jim, youre in far to poor a condition to ride a motorcycle like that, I think you need to hand that over to someone like me who can take care of it for you. ;^) Thats a sweet looking ride my man. Nice. Very nice. I must have dropped my Sporty 50 times before I finally bought crash-bars for it, and, of course, havent really droped it once since. Aint that how life goes though? Rob
hi jim, may the dead-salmon-and-novocaine days be few, and the tires-hitting-the-road days many! continued good fortune, rose
"Rob Duncan" <robdun…@gbronline.com> wrote in > Thats a sweet looking ride my man. Nice. Very nice. I must have dropped > my Sporty 50 times before I finally bought crash-bars for it, and, of > course, havent really droped it once since. Aint that how life goes
though? Yeah…what’s up with that? Maybe it’s a karmic insurance policy! vroom. Jim S
"white.lynx" <white.l…@shaw.ca> wrote in message > Do not pass any around,
but to cover all bases I have included > — some cyber smoked steelhead > — some cyber salmon jerky > — five cyber pounds of dark chocolate because everyone on this newsgroup > knows that dark chocolate is healthy for you > You can be sure that we all recognize and appreciate where you are at now > from where you used to be and everything that goes with it
I love chocolate, enough that it rivals some of the other rather important things, like breathing…:) Jim
Seriously, what about its environmental impact. I just switched to tin splitshots and no longer wrap my flies with lead. I do eat 25% of the fish I catch and like to hunt water fowl. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I guess I’m going to have to call that last fisherman I had this fall and ask him what brand of flouro he was using as there was a HUGE difference in visibility of the flouro vs mono. The flouro was extremely visible even through 18" to 24" of river water. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com Nearly all of the above reasons would have been true of the first generation of Fluorocarbon that came on the market. I suggest you try some of the newer stuff, it is much better and in many cases is superior on many levels to mono. The "selling point" of fluorocarbon (FC) is that’s it’s less visible underwater than because its index of refraction is closer to that of water than is the index of refraction of mono. I assume we’re all agreed on that. (It’s definitely not the price Some time ago I looked up the indices of refraction of "typical" FC and mono and compared them to that of fresh water. Sure enough, the FC was closer, but it wasn’t THAT MUCH closer — maybe halfway. I didn’t save the numbers and I don’t feel like looking them up at the moment. If it had been SPOT ON, I would have been impressed, but it wasn’t. The physics and neurophysics of what makes something more or less "visible" are complex. I was still skeptical about the claim. Then I took a length of FC and a length of mono (same diameters), put them into a glass of water, and looked at them. They looked about the same. After that, I was even more skeptical, and I remain so. We’ve heard anecdotal stories about how no one was catching fish, then someone switched to FC and started catching, and then everyone else switched and everyone started catching like crazy. I don’t put any credence at all on those stories. The same damn thing might happen for any number of other reasons.
Just as a footnote, my experience was with dries, not nymphing. Flouro isn’t my choice for dries but I do like it for nymphing. Overall, It’s not my choice for leader material because I don’t like making major changes to my leader just to switch between a dry and a nymph. However, in a situation like we had at the San Juan where there wasn’t much dry action, I will use it. I also like it on the dropper on a dry/dropper rig. Willi
Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. I don’t use it for nymphing either, because I think the putative benefits are nonexistant, or at least are so miniscule that they don’t justify the expense and bother. I used some of the second generation stuff on the Juan this year and it’s very strong, tough stuff. I’m as cheap as they come and I’m willing to pay the price.
The LAST thing you need, Willi especially on the San Juan, is fluorocarbon. In fact, in your case I think it’s unethical.
I just recevied the three forks 3wt rod I ordered, and I went to try it out. It was much easier to cast than my 20 dollar wal*mart rod. It seems to have a pretty slow action, which is nice after casting the broomstick like shakespear. I was wondering, what size tippet to use for 14-18 size dry flies? Thanks, ALex
Way cool Alex, congrats on getting your KPOS…I know you will grow to love it, as I do…collect the whole set and be confident in the knowledge that you have saved the job of some little Korean cutie. 
Frank Sr. previous advice on tippet size noted
Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. It sinks, too.
The sinking doesn’t bother me much. In fact, it’s a positive, because I believe a tippet under the surface is less visible than one floating in the surface tension, especially in calm water and sunny conditions. I don’t think FC sinks readily enough to pull under the surface a well floating fly, although it may be a factor with waterlogged or otherwise marginal flies. My objection is just the stiffness, which complicates a drag-free drift.
I have used the Umpqua super fluoro and find it a lot softer than deceiver for higher knot strength. I like it and may, repeat, may change completely to it before the end of the season. (Consumer warning on above advice: yes I am commercially connected with Umpqua.) Clark
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. It sinks, too.
Jon Cook writes: Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. It sinks, too.
Damn straight! Makes it wonderful for nymphing. <g If you grease it to within ten inches of the fly, that portion will float, but the portion untreated will sink just below the surface, but not enough to sink the fly. I don’t like its stiffness, however, for dries, but it is adequate when I am too lazy to switch. Dave
I have used the Umpqua super fluoro and find it a lot softer than deceiver for higher knot strength. I like it and may, repeat, may change completely to it before the end of the season. (Consumer warning on above advice: yes I am commercially connected with Umpqua.)
Has anyone here checked as to whether or not you can actually see the flouro leader/tippet material when it’s underwater? I’ve had a few instances this season where a fisherman shows up with the new fluoro and the fish just don’t seem to want to eat his bug. I change him over to the old stuff (I use Umpqua but I’m not commercially connected to them) and, bammo, lots more hits with the same fly and all. I’ve held a rolled up fluoro leader next to a rolled up regular leader under water. I can see the fluoro plain as day. Couldn’t hardly see the other stuff. I’m trying to recall what brands were the suspect material but for the life of me, I can’t recall. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com
Brian Nelson writes: Has anyone here checked as to whether or not you can actually see the flouro leader/tippet material when it’s underwater?
Yes, you can see it. Quite well, aamof. But, my experience with Orvis FC and Orvis Superstrength is just the opposite of what you note. Went from 5x Superstrength to 5x FC and caught fish immediately. I like it for nymphing because it holds up better to abrasion from rocks. YMMV, of course. <g Dave
Just as a footnote, my experience was with dries, not nymphing. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Brian Nelson writes: Has anyone here checked as to whether or not you can actually see the flouro leader/tippet material when it’s underwater? Yes, you can see it. Quite well, aamof. But, my experience with Orvis FC and Orvis Superstrength is just the opposite of what you note. Went from 5x Superstrength to 5x FC and caught fish immediately. I like it for nymphing because it holds up better to abrasion from rocks. YMMV, of course. <g Dave
"Brian D. Nelson" Has anyone here checked as to whether or not you can actually see the flouro leader/tippet material when it’s underwater? I’ve had a few instances this season where a fisherman shows up with the new fluoro and the fish just don’t seem to want to eat his bug. I change him over to the old stuff (I use Umpqua but I’m not commercially connected to them) and, bammo, lots more hits with the same fly and all. I’ve held a rolled up fluoro leader next to a rolled up regular leader under water. I can see the fluoro plain as day. Couldn’t hardly see the other stuff. I’m trying to recall what brands were the suspect material but for the life of me, I can’t recall.
I haven’t had any real problems at all brian, but one thing I find interesting when fishing dries on fluoro is that it seems to have more trouble breaking the surface tension. When fishing on stillwaters I have all manner of problems getting it to sink at all. Of course, once it does break though it sinks faster than mono but getting it to break through can be a heck of a problem.. any thoughts. Clark
Just as a footnote, my experience was with dries, not nymphing. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com
Could it be floating more as I mentioned above? I believe the "imprint" in the surface film is the biggest problem with it on smoother waters. Clark
Just as a footnote, my experience was with dries, not nymphing. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com Could it be floating more as I mentioned above? I believe the "imprint" in the surface film is the biggest problem with it on smoother waters.
Could be. All I know is it was very easily seen while under water whereas the mono basically disappeared and it did make a big difference (at least to me it did) in the number of fish that came up to eat the bug. I’ll have to do a little ’speriment the next time I have some available. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com
The sinking doesn’t bother me much. In fact, it’s a positive, because I believe a tippet under the surface is less visible than one floating in the surface tension, especially in calm water and sunny conditions. I don’t think FC sinks readily enough to pull under the surface a well floating fly, although it may be a factor with waterlogged or otherwise marginal flies. My objection is just the stiffness, which complicates a drag-free drift.
I’ve used it a good bit and the sinking doesn’t seem to be a problem (I agree with RW’s comment about it), but FC does appear to break more easily at the knot. Maybe that’s a function of its stiffness, but I believe FC’s advantage in visibility is outweighed by its stiffness, relative fragility at the knot, and expense. Bob
Yes, you can see it. Quite well, aamof. But, my experience with Orvis FC and Orvis Superstrength is just the opposite of what you note. Went from 5x Superstrength to 5x FC and caught fish immediately. I like it for nymphing because it holds up better to abrasion from rocks.
Funny, last year I took along the Orvis FC to the Salmon R, & it seemed to suffer more abrasion than plain mono. So much so, I almost abandoned fluorocarbon for fear that all the surface abrasion would negate the refractive advantages. (Then again this was 2x stuff, so it was a lot more visible to begin with.) Joe F.
I just recevied the three forks 3wt rod I ordered, and I went to try it out. It was much easier to cast than my 20 dollar wal*mart rod. It seems to have a pretty slow action, which is nice after casting the broomstick like shakespear. I was wondering, what size tippet to use for 14-18 size dry flies?
After buying a new rod, that is exactly what I wonder too. Depends on how bushy the flies are and other conditions. Experiment. Use a tippet that will cast the fly where you want it, but not stiff enough to lay out straight. Start with, say, 5x and see if it curls up nicely for you.
Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff.
reasons not to use flourocarbon: 1) too stiff for many purposes (harder to make a drag free float) 2) more expensive 3) hardness makes good knots elusive: IE the line doesn’t break, but knots often unravel 4) the stiffness of the line can cause hellatious tangles. …accidentally bounce the leader off a branch and you often reel back a monstrous spider web. 5) environmental pollution: nylon absorbs water and breaks down with UV exposure. nylon lasts a long time, but flourocarbon lasts (by comparison) forever.
"while_1" reasons not to use flourocarbon: 1) too stiff for many purposes (harder to make a drag free float) 2) more expensive 3) hardness makes good knots elusive: IE the line doesn’t break, but knots often unravel 4) the stiffness of the line can cause hellatious tangles. …accidentally bounce the leader off a branch and you often reel back a monstrous spider web. 5) environmental pollution: nylon absorbs water and breaks down with UV exposure. nylon lasts a long time, but flourocarbon lasts (by comparison)
forever. Nearly all of the above reasons would have been true of the first generation of Fluorocarbon that came on the market. I suggest you try some of the newer stuff, it is much better and in many cases is superior on many levels to mono. 1) The new generation stuff is more supple than many equivalent monos. 2) Yep it is, but as you don’t have to refresh your stocks each season it can be more value for money for many. 3) This has been pretty much negated. 4) The stiffness has gone. 5) Mono isn’t exactly environmentally friendly either. The onus is on the angler to ensure adequate cleanup of excess pieces. In a reality sense the length of time flouro stays on snag isn’t all that different to mono. Clark Clark
Nearly all of the above reasons would have been true of the first generation of Fluorocarbon that came on the market. I suggest you try some of the newer stuff, it is much better and in many cases is superior on many levels to mono.
The "selling point" of fluorocarbon (FC) is that’s it’s less visible underwater than because its index of refraction is closer to that of water than is the index of refraction of mono. I assume we’re all agreed on that. (It’s definitely not the price Some time ago I looked up the indices of refraction of "typical" FC and mono and compared them to that of fresh water. Sure enough, the FC was closer, but it wasn’t THAT MUCH closer — maybe halfway. I didn’t save the numbers and I don’t feel like looking them up at the moment. If it had been SPOT ON, I would have been impressed, but it wasn’t. The physics and neurophysics of what makes something more or less "visible" are complex. I was still skeptical about the claim. Then I took a length of FC and a length of mono (same diameters), put them into a glass of water, and looked at them. They looked about the same. After that, I was even more skeptical, and I remain so. We’ve heard anecdotal stories about how no one was catching fish, then someone switched to FC and started catching, and then everyone else switched and everyone started catching like crazy. I don’t put any credence at all on those stories. The same damn thing might happen for any number of other reasons.
"rw" < – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The "selling point" of fluorocarbon (FC) is that’s it’s less visible underwater than because its index of refraction is closer to that of water than is the index of refraction of mono. I assume we’re all agreed on that. (It’s definitely not the price Some time ago I looked up the indices of refraction of "typical" FC and mono and compared them to that of fresh water. Sure enough, the FC was closer, but it wasn’t THAT MUCH closer — maybe halfway. I didn’t save the numbers and I don’t feel like looking them up at the moment. If it had been SPOT ON, I would have been impressed, but it wasn’t. The physics and neurophysics of what makes something more or less "visible" are complex. I was still skeptical about the claim. Then I took a length of FC and a length of mono (same diameters), put them into a glass of water, and looked at them. They looked about the same. After that, I was even more skeptical, and I remain so. We’ve heard anecdotal stories about how no one was catching fish, then someone switched to FC and started catching, and then everyone else switched and everyone started catching like crazy. I don’t put any credence at all on those stories. The same damn thing might happen for any number of other reasons.
I would agree to some degree with your conclusions. I don’t think the differences are THAT huge. But I think there are differences and times will arise where one will give you an advantage over the other. I don’t believe either material is perfect in certain circumstances one will out perform the other. Having said that. My preliminary results using the new Super-Flouro is pretty encouraging. I’m not using it totally exclusively, but at the moment that’s only because I haven’t to been able to get it in all the sizes I want. I think I will but that doesn’t mean I wont find situations where I wont find a situation where I’ll want to use mono anymore either. Clark
I guess I’m going to have to call that last fisherman I had this fall and ask him what brand of flouro he was using as there was a HUGE difference in visibility of the flouro vs mono. The flouro was extremely visible even through 18" to 24" of river water. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana www.diamondnoutfitters.com
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nearly all of the above reasons would have been true of the first generation of Fluorocarbon that came on the market. I suggest you try some of the newer stuff, it is much better and in many cases is superior on many levels to mono. The "selling point" of fluorocarbon (FC) is that’s it’s less visible underwater than because its index of refraction is closer to that of water than is the index of refraction of mono. I assume we’re all agreed on that. (It’s definitely not the price Some time ago I looked up the indices of refraction of "typical" FC and mono and compared them to that of fresh water. Sure enough, the FC was closer, but it wasn’t THAT MUCH closer — maybe halfway. I didn’t save the numbers and I don’t feel like looking them up at the moment. If it had been SPOT ON, I would have been impressed, but it wasn’t. The physics and neurophysics of what makes something more or less "visible" are complex. I was still skeptical about the claim. Then I took a length of FC and a length of mono (same diameters), put them into a glass of water, and looked at them. They looked about the same. After that, I was even more skeptical, and I remain so. We’ve heard anecdotal stories about how no one was catching fish, then someone switched to FC and started catching, and then everyone else switched and everyone started catching like crazy. I don’t put any credence at all on those stories. The same damn thing might happen for any number of other reasons.
Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. I don’t use it for nymphing either, because I think the putative benefits are nonexistant, or at least are so miniscule that they don’t justify the expense and bother. I used some of the second generation stuff on the Juan this year and it’s very strong, tough stuff. I’m as cheap as they come and I’m willing to pay the price. Willi
I just recevied the three forks 3wt rod I ordered, and I went to try it out. It was much easier to cast than my 20 dollar wal*mart rod. It seems to have a pretty slow action, which is nice after casting the broomstick like shakespear. I was wondering, what size tippet to use for 14-18 size dry flies? Thanks, ALex
4x to 5x works well. I am leary of flourocarbon. The stuff reminds me of the gas that breaks down the ozone in solid form. Presentation is everything.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just recevied the three forks 3wt rod I ordered, and I went to try it out. It was much easier to cast than my 20 dollar wal*mart rod. It seems to have a pretty slow action, which is nice after casting the broomstick like shakespear. I was wondering, what size tippet to use for 14-18 size dry flies? Thanks, ALex
I just recevied the three forks 3wt rod I ordered, and I went to try it out. It was much easier to cast than my 20 dollar wal*mart rod. It seems to have a pretty slow action, which is nice after casting the broomstick like shakespear. I was wondering, what size tippet to use for 14-18 size dry flies?
5x normally. If the conditions are really difficult (very clear, smooth water, bright sunlight, picky fish) then 6x might be better. Al Hammel mentioned fluorocarbon in a negative way. I agree. Don’t use fluorocarbon for dry flies. It’s too stiff. I don’t use it for nymphing either, because I think the putative benefits are nonexistant, or at least are so miniscule that they don’t justify the expense and bother.
Hello Anglers, Will be in Yosemite for a few days and was wondering about fishing the lakes off Hwy 120 going east thru Tioga pass. Is fishing not allowed? Is it OK with barbless/artificial only? Is it catch & release? Do they plant any of these lakes with stupid DFG trout? What species of fish are in these lakes? Etc., etc. Appreciate any and all info. CP Note: I realize the Pass is closed due to rockslide! I also realize I could find this info somewhere if I really looked. But I’m looking for some first-hand knowledge/experience info.
Tuolumne Meadows has a lake near it, and the fishing can be good with worms and the white wood worms. Most of the lakes up near Tioga pass are sterile. Bill – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello Anglers, Will be in Yosemite for a few days and was wondering about fishing the lakes off Hwy 120 going east thru Tioga pass. Is fishing not allowed? Is it OK with barbless/artificial only? Is it catch & release? Do they plant any of these lakes with stupid DFG trout? What species of fish are in these lakes? Etc., etc. Appreciate any and all info. CP Note: I realize the Pass is closed due to rockslide! I also realize I could find this info somewhere if I really looked. But I’m looking for some first-hand knowledge/experience info.
Just got back from a ten day trip with my 9 year old son. Stopped off at saddlebag lake, 2 miles in from the Yosemite gate at Tioga pass. We took he boat in ,its a long and skinny lake, and planned to camp for the night. My son caught his first trout, a 14 inch rainbow, using a lure. At night, we used a fly and bubble on 4 pound test. Caught more fish than we could handle. When the boat came back the next morning to take us out, we decided to spend another night .Had another good day, nobody else camped there. Saw a few other hikers in the day but had the lake to ourselves all night. Saw no bears and had a wonderful time. Great place. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello Anglers, Will be in Yosemite for a few days and was wondering about fishing the lakes off Hwy 120 going east thru Tioga pass. Is fishing not allowed? Is it OK with barbless/artificial only? Is it catch & release? Do they plant any of these lakes with stupid DFG trout? What species of fish are in these lakes? Etc., etc. Appreciate any and all info. CP Note: I realize the Pass is closed due to rockslide! I also realize I could find this info somewhere if I really looked. But I’m looking for some first-hand knowledge/experience info.
Hi, I’m a short time lurker. Was wondering if anybody could recommend a resort/guide service in Colorado offering private water and/or accommodations. Thanks in advance. John Sorell
Go to www.elktrout.com
Elktrout is a very fine, fly fishing only-catch and release only, resort with great strecthes of private property on two rivers and quite a few fantastic ponds. The guides work hard and you fish right up to dark. Bows and cut throats are prevalent in the ponds with some very large browns lurking in the rivers. Fish seem to bight all the time. Quarters and food are first rate. Scenery is beautiful but lots and lots of cow shit to avoid. All together a wonderful private retreat. Tom Bogdan
Thanks to all for the replies….John – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Elktrout is a very fine, fly fishing only-catch and release only, resort with great strecthes of private property on two rivers and quite a few fantastic ponds. The guides work hard and you fish right up to dark. Bows and cut throats are prevalent in the ponds with some very large browns lurking in the rivers. Fish seem to bight all the time. Quarters and food are first rate. Scenery is beautiful but lots and lots of cow shit to avoid. All together a wonderful private retreat. Tom Bogdan
Hello. I’m Art Daudelin, a writer on assignment for "Physicians Financial News." I’m doing a piece on Fly Fishing and would like to speak with someone who can give me an overview and philosophy of the sport, as well as some tips, travel spots, etc. An M.D. would make a great subject for an interview, as the magazine is targeted to physicians, but any good insight would be welcome. E-mail me if you are interested… thanks in advance, art daudelin
If I didn’t fish whenever possible, I’d strangle every911 callin, terminally unemployable slob who gets on teh medic…. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello. I’m Art Daudelin, a writer on assignment for "Physicians Financial News." I’m doing a piece on Fly Fishing and would like to speak with someone who can give me an overview and philosophy of the sport, as well as some tips, travel spots, etc. An M.D. would make a great subject for an interview, as the magazine is targeted to physicians, but any good insight would be welcome. E-mail me if you are interested… thanks in advance, art daudelin
I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. -Zimmy
I’m primarily a warmwater ff and have always used an 8 wt. Recently I picked up a 6 wt. fast action rod and have really enjoyed it for bass and panfish. I think that the faster action allows it to cast larger flies well, yet, it is still fun with small 12" bass. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. -Zimmy
I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx.
Be guided by fly size. If your typical day was spent using only flies #16 and smaller you would want a 5 weight outfit (or 6 or 4). If the typical day was spent casting one-inch poppers or streamers for bass you’d want a 7 weight or 8. You can cast bigger flies on a lighter outfit, and you can cast smaller than #16s on a 7 weight or heavier outfit, but you would probably not enjoy it after an hour or so. — | Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs, | | Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734 |
I use a Sage 5wt overlined with 6wt line. It is a tip-flex rod and it has a very fast action which does a good job casting flies as small as size 12 dries to 1/0 deer hair poppers. It has enough backbone to fight big largemouths and is sensitive enough to make moderate sized panfish a blast to catch. No, it’s not the perfect rod for every situation, but as an all-around warm-water rod, I couldn’t want for much more. I still would like a 2 or 3wt for small panfish and a 9wt for saltwater. HTH, Clark – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. -Zimmy
(Donald Phillipson) writes:
*SNIP* I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. Be guided by fly size. If your typical day was spent using only flies #16 and smaller you would want a 5 weight outfit (or 6 or 4). If the typical day was spent casting one-inch poppers or streamers for bass you’d want a 7 weight or 8. You can cast bigger flies on a lighter outfit, and you can cast smaller than #16s on a 7 weight or heavier outfit, but you would probably not enjoy it after an hour or so.
Don’s advice is right on the money. Presuming you use a forearm-based casting stroke, sounds like a fast action 6wt. (such as the Orvis TL 906 – Silver Label or Trident version) would do the trick. If you expect to through lots of #2 deer hair bugs, go ahead and stick a 7wt. line on that fast action 6. The rod will handle it just fine and the 7wt. line pulls big bugs through the air better than the 6. If you didn’t need to throw the big bugs for largemouth bass, a 5 wt would do fine. So, like Don says, let your fly size be your guide. I have a line-weight/fly size/quarry table (my personal opinions) set up on my web-site that you might want to glance at. Go to "http://www.thegrid.net/flyfish/LineSpec.html" and click on the hyperlink to "Line Weight ‘Recommended Uses’ Chart". You might find it useful in making your decision. Good Fishing, Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools Mt. Shasta Fly Fishing Schools http://www.thegrid.net/flyfish
I have a pfluger summit 6W and I use it for every kind of fish, from 15 inch trout to 20 pound red salmon on the keni river. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. -Zimmy
If you are just getting back into flyfishing and you fished with lower modulus graphite or even fiberglass in the past, be very careful with the new tip flex type rods that some have recommended. A 5 weight is a good all around rod, and as one wrote, 6 wt line will help the rod load better with larger flies. I would consider a good mid flex or even a powerful full flex rod to get back in the swing of things. Either way, make sure you cast it first. Any good dealer will insist you cast it prior to buying it. Good luck. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m getting back into flyfishing after several years and i need a new rod/reel/line outfit. I’ve seen several nice ones around but can’t really decide which weight i should go for. I’m considering a #6 or #7 weight rod – but i haven’t ruled out a #5 or #8 weight either. I fish mostly for trout and panfish, w/ a few occasional largemouth and smallmouth bass and small pickerel. I would like an outfit w/ as much versitility as possible for small to medium-sized fish. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanx. -Zimmy
I’m seeking information about the new Paradigm from Thomas & Thomas. I’m considering buying an 8-1/2 or 9 foot for a 5 weight and would be interested in a critique of its overall performance from someone who has spent some time with one. Thanks, Jim — ***Upscale Leather*** Finely crafted products in fish leather. Visit our site at: http://www.tiac.net/users/batesbiz/upscale.html
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m seeking information about the new Paradigm from Thomas & Thomas. I’m considering buying an 8-1/2 or 9 foot for a 5 weight and would be interested in a critique of its overall performance from someone who has spent some time with one. Thanks, Jim — ***Upscale Leather*** Finely crafted products in fish leather. Visit our site at: http://www.tiac.net/users/batesbiz/upscale.html
Jim: I have had to opportunity to cast all the paradigms. They are smooth casting rods similar in feel to Winstons with the exception of having a bit more backbone. As for performance: do not expect them to be screaming speed rods. They will cast 60 feet of line all day and be quite forgiving of poor loop control. At the end of the day you won’t be tired from pushing line. They also present a fly well with a delicate tip action that helps turn the fly over easily. Cosmetics: the rods are beautifully finished and a delight to see in bright sun. The colors are radiant. Good looks and an easy rod to cast usually makes for a good combo. As with any rod, cast it and put it to the test for your style of fishing. If it feels good, looks good, do it! You probably will never regret it!
Try fishing Daniels Park on the Chagrin. It has a Dam which is the end of the line for the fish, unless the water is very high. There is a good holding pool below the dam and a few runs downstream could hold winter Steelhead. Since it is a public park, it does tend to get pressure during Salmon and Trout runs. Good luck, and release them. Tom Steele
Has anyone had any success flyfishing for steelhead around the Cleveland area? Grand River, Chagrin, ect. I know the rain should have brought in a few fish over the last few days. Thanks in advanceI just came to this group looking for the same info. There is a shopcalled Grand river Tackle shopwho usually has the skinny on cleveland area steelies.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO POST "Grand River Tackle" (’s) address and/or phone number, please. George Gehrke/Mr. Gink
Don’t tell anyone else, but the Plain Dealer had a "kiss and tell" article about how awesome the steelhead fishing is in the Grand, Conneat and Chagrin. Seems the Little Manistee River fingerlings that were stocked a while back have made it all happen. Oh, I guess all the rain we had over the last week pumped up the rivers to allow the silver bullets to pass through the gate. As we speak, I am tying egg sucking leaches and garish colored woolly worms. Guess you can tell what I will be doing this weekend. (Plus there are NO soccer games this weekend!!) Mark Rupp
Has anyone had any success flyfishing for steelhead around the Cleveland area? Grand River, Chagrin, ect. I know the rain should have brought in a few fish over the last few days. Thanks in advanceI just came to this group looking for the same info. There is a
shopcalled Grand river Tackle shopwho usually has the skinny on cleveland area steelies.
Has anyone had any success flyfishing for steelhead around the Cleveland area? Grand River, Chagrin, ect. I know the rain should have brought in a few fish over the last few days. Thanks in advance
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Lefty Kreh advocates attaching the tippet to the main body of leader via a loop
Can anyone fill me in on the conditions on the Yakima? How did the winter floods affect the river? Also, what patterns are most effective during April and May? I’m not real familiar with the Yakima so any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
I don’t know the condition of the Yakima in the canyon area. I believe most of the worst flooding was further away from the fly fishing water. Elk hair caddis has always done well for me. Tie it with plenty of the "big" floating hair and take lots of them. Good luck! Jim
Can anyone fill me in on the conditions on the Yakima? How did the winter floods affect the river? Also, what patterns are most effective during April and May? I’m not real familiar with the Yakima so any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
Hi Gary, Call Bill or Darcy at the Blue Dun in Wenatchee, WA at 509-664-2416. They should be able to give you up to the minute information about the Yakima and any other local rivers. Tight Lines Al Beatty BT’s Fly Fishing Products Bozeman, MT (96 catalog)
Can anyone fill me in on the conditions on the Yakima? How did the winter floods affect the river? Also, what patterns are most effective during April and May? I’m not real familiar with the Yakima so any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
Stones should still be working a little bit, try a madam x in size 8 with a yellow thorax. March browns, sz12, 14 should work, as should PMDs, sz 14, 16. In May, olive and tan caddis will be good, size 14, 16. BWO’s, 16, 18, 20, are always around. A prince nymph can be good. Cooper’s Fly Shop, in Ellensburg, 509-962-5259, has the best info at any given time. Charlie and Robert are shoestring operators, stop in and help them succeed – they’re great guys.
Can anyone fill me in on the conditions on the Yakima? How did the winter floods affect the river? Also, what patterns are most effective during April and May? I’m not real familiar with the Yakima so any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
I don’t think the winter floods are going to be the problem. This last weekend the water looked to be running high and the reservoirs above looked pretty full. Now we’ve had three more days of heavy rains and more predicted. Don’t think I’d hold my breath for clear water. — Jewelee
I don’t know the condition of the Yakima in the canyon area. I believe most of the worst flooding was further away from the fly fishing water.
The canyon did get flooding. I understand from friends with a trailer at Red’s Riverview Campground that the lower section was swept by water. Not to worry about a campsite thought– they also said Red’s would be restored and ready for business as usual this summer.