Question:

B-run slow and far in-between but large when you hook up.  A few 30 + inchers have been caught and released.  Ron Fudge released a 33 inch Buck but had to work two/three days for it.  Very slow fishing.  Run up the Snake is in cloudy water and the fish just aren’t interested in doing anything in this dry weather.  We need some rain to scent the water.  The mud is from the clear cutting up river as it continues to do excessive erosion damage in the cliffs and mountains. Today I pulled the big jet boat out and took it to town for a set of all new brakes, two new matching tires so all four are alike, and for all new wheel bearings.  We spent an hour in the power wash cleaning and waxing "The Professional" Jet Guide Boat.  I was surprised how dirty the boat was just sitting in storage and out of the sun all summer.  Of course we’ve been away a lot for the last three months. We will be taking pictures to post on the web site as soon as we get her into the water.  Some boaters are picking up six to eight fish a day using shrimp bait but they aren’t fly fishermen either.  These individuals are fishing at night and it seems the new battery lighted lures are catching more fishermen then fish anyhow.  Maybe next year the new lures will be playing Mozart underwater? Mr.G.

  george.vcf

1K Download

Response:

        (blather snipped out of concern for the honor of the newsgroup)         it is perversely fascinating that anyone, even you, george, would think that any other human being on the planet could possibly give a damn about the matters proffered in the preceding post. wayno  (ok, so me and willi loehman read it)

Response:

   (blather snipped out of concern for the honor of the newsgroup)    it is perversely fascinating that anyone, even you, george, would think that any other human being on the planet could possibly give a damn about the matters proffered in the preceding post. wayno  (ok, so me and willi loehman read it)

Heck, I read ‘em.  You never know what material might lurk.  Sorta like the kid and the barn full of horseshit, just certain there’s a pony under it all.  Actually, considering that Admiral Ginkstinks (hey, I think Gink Stinks – so sue me) is the source, a "full of horseshit" analogy is particularly apropos. For example, this one makes me wonder what kind of strange boat uses 4 matching (or even mis-matched) tires, new wheel bearings, or new (or old) brakes.  The only thing I can think of is that now that he’s without air support and de-Sabered – hmm, does that mean he’s "out of plane?" – he’s plotting to go capture a warm water port in Afghanistan to keep it out of the hands of them there godless commies….or them there ragheads….or somebody else that done him wrong….uh-oh…’tripper, better scratch parking your aircraft carrier in the Port of Kabul without battling a greasy little muppet and his lawyer, …and watch out for those flaming bamboo torpedoes….wait – damn the torpedoes, full stream ahead… TC, R

Response:

Question:

Warning: another Scoobey Bellows TR, short on fish and long on everything else: Just got back from four days in Yosemite — kicking back next to an alpine lake at 10,000′ on Sat. night, watching the Perseid meteor shower, with the huge streaks punctuated by distant flashes of lightning, was the high point — but the fishing wasn’t too astounding. Departed Tuolumne Meadows, north of the main valley (love the valley, but not the tourists there). Friday, on the hike in, along Rafferty Creek I think it’s called, I saw lots of little, tiny goldens in the creek, acting just like grown-up trout. Could have just stared at them for hours. Camped that night at Booth Lake, close to the 10,000 foot level; that lake has a narrow (5 ft wide?) band of vegetation around the perimeter, and in the late afternoon trout started dimpling the surface right there, close to shore. I couldn’t see what the hatch was — assume callibaetis but could see no duns — but I saw a couple of small white moths flutter by. I have no idea whether there is any such thing as an aquatic moth, but it was the only insect in view. So, I decided to tie on a CDC sulfur emerger: could be a callibaetis, could be a moth caught on the surface, was my thinking. Picked up a nice little (6") trout on the first cast. Really interesting color: green/tan on the sides (golden trout?), but blood-red on top. If you know what that is, please tell me. Released him, sacrificing the deeply-hooked fly; lost another fly for no reason other than mistying the knot in the dark; then a bat started chasing my casts back and forth and, remembering Tom L.’s story about whacking a bat back and forth on the water thinking "damn, this streamer’s really heavy," called it quits. (Camped in the Hennessy Hammock that some of the Penn’s Clave folks saw. Interesting factoid: did you know that the temperature inside a nylon hammock tends to resemble that outside? D’oh! I never realized how much the ground acts as a heat sink when you’re in a regular tent. Temp dropped below 32 degress up on top of that mountain, and I froze my keister. Slept outside on the ground the other nights: much warmer (though definitely still not warm enough). I like that hammock idea, but it’s too cold for anything other than warm-weather. (Their website shows how to bungee a space blanket to the underside for warmth, but it seems too mickeymouse to mess with. Jury’s still out, but I may be trading for an old-fashioned one-man tent. )) Second night camped at a higher, sterile lake. Weird topography: so grassy around the marge it was like a lawn, but with big humps and hummocks serrated by twisting gravel channels that sometimes must carry water but at that time were dry; and beaches on the lake, pure light-colored sand; weird kicking back on the beach with your shirt off in the bright sunshine at 10,000′. That’s where we saw the Perseids. Next day we hiked up to a 10,600′ pass — a nice, neat two-miles-high — scrambled up an even taller granite ridge nearby, goggled at the views. Could see a smalllightning-strike fire burning on a steep slope ahead of us, across the North Fork Tuolumne River in the Ansel Adams Wilderness. I was a little concerned — fires usually burn uphill, but not always, so was planning our routes out if it jumped the river. (Spent two summers in college as an AD firefighter for the Forest Service.) But, no worries; Park Service was just letting it burn under wilderness rules, it kept to its side of the river and it was fun to watch it as we got nearer. Camped the last night along the John Muir Trail, on a stretch of river running through a wide meadow. Reasonably big though slow water, but again, very very small trout. More fun to watch than to fish for. An invisible hatch: nothing bumping the surface of the water, struggling, sending rings outward, and fish rising, and never could see a damn thing; and no midges in the air. Time for Zen fishing: no bug, no fly, no rod. Then a short hike back to the Meadows to close the loop, with a stop on the way to skinny-dip under an underwater stone arch formed at the base of a little waterfall. Cold, cold water, deep pool, hot sunny day: never gets better. So once again, fishing serves as an excuse or just a supplement to the joys of getting out there. Hope everyone else’s summer’s going as well (but hopefully with bigger fish, the icing on the cake). — Scoobey (Scott Bellows) "Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum." -Ambrose Bierce

Response:

Every summer I go on a backpack/kayak/raft/float plane/something like that trip with my two best friends from junior high and high school, even though one now lives in St. Louis and the other in Thousand Oaks, an hour outside LA. (That may not be the belly of the beast, but it’s at least its esophagus. He even called SF "Frisco" twice on our trip. I seriously considered "accidentally" giving him a shove off a lovely lookout.) Mu, I just noticed you’re at U of M. My brother, Nick Bellows, goes there. Go blue!

Actually, I’m in Thousand Oaks!  I’m trying to hold on to this umich account for as long as possible.  Has great anti-spam capabilities and it’s UNIX.  I’m not gonna find those two combinations in any other easily availble net service. Mu

Response:

Just got back from four days in Yosemite — kicking back next to an alpine lake at 10,000′ on Sat. night, watching the Perseid meteor shower, with the huge streaks punctuated by distant flashes of lightning, was the high point

Went to Joshhua Tree NP.  Never got below 80 at night and it was humid. Lightning in the distance was interesting but cloud cover limited my meteor count to 5 Interesting TR.  Have yet to go to Yosemite though it’s only 6 hours away. Don’t you live in Oregon? Mu

Response:

Yep, live near Portland, but am Bay Area born and raised. (A native Oregonian friend put it this way: "If you weren’t born in Oregon, you’ll never be an Oregonian. But if you’re a native Northern Californian, we will grant you sanctuary.") Every summer I go on a backpack/kayak/raft/float plane/something like that trip with my two best friends from junior high and high school, even though one now lives in St. Louis and the other in Thousand Oaks, an hour outside LA. (That may not be the belly of the beast, but it’s at least its esophagus. He even called SF "Frisco" twice on our trip. I seriously considered "accidentally" giving him a shove off a lovely lookout.) Mu, I just noticed you’re at U of M. My brother, Nick Bellows, goes there. Go blue! — Scoobey (Scott Bellows) "Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum." -Ambrose Bierce – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Have yet to go to Yosemite though it’s only 6 hours away. Don’t you live in Oregon? Mu

Response:

Thanks guy.  Those high passes are wonderful.  Feels like you can see around the world.      Frank Reid

Response:

Warning: another Scoobey Bellows TR, short on fish and long on everything else:

Sounds like heaven. Thanks for the report. TL MC

Response:

Question:

Greetings all, I am planning on taking my son on some fishing trips here in the next few weeks; he is relatively young and just starting in fishing.  We are planning on going to the South-East corner of Minnesota for the trips but we are somewhat new to the area and not familiar with the rivers and streams.  I would like to find a river or stream that we camp nearby for a night or two and that he can fish in while I can also do some fly fishing (preferable within walking distance of the camp.) Does anyone know of any places like this in the area that they could recommend to us?  We would greatly appreciate any information that we get. Thanks….

Response:

… Does anyone know of any places like this in the area that they could recommend to us? …

Whitewater State Park. — Ken Fortenberry

Response:

Question:

Anybody know what happened to the fly swap that was posted on this newsgroup a while back?  I Emailled the poster and haven’t heard from him. Willi

Response:

Anybody know what happened to the fly swap that was posted on this newsgroup a while back?  I Emailled the poster and haven’t heard from him. Willi

 So did I! perhaps he’s busy? Or a little confused by all the reactions? Hans van der Stroom

Response:

Hans van der Stroom schrieb in Nachricht Anybody know what happened to the fly swap that was posted on this newsgroup a while back?  I Emailled the poster and haven’t heard from him. Willi So did I! perhaps he’s busy? Or a little confused by all the reactions? Hans van der Stroom

I got no reply as yet either. Perhaps he got too many e-mails ? Obviously quite a few people replied. Hope he manages to get it going though. Would be nice to have something a little more tangible from other ROFF members, makes it more personal somehow. Tight Lines ! Mike Connor

Response:

I did the same.  Last I heard from him. Hans van der Stroom schrieb in Nachricht William Loehman heeft geschreven in bericht

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Anybody know what happened to the fly swap that was posted on this newsgroup a while back?  I Emailled the poster and haven’t heard from him. Willi So did I! perhaps he’s busy? Or a little confused by all the reactions? Hans van der Stroom I got no reply as yet either. Perhaps he got too many e-mails ? Obviously quite a few people replied. Hope he manages to get it going though. Would be nice to have something a little more tangible from other ROFF members, makes it more personal somehow. Tight Lines ! Mike Connor

Response:

I got no reply as yet either. Perhaps he got too many e-mails ? Obviously Tight Lines ! Mike Connor

Maybe he’s making a list to sell to phone solicitors…..;] No really. Maybe life intervened. pete

Response:

It was mine, promised it to you somewhere in the Peter Ross thread some time ago. Just forgot to adjust the label. Cheers, Herman Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by Herman. Mu

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Peter Ross was a Scottish barber who combined the now alomost forgotten Teal and Silver and the Teal and Red to a (according to history) very succesful wet fly/attractor. Origins are (top of my head) somewhere late on the last century. I caught more fish on it than I care to remember. Ideal fly for rivers in rainy circumstances and staining water. Fish across and down and have fun! Also very good on lakes. The odd thing about the PR is that it either works for you, or not at all. There’s still some Scottish mystic left in the old pattern I guess.. Pattern: Hook: standard wet fly, normally 8 – 14 Tail: goldpheasant tippets Body: rear 2/3 flat silver, front 1/3 red seal (imitation)       ribbed with silver wire Wing: Teal Hackle: black hen or soft cock, tied to the underside of the hook. Herman, enjoying a wee dram.. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, I am collenting the stuff for the web site. Who is Peter Ross? Paul … Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by Herman. Mu

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Ah, thanks Herman, for awhile there I thought I screwed up in picking that one out to give to Mu….the label had me confused. (more than usual, that is) Frank (where am I?) Church

|It was mine, promised it to you somewhere in the Peter Ross thread some |time ago. Just forgot to adjust the label. |Cheers, Herman |

| | Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment | of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it | that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? | | BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by | Herman. | | Mu | |– |Cheers, Herman |Herman Nijland |Daytime webmaster |Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

I thought I was short a fly for a moment because I didn’t see anyflies like that.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ah, thanks Herman, for awhile there I thought I screwed up in picking that one out to give to Mu….the label had me confused. (more than usual, that is) Frank (where am I?) Church |It was mine, promised it to you somewhere in the Peter Ross thread some |time ago. Just forgot to adjust the label. |Cheers, Herman | | | Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment | of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it | that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? | | BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by | Herman. | | Mu | |– |Cheers, Herman |Herman Nijland |Daytime webmaster |Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

‘Twas an exciting day at the Kirkpatrick household yesterday when the Fly Menagerie arrived.  Even my wife, an occasional fflady (between golf and tennis and gardening pursuits), was intrigued.  She especially liked the cute flys with the eyes.  I was duly impressed by the level of fly-tying-skills displayed, all previously expressed caveats, rationalizations, and absurd excuses notwithstanding.  Geez….These guys are GOOD!  I must have obtained the hand-selected display flys that Frank had obtained from some secret source, mimicing the identical fly types purportedly sent by Roffians.  Great job guys.  I too am looking forward to the web site for more info on how and when to fish each fly.  Thanks to all participants. Pat K In article Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by Herman. Mu

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

I’m looking forward to your website paul.  I haven’t got all the names matched up with the flies yet.  Thanks for the effort. — Levi "So long, and thanks for all the fish."

Response:

Speaking of which, is the site up yet Paul?  Got a URL for us?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m looking forward to your website paul.  I haven’t got all the names matched up with the flies yet.  Thanks for the effort.

Response:

It’s taking a little longer than I expected (doesn’t every project). Here is one of the flies: http://www.paul.goodwinweb.com/flyswap2000/grw.jpg It is the Green Rock Worm tied by LaCourse. Nice fly but I had expected he’d tie something with wool. Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Speaking of which, is the site up yet Paul?  Got a URL for us? I’m looking forward to your website paul.  I haven’t got all the names matched up with the flies yet.  Thanks for the effort.

Response:

I just found the pattern in the book by Taff Price "Fly Patterns an international guide" Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Peter Ross was a Scottish barber who combined the now alomost forgotten Teal and Silver and the Teal and Red to a (according to history) very succesful wet fly/attractor. Origins are (top of my head) somewhere late on the last century. I caught more fish on it than I care to remember. Ideal fly for rivers in rainy circumstances and staining water. Fish across and down and have fun! Also very good on lakes. The odd thing about the PR is that it either works for you, or not at all. There’s still some Scottish mystic left in the old pattern I guess.. Pattern: Hook: standard wet fly, normally 8 – 14 Tail: goldpheasant tippets Body: rear 2/3 flat silver, front 1/3 red seal (imitation)       ribbed with silver wire Wing: Teal Hackle: black hen or soft cock, tied to the underside of the hook. Herman, enjoying a wee dram.. Hi, I am collenting the stuff for the web site. Who is Peter Ross? Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … Got my package in the mail the other day.  It was a wonderful assortment of flies.  I hope we can get some more info on some of them.  Who was it that was collecting info for a web site? Paul? BTW, who tied the Peter Ross?  Mine was labeled as being an Elk & CDC by Herman. Mu — Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Came home tonight to find the most unlikely collection of bugs imaginable on my doorstep.  Everything from dandruff to this big red lobster-lookin thing that looks like more than a match for any fish I’ve ever caught.  Really nice looking set of flies, and quite a few patterns I’ve never even heard of.  Considering the number of people who claimed to be beginners, I am really impressed by how nice these things all look.  Of course there were a couple that were conspicuous by their absence.  All drop-outs have to tie double next year! ;

Question:

_______  The wading life vest is a good idea anymore the older you get. Of course its a good idea no matter how old you are.  The Madison has slick rounded stones in it and falling is easy enough and no matter how deep the water of any river you’re in, its more difficult to get back up on your feet. The most dangerous thing anyone can do when they fall and start floating down stream is holding onto their fly rod and then exhausting themselves with energy they could have spent more wisely getting back to shore. Let the fly rod go! — Mr.G http://www.gink.com/shopcart/index.html

Response:

I agree 1000%  I just bought a Stearns vest with the flotation built in.  It doesn’t have some of the bells and whistles, e.g., Supplex, net loop, but I value the safety feature above everything else. Jim Benenson Los Alamos NM’ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – _______  The wading life vest is a good idea anymore the older you get. Of course its a good idea no matter how old you are.  The Madison has slick rounded stones in it and falling is easy enough and no matter how deep the water of any river you’re in, its more difficult to get back up on your feet. The most dangerous thing anyone can do when they fall and start floating down stream is holding onto their fly rod and then exhausting themselves with energy they could have spent more wisely getting back to shore. Let the fly rod go! — Mr.G http://www.gink.com/shopcart/index.html

Response:

The most dangerous thing anyone can do when they fall and start floating down stream is holding onto their fly rod and then exhausting themselves with energy they could have spent more wisely getting back to shore.

The next most dangerous thing you can do when fishing is to let safety equipment substitute for common sense. A fly vest with flotation built in is a good idea; wearing one so you can wade deep, swift water that you normally wouldn’t wade is a very bad idea. (I know you weren’t suggesting that, George. Just thought it needed mentioning.) — Rusty Hook Laramie, Wyo Before you buy.

Response:

Question:

You are either dissembling or you don’t fish nearly as much as you were claiming to last year.  It is inconceivable that you could ask this question and at the same time write the kind of stuff quoted below unless of course you are just a troller.  By the way, what is "Wild Trout" etc.?  Do you by any chance mean Oregon Trout, Cal Trout or Washington Trout?  Care to post your professional qualifications in Genetics/Biochemistry/Biology to assist in evaluating your opinions? Fred wrote on Sat. 19.Feb.2000 "That was a great bit of thinking, and you are correct.  The problem is that people like Mike, TU, Wild Trout, etc. haven’t a clue about genetics.  If the argument could be changed from genetics to behavior, especially of Fish and Game people, changes could be made.  Unfortunately the last part of

science F&G types understand is genetics.  There is just too much math in population biology and too much biochemistry in genetics for most of them to understand." how do you tell a hatchery from a wild fish if no clipping has been done?  Please answer.

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

Despite your good intentions, your ducking the question.  If you don’t like farming, fine, but without some science to back up the worry just leads to more and more rumor and not much real knowledge.  

I’m sorry but you seem to be confusing separate and distict areas of concern. I am not ducking any questions, but you seem to be concentrating on just one of these areas to the exclusion of everything else, and it is an area of argument I haven’t even entered into. Hatcheries may or may not hurt fish, but what is undeniable is that commercial fish farms, regardless of whatever hatchery facilities they use, and without any reference to the genetic make up of the fish they produce, do untold harm to wild fish stocks if sited in sensitive areas. The evidence for this from both Ireland and Scotland is overwhelming. The question of whether depleted fish stocks can be restored to former levels by the release of hatchery bred fish is a different matter, and the arguments again do not necessarily depend on genetics. For instance if the reason for falling stocks is lack of food in the home rivers in the pre sea-going stage of the fishes life, then I can’t see a release of hatchery bred smolts having any real benefit until that problem has been addressed. Unfortunately in the UK there is evidence in some rivers that this is the case, surveys having shown severe depletion of invertebrate fauna, which has been ascribed to leakage into the water courses of agricultural chemicals. If the lack of fish is attributed to loss of spawning grounds, then the release of hatchery fish could help counter this. The genetic make-up of these fish is a separate issue, which I haven’t touched on except for the following special case. This last area, is the concern over modifying the genetic structure of artificially reared fish, by the introduction of DNA taken from entirely different species. This DNA need not even be from fish. Grain crops were modified by the introduction of DNA obtained from rats. in order to develop the ‘terminator’ strains for instance. You seem to be implying that we should wait for ’scientific’ evidence that such modifications are harmful, before condemning them. I simply can’t agree. It is the commercial operators who are pushing for these developments, for purely financial motives. They should be the ones to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that their actions are safe, before any fish so modified are allowed anywhere near public waters. Proof that environmental damage is caused unfortunately usually comes from a retrospective study of the failure of experiments like this. It is too late then. Unless you can show some genetic differences between two fish in a stream, and that you know which genotype is REALLY adapted to that water, the idea that hatcheries hurt fish is unsubstantiated.  Best,

I don’t claim that hatcheries hurt fish, in the case of those which simply strip the eggs from trapped wild fish, and fertilise them with milt similarly obtained. Nor would I ever claim that I would be able to determine which genotype is adapted to a particular water. I also doubt that anyone else could, except by statistical analysis over a period of time. But we don’t have to, as nature has proved itself capable of doing a pretty good job of this on its own, at least till we started interfering. Cheers Ian D

Response:

The problem with Freds "thinking" is that it is 99% based on conviction and 1% on science.  He obviously confuses "gene" with "jeans" as in Levis….as far as his assertions about too much math in population biology and too much biochemistry in genetics for "them" to understand, have a look at Freds professional qualifications,,,,One mught even question his ability to read with understanding….see the following: GENETIC DIVERGENCE IN FIRST GENERATION HATCHERY FISH 1)  Reisenbichler, R. R. 1994. Genetic factors contributing to declines of anadromous salmonids    in the Pacific Northwest. D. Stouder, Peter Bisson, and R. Naiman (eds.)  In: Pacific       Salmon And Their Ecosystems. Chapman Hall, Inc.         "Gene flow from hatchery fish also is deleterious because hatchery populations genetically adapt to the unnatural conditions of the hatchery environment at the expense of adaptedness for living in natural streams. This domestication is significant even in the first generation of hatchery rearing." 2)  Jonsson, Bror, and  Ian A. Fleming. 1993. Enhancement of wild salmon populations. G.         Sundnes ed.) Human impact on self-recruiting populations, an international symposium.     Kongsvoll, Norway, Tapit, Trondheim, Norway.         "Thus, the use of supplementation to enhance populations should be carefully considered, even when only a single generation boost to a population seems warranted.         " Differences were evident for hatchery Atlantic salmon relative to wild salmon, with common genetic backgrounds, in breeding success after a single generation in the hatchery.  Hatchery females averaged 80% of the breeding success of wild females and hatchery males averaged 65% of the breeding success of wild males." 3)  Reisenbichler, RR. 1996. The risks of hatchery supplementation.  The Osprey. Issue 27. June  1996.         "Available data suggest progressively declining fitness for natural rearing with increasing generations in the hatchery.  The reduction in survival from egg to adult may be about 25% after one generation in the hatchery and 85% after six generations.  Reductions in survival from yearling to adult may be about 15% after one generation in the hatchery, and 67% after many generations." 4)  Verspoor, Eric. 1988. Reduced genetic variability in first generation hatchery populations of         Atlantic salmon. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. Vol. 45, 1988.         "Mean heterozygosity and number of alleles per locus were positively correlated with effective number of adults (N) used to establish the hatchery groups and averaged 26 % and 12 % lower, respectively, than wild stocks.  The observations are consistent with a loss of genetic variability in the hatchery salmon from random drift caused by using small numbers of salmon for broodstock.         "More hatchery groups appeared to be monomorphic than did wild stocks.         "Hatchery samples were 50% larger than those from the wild introducing a bias in favor of detecting alleles in the hatchery groups compared with the wild stocks.  Thus the differences is probably underestimated.         "There is a loss of alleles in the hatchery groups with lower Ne (effective breeding population numbers) values.         "Theory suggest that most (99%) genetic variability will be preserved if Ne of the broodstock is 50.         "Losses of genetic variability can occur even in the first hatchery generation if numbers of fish used for broodstock are not sufficient.  The average reductions in variability detected here are the same as those found in salmon maintained in hatcheries for a number of generations.  Stahl found levels of heterozygosity to be 20% lower in Swedish hatchery salmon." 5)  Waples, Robin. Dispelling some myths about hatcheries. February 1999. The American    Fisheries Society. Fisheries Vol. 24. No. 2.         "In the Tucannon River in southeastern Washington, a (hatchery) supplementation program for the depressed run of spring chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) was initiated in the mid-1980s.  Founded with local broodstock, this program aims to maintain genetic integrity of the natural population and has a strong research and evaluation component.  In spite of these efforts, data for the early 1990s showed that, compared to the natural adults, returning hatchery fish were younger, were smaller for the same age, and had lower fecundity for the same size (Burgert et al. 1992).  The underlying causes of these somewhat surprising phenotypic changes are not known; however, even if the changes were entirely an environmental response to hatchery conditions, they still would represent a significant single-generation reduction in productivity of the population." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That was a great bit of thinking, and you are correct.  The problem is that people like Mike, TU, Wild Trout, etc. haven’t a clue about genetics.  If the argument could be changed from genetics to behavior, especially of Fish and Game people, changes could be made.  Unfortunately the last part of science F&G types understand is genetics.  There is just too much math in population biology and too much biochemistry in genetics for most of them to understand. Why do I feel as though I’ve been hijacked..? I’d vote for a fisherman with a little scientific understanding over a non-fishing scientist *any time*. I have known too many fishery scientists who couldn’t see the wood for the trees and who were prepared to compromise their science for career purposes… — Nogood Boyo

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

Specifically on point?  No, but see "Restoring Wild Trout Resources: How Hatchery Fish Fit Into the Equation", Dr. Robert A. Bachman.  Believe this paper was presented in 94 or 95 at an AFS syposium…I have a hard copy, but no internet link.  Bachman has done work in this area and last address I had was Department of Natural Resources, Tawes State Office Bldg.,  580 Taylor Ave., Annapolis, MD 21401.  You might also try searching the AFS(American Fisheries Society) journals on line at   http://www.fisheries.org/pubs.html – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – mike – thanks for the web site…interesting and provocative information. most of the articles/papers i read on the site related to anadromous species.  do you know of any similar studies involving trout in the southeastern streams? jeff Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy. — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

You are either dissembling or you don’t fish nearly as much as you were claiming to last year.  It is inconceivable that you could ask this question and at the same time write the kind of stuff quoted below unless of course you are just a troller. Fred wrote on Sat. 19.Feb.2000 "That was a great bit of thinking, and you are correct.  The problem is that people like Mike, TU, Wild Trout, etc. haven’t a clue about genetics.  If the argument could be changed from genetics to behavior, especially of Fish and Game people, changes could be made.  Unfortunately the last part of

science F&G types understand is genetics.  There is just too much math in population biology and too much biochemistry in genetics for most of them to understand." how do you tell a hatchery from a wild fish if no clipping has been done?  Please answer.

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

i have yet to read a study that says hatchery planting in the northwest has not had negative impacts on the wild fish.

That’s too many negatives for me, Bellows. I guess what you mean is that no study you’ve ever read said hatchery planting has had positive impacts on the wild fish. I could ask how many "studies" you’ve read, where they came from, and so on, why bother?. It all boils down to a trivial claim. Duh. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ something bogus to avoid spam)

Response:

And that is why you only take fish from the home stream for hatchery use….

Not here (UK) we don’t…  unless a system is thought to be pristine, in which case there are restrictions.  But so many systems have been wrecked in the UK that over the years there has been plenty of mixing of strains.  Even in systems which are thought by the regulatory body (Environment Agency) to be pristine, I know that there has been stocking in years gone by with fish from elsewhere. Are we all talking about the same kind of hatchery here..?  A hatchery specific to one system, used to maintain stocks in that system for fishery purposes, is very different from a commercial fish farm in coastal waters, used to produced tonnage for the market.  They pose very different risks. — Nogood Boyo

Response:

That was a great bit of thinking, and you are correct.  The problem is that people like Mike, TU, Wild Trout, etc. haven’t a clue about genetics.  If the argument could be changed from genetics to behavior, especially of Fish and Game people, changes could be made.  Unfortunately the last part of science F&G types understand is genetics.  There is just too much math in population biology and too much biochemistry in genetics for most of them to understand.

Why do I feel as though I’ve been hijacked..? I’d vote for a fisherman with a little scientific understanding over a non-fishing scientist *any time*. I have known too many fishery scientists who couldn’t see the wood for the trees and who were prepared to compromise their science for career purposes… — Nogood Boyo

Response:

how do you tell a hatchery from a wild fish if no clipping has been done?  Please answer.

I am not a scientist but I have discussed this with scientists who claim to be able to tell. I remember in particular a discussion with a lady by the name of Heather Hall [1] who had spent a couple of years studying trout on a South Wales river (the Usk) which rises very close to my local river.  She said that it is possible in the lab to detect characteristics peculiar to ancient native strains which are missing from non-native stockies.  She had established that trout spawn so specifically in such very well defined areas that within one system you can have many discrete strains with no inter-breeding.  She said these differences can be detected. The reason I was particularly interested in (and recall) this was that I want to know whether my river (the Tawe) still contains any genuine natives and whether it is worth trying to find them and help them to recover.  The river has suffered greatly from industrialisation and development for the last couple of hundred years and has been repeatedly stocked with non-natives for the last 50 years.  The standard theory AIUI is that the stockies will not be as well-suited to the system as any remaining natives which have evolved here since the last ice age. Against that some argue that the river has changed so much in the last two hundred years that all that evolution is wasted… [1]  She was a cracker and I’d be interested to know if details of her work have been published. — Nogood Boyo

Response:

Chris, I have lived in Oregon for 30 years….please cite me one study which upholds what you say….just one well done scientific study.  I am afraid you are the one with blinders….you just believe what you are told, rather than thinking something through.  Hint: how do you tell a hatchery from a wild fish if no clipping has been done?  Please answer. Fred – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ian, Despite your good intentions, your ducking the question.  If you don’t like farming, fine, but without some science to back up the worry just leads to more and more rumor and not much real knowledge.  Unless you can show some genetic differences between two fish in a stream, and that you know which genotype is REALLY adapted to that water, the idea that hatcheries hurt fish is unsubstantiated.  Best, well, the northwest is a classic case study on what not to do with hatcheries.  i have yet to read a study that says hatchery planting in the northwest has not had negative impacts on the wild fish.  there have been loads of studies and all have shown the negative impacts, both fiscally and environmentally of our reliance on hatchery fish to sustain our fisheries. you can continue to wear blinders on this issue, but i’d suggest some reading. chris

Response:

JB And that is why you only take fish from the home stream for hatchery use….try that on Wild Trout and ask where the difference is….there really is no answer. Fred – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – .  If the hatchery fish that are being cage-reared are from a river that is remote from the wild stocks near the cage site, and the stocks interbreed as a result of the escape of the caged fish, there is a great danger of gentetically-induced homing imparment in the progeny. JB

Response:

Farmed salmon have no homing instinct, and if escapees interbreed with wild fish, there’s a chance the wild ones could lose their homing instinct as well, and the complete run could be lost to a particular river. That’s unproved though

:I thought the homing instinct became imprinted during the smolt stage (forgive the sloppy terminology).  So, if farmed fish get to spawn in rivers, won’t the resulting smolts become imprinted with those rivers..? I’m not saying that’s OK – I know it’s not good to dilute native genes – but the homing instinct would be there, wouldn’t it..?: It has been found that Atlantic salmon smolts released to rivers remote from their home river have very poor return rates compared with smolts from adjacent drainages released to the same rivers.  What I infer from this is that there is a genetic basis to out-migration.  A smolt has to "know" when to turn left or right when it encounters various ocean currents.  If the hatchery fish that are being cage-reared are from a river that is remote from the wild stocks near the cage site, and the stocks interbreed as a result of the escape of the caged fish, there is a great danger of gentetically-induced homing imparment in the progeny. JB

Response:

Ian, Despite your good intentions, your ducking the question.  If you don’t like farming, fine, but without some science to back up the worry just leads to more and more rumor and not much real knowledge.  Unless you can show some genetic differences between two fish in a stream, and that you know which genotype is REALLY adapted to that water, the idea that hatcheries hurt fish is unsubstantiated.  Best,

well, the northwest is a classic case study on what not to do with hatcheries.  i have yet to read a study that says hatchery planting in the northwest has not had negative impacts on the wild fish.  there have been loads of studies and all have shown the negative impacts, both fiscally and environmentally of our reliance on hatchery fish to sustain our fisheries. you can continue to wear blinders on this issue, but i’d suggest some reading. chris

Response:

Ian, Despite your good intentions, your ducking the question.  If you don’t like farming, fine, but without some science to back up the worry just leads to more and more rumor and not much real knowledge.  Unless you can show some genetic differences between two fish in a stream, and that you know which genotype is REALLY adapted to that water, the idea that hatcheries hurt fish is unsubstantiated.  Best, Fred – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I thought the homing instinct became imprinted during the smolt stage (forgive the sloppy terminology).  So, if farmed fish get to spawn in rivers, won’t the resulting smolts become imprinted with those rivers..? I don’t know. I shouldn’t think any one does with any degree of certainty. We might be pretty certain that imprinting takes place at the smolt stage, and even have an idea that the mechanism involved seems to rely on the fishes acute sense of ’smell’, but does anybody have the faintest idea what triggers the impulse off? The ability to recognize and differentiate chemicals in the water at incredibly small dilutions is shared by many species with no homing instinct, so even if the salmon retains the ability to recognise its birth river, if the homing is triggered by a genetically determined factor,who’s to say it’ll use it? Why take the risk? There could be more problems arising that no one’s even thought of. Nature has done a pretty fair design job on salmonids without needing any help from us. The ability of a species to survive is dependent on so many factors, and the species/species, and species/environment interactions are so complex that I don’t think we’ve come anywhere near understanding them in their totality. It might be possible to modify an organism in such a way that it is perfectly suited to life in a controlled and well understood environment such as a laboratory, but the one thing certain about the natural environment is that whatever controls it, it ain’t us. We don’t even understand it. If it isn’t broken don’t fix it is still a pretty good rule. Cheers Ian D

Response:

I thought the homing instinct became imprinted during the smolt stage (forgive the sloppy terminology).  So, if farmed fish get to spawn in rivers, won’t the resulting smolts become imprinted with those rivers..?

I don’t know. I shouldn’t think any one does with any degree of certainty. We might be pretty certain that imprinting takes place at the smolt stage, and even have an idea that the mechanism involved seems to rely on the fishes acute sense of ’smell’, but does anybody have the faintest idea what triggers the impulse off? The ability to recognize and differentiate chemicals in the water at incredibly small dilutions is shared by many species with no homing instinct, so even if the salmon retains the ability to recognise its birth river, if the homing is triggered by a genetically determined factor,who’s to say it’ll use it? Why take the risk? There could be more problems arising that no one’s even thought of. Nature has done a pretty fair design job on salmonids without needing any help from us. The ability of a species to survive is dependent on so many factors, and the species/species, and species/environment interactions are so complex that I don’t think we’ve come anywhere near understanding them in their totality. It might be possible to modify an organism in such a way that it is perfectly suited to life in a controlled and well understood environment such as a laboratory, but the one thing certain about the natural environment is that whatever controls it, it ain’t us. We don’t even understand it. If it isn’t broken don’t fix it is still a pretty good rule. Cheers Ian D

Response:

thanks again… jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Specifically on point?  No, but see "Restoring Wild Trout Resources: How Hatchery Fish Fit Into the Equation", Dr. Robert A. Bachman.  Believe this paper was presented in 94 or 95 at an AFS syposium…I have a hard copy, but no internet link.  Bachman has done work in this area and last address I had was Department of Natural Resources, Tawes State Office Bldg.,  580 Taylor Ave., Annapolis, MD 21401.  You might also try searching the AFS(American Fisheries Society) journals on line at   http://www.fisheries.org/pubs.html mike – thanks for the web site…interesting and provocative information. most of the articles/papers i read on the site related to anadromous species.  do you know of any similar studies involving trout in the southeastern streams? jeff Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy. — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

What was the report about? Willi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Did anyone catch the CBS report tonight?  I hope none of those giants find their way from Canada, into Upper Creek in Burke Co., NC!!! Opie in NC

Response:

Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie

Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley

Response:

If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley

Before you buy.

Response:

Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me.

The genetics are not the same. The fish come from different strains, at least when considering farmed salmon. It’s different for fish bred from eggs removed from salmon trapped in their ‘home’ waters for planned restocking or regeneration of a river, but I don’t think that’s what we’re talking about here. Farmed salmon have no homing instinct, and if escapees interbreed with wild fish, there’s a chance the wild ones could lose their homing instinct as well, and the complete run could be lost to a particular river. That’s unproved though and not the immediate cause of the troubles affecting wild fish. Diseases previously unknown in the wild stocks have appeared and been proved to have emanated from fish farms. Attempts to control these have been set back by unscrupulous fishery staff, who have transferred diseased fish illegally, to avoid the loss involved in culling, or have transferred healthy stock in inadequately decontaminated containers. The sea trout of the west coast of Scotland, at least in those regions where fish farms proliferate, have been virtually wiped out. There’s not much doubt that this is due to the vast numbers of fish lice that are found in the vicinity of the farms. These transfer to sea trout smolts which just aren’t strong enough to cope. A similar thing happened in Ireland, but farming was halted in certain areas to observe the effect, and there are signs of recovery where this has been done. A bit further down the line in the list of problems affecting European wild fish is an apparent lack of food during the period when the fish are at sea, and should be packing on weight ready to make the spawning run. This is widely acknowledged as being due to overfishing for the prey species, such as sand-eels. These have several commercial uses, including manufacture of fertilisers, and believe it or not, as fuel in Danish power stations, but they are also an ingredient of the pellets used in the feed at the fish farms. It all adds up, and even where the exact details of cause and effect aren’t known, the decline in the wild fisheries has been tied into the increase in fish farms too closely to be denied. There are real fears that if something isn’t done, and soon, the Atlantic Salmon could be well on the way to extinction as a wild species, at least as far as Scotland is concerned. Cheers Ian D

Response:

The  Native Fish Society’s "Library" at http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm has information on research regarding the genetic differences between native and hatchery stocks. Regards, — Jeff www.teleport.com/~salmo/jp.htm

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me.

Response:

Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy.

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

Mike, I have read most of that stuff…..now pay attention…..how does the physical location of where you combine sperm and eggs (plastic pan or gravel) change a genotype?  Just answer that one question. Fred Rick son – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy. — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

Fred, Perhaps you should pay attention to what you write and quit obfuscating.  You wrote "Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same…"You have been pursuing your same tiresome and innaccurate arguments for far too long.  The same nonsensical positions you espouse were positions offered by fishery managers of the 60s and 70s…….look around you and see where they got us. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mike, I have read most of that stuff…..now pay attention…..how does the physical location of where you combine sperm and eggs (plastic pan or gravel) change a genotype?  Just answer that one question. Fred Rick son Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy. — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

– Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

mike – thanks for the web site…interesting and provocative information. most of the articles/papers i read on the site related to anadromous species.  do you know of any similar studies involving trout in the southeastern streams? jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fred, I see that you still haven’t passed Genetics 101.  Read some of the material and maybe you can eventually get a passing grade. http://www.teleport.com/~salmo/library.htm Tim, Since the genetics of hatchery and wild fish are exactly the same (it makes no difference where the egg and sperm get together…Genetics 101)….how about explaining this to me. If you’re interested in the effect that escaped hatchery fish can have on a wild salmon population, take a look at the case involving Atlantic Salmon in the Maritime provinces on Canada’s east coast.  To put it bluntly: WHAT A MESS! Tim Introducing genetic features which enhance growth in Pacific Salmon stocks for commercial use.  I didn’t read the "Genetically Altered" thread, but I would assume it followed these same lines.  In the report, there was a fear from conservationists that escapes would cause damage to naturals. Opie Frightening thought.Salmon growers in Scotland were caught on the hop last year when they got caught up in the G.M debate and killed the entire stock." not one managed to escape" they assured us" and adding a flounder gene was not in the least detrimental to the condition or taste of the fish" . The gene produces fish growing at twice the normal rate . You can only imagine the mess if they got into fragile salmon waters the competition for food would be immense. John Whiteley Before you buy. — Mike Leitheiser Lake Oswego, Oregon "When the trout are lost, smash the state."    Tom McGuane

Response:

Question:

I am new to fly fishing and would like to acquire some good quality equipment.  However, I am unable to mortgage the house for new gear.  I am interested in a 8 1/2′ to 9′ rod, 5-6 wt (Sage, Loomis, ect quality) and a reel (Abel, Ross, ect).  Please let me know of any  used gear that you would like to sell or any advice which you would like to pass along. I guarantee that the gear  will continue to see years of enjoyment!

Response:

I am new to fly fishing and would like to acquire some good quality equipment.  However, I am unable to mortgage the house for new gear.  I am interested in a 8 1/2′ to 9′ rod, 5-6 wt (Sage, Loomis, ect quality) and a reel (Abel, Ross, ect).  Please let me know of any  used gear that you would like to sell or any advice which you would like to pass along.

You could save a small bundle by buying an SA System II or an Orvis Battenkill reel.  They are both very pleasant to use, and blessed with smooth, powerful drags.  You will not wear them out, and they can be purchased new for less than the price of a used Abel.   From what I can gather, there is something of a consensus on the net; given a limited budget you are better off investing the lion’s share of your money in your rod rather than in your reel. — Keep your stick on the ice.

Response:

Question:

I have the opportunity to spend a long weekend off Marsh Harbor on a 46′ Sport FIsherman (with flats skiff)  this summer. I am looking for input on the prime time between June and August  (considering both weather and fish) to make this trip. Any input would be appreciated.

Response:

writes: I have the opportunity to spend a long weekend off Marsh Harbor on a 46′ Sport FIsherman (with flats skiff)  this summer. I am looking for input on the prime time between June and August  (considering both weather and fish) to make this trip. Any input would be appreciated.

I fished a week early last July out of Great Abaco Bonefish Club in Marsh Harbor. I believe there are basically two main areas available (at least that we fished); The Marls and Cherokee Sound. The Marls is a huge area of flats/mangroves with a healthy population of bonefish. Cherokee Sound just outside Marsh Harbor has less bonefish but they are on average much larger and more difficult to catch. The fishing is really dictated by tidal movements and local guides a must. My impression was that the better guides in this area were connected to the lodge, but I might be wrong. The guides we had did their best, but some of them had limited experience with flyfishing (this is a relatively virgin area for flyfishing). We had pretty good fishing overall. Not great numbers of fish per day, but a decent average, say 4 pounds. The bigger fish went up to 8 pounds. We saw a few permit, but this is not a permit (or tarpon) hotspot! The flies that worked the best for us were Gotchas and Charlies, sizes 4 and 6. Good luck! Inge Solberg Houston, Texas

Response:

Question:

I will be travelling in Europe this Spring and have thought to do a little fly fishing.  If there is anyone out there with knowlede of freshwater fishing in Norway or Spain/Portugal (Pyrenes) I would be greatful.  Please post publicaly so others might benefit.  Thanks Grant C. Hughes Portland, OR  (Home of the Deschutes Red Side)

Response:

I will be travelling in Europe this Spring and have thought to do a little fly fishing.  If there is anyone out there with knowlede of freshwater fishing in Norway or Spain/Portugal (Pyrenes) I would be greatful.  Please post publicaly so others might benefit.  Thanks Grant C. Hughes Portland, OR  (Home of the Deschutes Red Side)

Grant! Being a norwegian….I’ll be more than happy to give you some advice and info., but I do need a little more details from you…..especially when you are planning to go, where in Norway (if you are on business) and how much time you got to spend. Spring is a pretty broad term, especially in a country like Norway where we can have spring down south when they still got 6 weeks of winter left further north. In general, I can say that trout season would start sometime in April (a littel dependant where you are) while the salmon season starts mid-May in some rivers and June 1 in most. There is little guided fishing for trout, although opportunities are plenty. Guided salmon fishing is available on most of the bigger rivers (if you can afford the cost). Although I’ve been to Spain and Portugal on a few occasions, I’ve never flyfished and can’t offer any help, but maybe someone else can. Tight lines! Inge Solberg Houston, TX

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: Suggest you try just below the "Glory Hole," where Putah Creek exits Lake Berryessa, (that is to say, below the damn dam), fishing nymphs down and across the broken water, merrily, merrily.  Some years (10?) ago, I was fishing here in the rain on a cold day in midwinter, got skunked, but did see a lure-slinger  walking out with fish the size of my leg.  Wondered why he would kill such a fine trout, ‘less he was skared of it!  But I would be wary of anybody who tells you Putah Creek is a "Trophy Trout Stream."  It’s just the only semblance of a moving-water trout-type flyfishing option close-in to the Bay Area, and for that, I guess we must be grateful. Sorry to disagree but there are lots of folks (none tyros) who would classify Putah Creek a trophy fishery. Its a tailwater stream that holds many fish, many large, few  pushovers. I don’t know if that qualifies as a "trophy" fishery but it ain’t a muddy, put-and-take slough.

Last I heard, Putah was officially classified as a "Trophy Trout Stream" by the state of California.  This qualifies it for special environmental protection, and special fishing regs.  They stock "put and take" rainbows down in the Solano Lake end, and there is a resident population of browns and land locked steelhead living from the head of lake Solano to the dam at lake Berryessa.  I’ve never gotten one of the giants, but I’ve seen several trout over 25" there in the water.         Putah is an interesting creek.  From Berryessa to Solano it is a great peice of water.  Cold water, good oxygenation, nice holes large bouldered bottom providing plenty of pocket water.  Lake Solano is a big evaporation pond.  There is a dam at the lower end of the lake, and during the summer, in dry years, there is no flow from it.  I’ve found the stream below Solano bone dry in some summers.  In a wet year, the creek flows on and eventually spreads out and sinks into the ground in the middle of the Sacramento cosway.  When you drive from Davis to Sac across the cosway, look to your right across the rice fields.  There is a peculiar patch of trees and scrub.  That is the termination point of Putah creek!         It’s been a while since I lived in Cali, but Putah was my training ground.  Don’t badmouth it just because your not competent enough to catch any of the multitude of giant (but extremely selective) trout that live there. Enjoy this gift of nature and preserve it for future generations. . Lenny Bloksberg . .

Response:

writes: Suggest you try just below the "Glory Hole," where Putah Creek exits Lake Berryessa, (that is to say, below the damn dam), fishing nymphs down and across the broken water, merrily, merrily.  Some years (10?) ago, I was fishing here in the rain on a cold day in midwinter, got skunked, but did see a lure-slinger  walking out with fish the size of my leg.  Wondered why he would kill such a fine trout, ‘less he was skared of it!  But I would be wary of anybody who tells you Putah Creek is a "Trophy Trout Stream."  It’s just the only semblance of a moving-water trout-type flyfishing option close-in to the Bay Area, and for that, I guess we must be grateful.

Response:

writes: Suggest you try just below the "Glory Hole," where Putah Creek exits Lake Berryessa, (that is to say, below the damn dam), fishing nymphs down and across the broken water, merrily, merrily.  Some years (10?) ago, I was fishing here in the rain on a cold day in midwinter, got skunked, but did see a lure-slinger  walking out with fish the size of my leg.  Wondered why he would kill such a fine trout, ‘less he was skared of it!  But I would be wary of anybody who tells you Putah Creek is a "Trophy Trout Stream."  It’s just the only semblance of a moving-water trout-type flyfishing option close-in to the Bay Area, and for that, I guess we must be grateful.

Sorry to disagree but there are lots of folks (none tyros) who would classify Putah Creek a trophy fishery. Its a tailwater stream that holds many fish, many large, few  pushovers. I don’t know if that qualifies as a "trophy" fishery but it ain’t a muddy, put-and-take slough.

Response:

I hear Putah creek is a trophy trout stream.  I fished it about 1 month ago with some success on 18-20 prince nymphs.  I saw no fish over 8". Steam side brush made casting near impossible.  There were few pockets from which to cast from.  Wading was difficult due to the changing deapth of water and varying stream flows throughout the length of the creek starting just outside of Winters.  Does anyone know how and where to fish this water?

Response: