Question:
And now, back to your regularly scheduled programmming….. bite me Warren!
Go smoke a whitefish! — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/
Response:
fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish. I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt.
My guess is that if we are thinking like a fish we would eat sticks and rocks. I keep finding them in the fish that I keep. Big Dale
Response:
Excellent synopsis Peter. These types of discussions were what first attracted me to and later hooked me on ROFF. My thanks to you, Willi, et all for the thought provoking insights/explanations.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled programmming….. bite me Warren!
Response:
I am a fairly new fly fisher and an even newer tier. I have been fortunate enough to have a few experienced hands tell me that I am far more picky about my flies than the fish. Also, worry about developing the tying skills and your flies will look more like the store flies as you get better. In the mean time, it’s pretty darn cool to catch a fish on something that you made by hand. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Even during hatches, not all the fish will be keyed into the same features on a fly. With some, wings may be important, others how high or low the fly floats, others size, others sparseness, other "action", others color, other orientation etc. etc. Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it, those that look for something wrong and if found will reject it, and those that just want something to eat. Individual fish have individual feeding habits and preferences. There is no magic fly. Being successful means finding a fly that appeals to the majority of fish and turns off few. Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish. Willi
Response:
<snipped a whole bunch for the Grand Poohbah Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending?
Willi, I can’t remember if you were there when this happened during the clave or not. We were fishing and saw a fish swallow a bunch of moss and then spit it out. Perhaps there was a morsel of food in that bunch of moss and the fish separated it and then spit the moss back out. It could be that the fish sees the hook as debris to filter out from the food and takes the fly anyways. Just a thought. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/
Response:
What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done.
Wolfgang, Like usual, I don’t know how to take what you say but did you mean the above? If so, I’d like to see it. Willi
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple. Not to be a wise-ass, but we do? I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving? It ain’t SUPPOSED to be easy! Nevertheless, here’s a little tip: never try to get away with making two (or three) points look like one.
Well, thanks, but, basically, I was calling you fat…. A trout’s brain IS small and relatively simple. We could go into all kinds of tedious detail about comparative neuroanatomy (and the literature is voluminous) but it’s late and I need to get to bed.
And so is the literature that says there is, or isn’t, a God or Gods, that Communism is the best thing since, well, others say it wasn’t, and with the advent of the Web, probably quite a bit claiming Elvis, JFK, and Marilyn Monroe are having a nightly GB at Bill Gates’ house. What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done.
Granted, we…well, ok, "we" implies the wrong thing, so – someone can likely get general info, like, "shine light, fish swims away" and "fish tries to eat this, but not that," but I’m dubious we can truly know what fish "think," perceive, or whatever you call it, i.e., knowing the fish "thinks" a particular thing is or isn’t, and more importantly, why. For example, I’d run away from a group of people having a Beastie Boys marathon, but not because I’m scared of the people, music, or the Beastie Boys, but I don’t like them, either. On the other hand, I might sit and listen with a group of gangbangers who happened to like, oh, say, Bobby Short, Bob Wills, or certain Jane’s Addiction cuts. One reason I’m sure "we" haven’t discovered such information (past a certain superficial level, anyway) is because especially with things like fish, which leads to fishing, is that it would get exploited before the ink was dry on the reports. I hate to sound cynical, but I think if "we" could truly and accurately figure out what makes fish "tick," or what they "think" (again, accurately is key), companies would be on it like, well, fish on scientifically-developed foolproof (the key) lures. Moreover, even when the ability to vocally express how a creature is feeling is there, even that isn’t a completely accurate measure…look at women, for example…. We are all familiar with the adage that suggests success in fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish. I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt.
Yeah, and it’s always made me laugh…why the hell would I want to think like the thing I’m trying to outsmart and catch. For example, if a lion thought like a Tommy, would another lion get confused and eat him, or even more odd, would he get confused and die of exhaustion trying to outrun himself? Heck, maybe he’d just have a crisis of conscience and run off and become a vegan and try to convert the pride. Soon, he’d be smoking clove cigarettes, getting arrested with Al Sharpton, and whining about Nike factories and under-sized limos. Next thing you know, he’d be hanging out with Paul McCartney, and Lord knows what else…well, actually, I think the Lord did know, which is why lions don’t flit about trying to think like Tommies…..they just catch ‘em and eat ‘em….. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Wolfgang
Response:
As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple. Not to be a wise-ass, but we do? I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving?
It ain’t SUPPOSED to be easy! Nevertheless, here’s a little tip: never try to get away with making two (or three) points look like one. A trout’s brain IS small and relatively simple. We could go into all kinds of tedious detail about comparative neuroanatomy (and the literature is voluminous) but it’s late and I need to get to bed. What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done. We are all familiar with the adage that suggests success in fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish. I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt. Wolfgang
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <Big Snip I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi I told my wife about this post and tried to get her to conduct an experiment, but she wouldn’t do it. All I wanted her to do was let me get the video camera and shoot video of her sniffing our Basset Hound’s butt and then giving me her perceptions. Among "other" things, she said I’d been on this news group way too long. <g
Post of the week, great image!! Willi
Response:
[snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos
This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi
Response:
First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to.
I believe this is often of major importance. When fishing with a dry fly, I often cast to spots I *know* hold fish, and I get no response because the fly is riding a little low in the water. After treating it with desiccant it will be riding on the very tips of the hackles; it just amazes me how this can trigger strikes from fish that weren’t the least bit interested in the same fly moments earlier.
Response:
First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to. I believe this is often of major importance. When fishing with a dry fly, I often cast to spots I *know* hold fish, and I get no response because the fly is riding a little low in the water. After treating it with desiccant it will be riding on the very tips of the hackles; it just amazes me how this can trigger strikes from fish that weren’t the least bit interested in the same fly moments earlier.
(I noticed you use this technique on a fish that short struck the other day on the Big T) And sometimes the opposite is true, the fish will take a partly submerged fly after rejecting the same fly floating high and dry. This happened to me yesterday. Willi
Response:
This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi
I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film. The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. A partially drowned fly may work if the fish is keyed on emerging or drowned insects. Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film. The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play.
That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending? The point I’m trying to make is that when we use our vision to try and explain how a trout or any other animal uses their vision, I think that alot of the assumptions made are going to be erroneous. This is especially true if, like in the case of trout vision, there are demonstrative physical differences in vision components between that animal and ourselves. Also, vision is more than how the eye perceives something, it is how the brain interprets the signals that it receives from the eye. I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi
Response:
I’ll take dogs as an example, ….. ….. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous.
True, but no more erroneous than if we *didn’t* use our sense of smell to try to understand theirs. ;) I agree with everything you say about our sense of vision necessarily being different from a trout’s, but it’s really the closest thing we have to work with and base our guesses on. Otherwise we’re reduced to throwing up our hands and relying on "conclusions" drawn from what are really small, highly variable samples (our own personal experiences). AND we’d have less to BS about. JR
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film. The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending?
[snip] As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple. It can only process so many visual cues. If we make this process overly complex, I think we make it more difficult than it need be. I believe that a trout processes the visual cues that say "food" and ignores those that suggest otherwise (e.g. the hook.) After all, a trout’s world is full of drifting debris. It has to have a simple, yet quick way to differentiate between a small stick and a nymph, for example. If your fly has the necessary cues, the trout takes it, despite the big, ugly hook. This differentiation process is probably learned through repetition – the more bugs of a certain type that pass by a trout, the more likely it will fixate on them and begin to feed. It probably has to learn what is good to eat, every time a major hatch occurs – this explains why the early part of a hatch may not engender much of response. It may well perceive colour, light refraction, etc. differently than us, but there is only a few cues we need to get right. This is one of the reasons why I don’t like to stray too much from the original materials in an old recipe. Skues talks about how certain materials have a special quality in the water and appear more like the natural when presented in the trout’s world. I think if you get the hackle and tail, size, and colour right, you’ll fool trout more often than not. Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film. The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending? [snip] As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple.
Not to be a wise-ass, but we do? I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving? It can only process so many visual cues. If we make this process overly complex, I think we make it more difficult than it need be. I believe that a trout processes the visual cues that say "food" and ignores those that suggest otherwise (e.g. the hook.) After all, a trout’s world is full of drifting debris. It has to have a simple, yet quick way to differentiate between a small stick and a nymph, for example. If your fly has the necessary cues, the trout takes it, despite the big, ugly hook.
Maybe they just intend to eat what appears to be the bug and not what appears to be whatever the hook appears to be. When one gets a club sandwich, one doesn’t think, "Hmm, this looks good, well, except for that frilly stick in it. I wonder if I have to eat that, too?" so perhaps it simply looks like a fish’s frilly stick or parsley sprig or whatever, or maybe they see insects on or near actual sticks, and eat the bug and either not eat or spit out the stick – maybe they see a stick and a bug, and when they spit out the stick, to their surprise and your consternation, the whole thing goes. Or maybe, just like most living creatures, including humans, close is good enough if you are hungry enough or the food looks good enough. If simply looking odd or different prevented predation, we’d be up to our hat brims in things like albinos, genetic appearance deformities (that had no health ramifications), etc. because they’d be no natural predators of such things (well, except man and a few other things), they’d gradually become more prevalent. This differentiation process is probably learned through repetition – the more bugs of a certain type that pass by a trout, the more likely it will fixate on them and begin to feed. It probably has to learn what is good to eat, every time a major hatch occurs – this explains why the early part of a hatch may not engender much of response. It may well perceive colour, light refraction, etc. differently than us, but there is only a few cues we need to get right. This is one of the reasons why I don’t like to stray too much from the original materials in an old recipe. Skues talks about how certain materials have a special quality in the water and appear more like the natural when presented in the trout’s world. I think if you get the hackle and tail, size, and colour right, you’ll fool trout more often than not.
If you look at writers of the beginnings of the "dry fly era of prominence" (say from about 1870 to Mary Orvis Marbury, etc., forward), you find that there are vast differences of opinion as to replication vs. stimulation vs. "tempting" vs. simple guessing vs. planned experimentation. Many felt that "fooling" the fish by making them think the fly was a true natural was all but impossible, and the closer you tried to get, the more "unnatural" your imitator would appear. Maybe it was a mirror of the Impressionists, but some seem to feel that "suggesters" were more effective than imitators. FWIW, my view has always been (and admittedly, it is both acquired from others and self-discovery) that there is much more to it than accurate-to-us appearing imitators, but YMMV. For example, how many have had beat-up, ratty, tattered old flies, lures, etc., that produced better than new, truly accurate imitators? As to the history of the subject, if anyone is interested, I have some pretty old volumes, and some do talk about this very subject, plus I’m sure there are many others with other works, so perhaps we can piece together a history of this aspect of the sport. TC, R
Response:
<Big Snip I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi
I told my wife about this post and tried to get her to conduct an experiment, but she wouldn’t do it. All I wanted her to do was let me get the video camera and shoot video of her sniffing our Basset Hound’s butt and then giving me her perceptions. Among "other" things, she said I’d been on this news group way too long. <g
Response:
Excellent synopsis Peter. These types of discussions were what first attracted me to and later hooked me on ROFF. My thanks to you, Willi, et all for the thought provoking insights/explanations. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a hackle dimpled surface film producing halos of light – a tail that also produces a dimpling along its length and the same light refraction – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos – a body that for the most part is in shadow – the solid outline of a dun’s wings – all of this seen against a bright sky background First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to. As she gets closer, the colour and wing start to become important. A fish can focus on a fly less than an inch from its nose – its close range vision is excellent – so the rest of the details have to start to make sense, the wing, the body colour, the size, etc. Trout seem to take flies for a number of reasons – obviously hunger and it matches what she’s been eating for the last half hour, curiosity, aggression, and playfulness. I mentioned in a much earlier post, being fooled by three little browns that raced around chasing Gray Foxes. It’s not wise to take an anthropomorphic interpretation of their behaviour, however, had they simply been hungry, they could have sat in one of the many feeding lanes and sipped Gray Foxes all afternoon. It’s difficult to interpret their pack chasing behaviour as anything other than playful competition. They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look. To sum it up, the fly should sit right, producing the right halos, plus it should cast a shadow of approximately the right size, and finally, it’s details should be right to pass the close range examination. This applies to picky fish in slower water condition; brookies in fast water tend to slash at anything that looks like food. So in my neck of the woods, flies that will catch brookies on the cascade section of the Credit, will be a complete bust on the slow glides of the Grand. There’s too much variation o attempt generalize much further than this. (Much of the above wisdom, courtesy of various books by Lafontaine, Skues, et al.) Peter Visit The Streamer Page at
http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html
Response:
<snipped interesting speculations of an experienced fishtricker They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look.
kinda like on penns creek when we were there… the march browns had to quiver a bit and just right to interest most of those finicky browns …anything just floating motionless on the water generally wouldn’t be touched. i saw dozens of fish nail the bug just as it was starting to take off from the surface, and several coming full-body out of the water like a salmon to grab the bug in the air. that was one of those memory etchings i look forward to collecting more of…
Response:
Even during hatches, not all the fish will be keyed into the same features on a fly. With some, wings may be important, others how high or low the fly floats, others size, others sparseness, other "action", others color, other orientation etc. etc. Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it, those that look for something wrong and if found will reject it, and those that just want something to eat. Individual fish have individual feeding habits and preferences. There is no magic fly. Being successful means finding a fly that appeals to the majority of fish and turns off few. Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish. Willi
Response:
Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it…
- "Hey, Jimmie, looks like we got a hotty floating by at three o’clock!" – "Woa, dude, check out the hackles on *that* one!" – "Hey, there, midge! Why doncha drift on over to *my* riffle, baby?" –Steve (if fish could talk)
Response:
Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish.
Not only do we merely perceive color differently than the fish (probably), we probably also overestimate color and underestimate behavior of the bug. This idea is explored in "What The Trout Said" and "Dry Fly: New Angles".
Response:
Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish.
And although it simply states the obvious, the fish views the fly from a completely different angle, and through a different medium, so even if they did see (eye construction- and placement-wise) in the same manner as people, their frame of reference is completely different. It’s unlikely that man and fish will ever see a fly the same, regardless of the difference in the eyes. Moreover, we can not know what differences would go ignored, which would be seen as different but "OK," and which were different and off-putting. As a simple example, most people would recognize and accept Wendy’s square hamburger as just another burger variant and eat it if they wanted a burger (yeah, yeah, eyeball jokes, taste, etc., aside), but given a choice between a burger with, say, asparagus spears, raw oysters, and orange sherbet and a plain burger, most would likely choose the plain one (even if they’d eat all the items in other combinations). But as Willi points out, fish seem to be like people in that they do have individual habits, and occasionally, just like kids drinking pickle juice over ice, a fish might try and eat something different. Fish "dine" on what comes past or is within sight, they don’t seem to "plan" dinner – "Ooh, honey, doesn’t the Four Seasons sound good, and then, we can go by the Carlyle for drinks and a little Bobby…" or decide that the tacos at El Asadero sound better than the seafood at Costa Azul and head that way. But they can sometimes be tempted by teasing them with something that looks "food-ish" enough AND different enough to tempt them into taking a chance, just like you do when the waiter suggests the entire tenderloin, rare, with Hollandaise and a large side of creamed spinach, or the dessert cart comes by with the Double Chocolate Drunken Fudge Cream Cake with Buttery-Sweet Ice Cream on top. You know you shouldn’t, the better half is gonna bitch, but like a moth to a flame….or rather, a hog to a trough…. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Willi
Response:
[snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a hackle dimpled surface film producing halos of light – a tail that also produces a dimpling along its length and the same light refraction – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos – a body that for the most part is in shadow – the solid outline of a dun’s wings – all of this seen against a bright sky background First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to. As she gets closer, the colour and wing start to become important. A fish can focus on a fly less than an inch from its nose – its close range vision is excellent – so the rest of the details have to start to make sense, the wing, the body colour, the size, etc. Trout seem to take flies for a number of reasons – obviously hunger and it matches what she’s been eating for the last half hour, curiosity, aggression, and playfulness. I mentioned in a much earlier post, being fooled by three little browns that raced around chasing Gray Foxes. It’s not wise to take an anthropomorphic interpretation of their behaviour, however, had they simply been hungry, they could have sat in one of the many feeding lanes and sipped Gray Foxes all afternoon. It’s difficult to interpret their pack chasing behaviour as anything other than playful competition. They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look. To sum it up, the fly should sit right, producing the right halos, plus it should cast a shadow of approximately the right size, and finally, it’s details should be right to pass the close range examination. This applies to picky fish in slower water condition; brookies in fast water tend to slash at anything that looks like food. So in my neck of the woods, flies that will catch brookies on the cascade section of the Credit, will be a complete bust on the slow glides of the Grand. There’s too much variation o attempt generalize much further than this. (Much of the above wisdom, courtesy of various books by Lafontaine, Skues, et al.) Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html
Response:
Question:
Mike Connor writes: "Waiter, there is a fly in my soup". "Is it black sir ?". "No". "Oh good, then you wont need the rubber bands".
ROFL. Woke up the dog! Best esoterica and it immediately goes into the roff hall of shame. Thanks, Mike. Dave LaCourse "We can’t change the winds, but….. we can adjust our sails!!"
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Waldo writes: Ignore all of the advice you have heard here. I live in Ontario, the black fly capital of the world. Don’t wash for 5 days then go fishing – nothing will bite you – promise. Taste your skin after five days without soap and water – tastes bitter – tastes that way to the bugs too. Our skin has a natural repellent but we keep washing it off. And I’m serious – worked for me in the North West Territories. Five days in the bush and about half a dozen bites. Ten minutes in Yellowknife after a shower and I swear every f*****g bug within half a mile had taken a chunk. Peter damn, no wonder mark looked green every mornin down in almond 
waldo
Yeah, and HE was immune from all the flying biters too. Of course, this explains a lot about Peter’s truck… Dave LaCourse "We can’t change the winds, but….. we can adjust our sails!!"
Response:
Blackflies are part of the northwoods experience and an indicator of the right time to go fishing: i.e., the thicker the flies (usually) the better the fishing. Deep-Woods Off (40 percent DEET) will keep them more or less at bay and do so about as well as the 100-percent DEET products like Repel or Ben’s, with less damage to you and your equipment. Here in Maine we pretty much slather it on all day in fly season, which for us lasts from around the last of May until mid-July in the Penobscot drainage. As you can see, avoiding fly season means avoiding fishing season. By time the flies are gone, so is the runoff water and many of the trout, at least the accessible ones. Some folks wear bug jackets with gloves, and these work pretty well with some restriction in mobility and vision; you can’t really follow your fly very well through a headnet. The better bug jackets are those made of tightly woven cotton with mesh panels at the front of the hood and under the arms for ventilation. The all-mesh jackets tear up pretty quickly in the puckerbrush and they don’t even slow mosquitoes down, as they can drill right through the mesh wherever it touches you. The secret to dealing with blackflies is not in eliminating the pain of their bites but in not minding the pain of their bites. After a while you get used to it. If you smoke, keep a cheap cigar or reeky pipe tobacco going as a smudge pot; after a while you’ll hardly notice the little buggers. JRB
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Response:
Hell, if THAT works, then smokin’ a blunt will work even better. /daytripper (I mean, if *numb* is what you want…)
Works on moose apparently. Peter email is spam blocked – remove first ’s’
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Long sleeve shirts AND rubber bands around wrists. I recommend a head net also if you absolutely must go into the northwoods during blackfly season. I do not. I don’t go after late May or before late August. Not the Adirondacks but northern Ontario. — Ken Fortenberry What a wussy flatlander you are. <g Best fishing is during black fly season. Dave L.
What’s a black fly? Peter (snicker) email is spam blocked – remove first ’s’
Response:
I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Ignore all of the advice you have heard here. I live in Ontario, the black fly capital of the world. Don’t wash for 5 days then go fishing – nothing will bite you – promise. Taste your skin after five days without soap and water – tastes bitter – tastes that way to the bugs too. Our skin has a natural repellent but we keep washing it off. And I’m serious – worked for me in the North West Territories. Five days in the bush and about half a dozen bites. Ten minutes in Yellowknife after a shower and I swear every f*****g bug within half a mile had taken a chunk. Peter email is spam blocked – remove first ’s’
Response:
"Waiter, there is a fly in my soup". "Is it black sir ?". "No". "Oh good, then you wont need the rubber bands". TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de
Response:
Ignore all of the advice you have heard here. I live in Ontario, the black fly capital of the world. Don’t wash for 5 days then go fishing – nothing will bite you – promise. Taste your skin after five days without soap and water – tastes bitter – tastes that way to the bugs too. Our skin has a natural repellent but we keep washing it off. And I’m serious – worked for me in the North West Territories. Five days in the bush and about half a dozen bites. Ten minutes in Yellowknife after a shower and I swear every f*****g bug within half a mile had taken a chunk. Peter
damn, no wonder mark looked green every mornin down in almond waldo
Response:
I grew up in the area you are thinking of hitting this summer. Usually in July, the biggest pain in the butt isn’t the blackflies, but the horseflies and deerflies. One of these things is worse than a 1000 blackflies when it comes to the bite. I find that if you use deep woods cutter, they leave you alone. If you eat a banana, you will not make it more than 10 feet into the woods before you are chewed to bits. The blackflies will usually be out that time of year in the earlier dusk, then it’s the mosquitos. The last couple of years they haven’t been all that bad. Good luck up there. Any questions on where to go in the area between Watertown and Lake Placid, let me know. I may even be able to set you up with a free guide of the area, or I may be in the area then myself. Just drop a line. Gordo The worst day on the water beats the best day in the office. Gordo
Response:
deer flies have a tendency to land of the back of your head. As stupid as this idea sounds, it really works. I have come in after a day of fishing to find as many as twenty deer flies stuck on the back of my hat.
why not demonstrate your altruistic nature and send a few patches to petah charles for application to his crotch somewhere around the third day out… wayno
Response:
I grew up in the area you are thinking of hitting this summer. Usually in July, the biggest pain in the butt isn’t the blackflies, but the horseflies and deerflies. One of these things is worse than a 1000 blackflies when it comes to the bite. I find that if you use deep woods cutter, they leave you alone. If you eat a banana, you will not make it more than 10 feet into the woods before you are chewed to bits.
I am the pate de foie gras of the biting insect world, the lobster thermidor, the hollandaise sauce. There is nothing in this world which will dissuade them from sampling me if the opportunity presents itself. Black flies, mosquitos, deer flies, chiggers, horse flies, no-see-ums, and ticks will drink a pool of DEET if they think I am at the bottom of the pool. Sadly, it seems to be a matter of individual body chemistry. It makes no difference whether I am sterilized or wallowing in eight days of filth. Copious clouds of cigarette smoke annoy them but will not keep them from biting. Thus far, deer flies are the only biting insects for which I have found an effective deterrent, and this is so bizarre that most people will probably not believe it. I didn’t myself until I actually tried it. Tred-Not deerfly patches are pieces of fly paper with a sticky side that is attached to the back of your hat, and a VERY sticky side that traps flies when they land on it. For reasons unknown to me, deer flies have a tendency to land of the back of your head. As stupid as this idea sounds, it really works. I have come in after a day of fishing to find as many as twenty deer flies stuck on the back of my hat. These things are made by a company called Detex in Michigan. I know they have a web site but I’ve lost the address. However they are available at the following URL: http://www.biconet.com/traps/deerflyPatch.html
Response:
Yes, You will be feeding the little buggers. Some tips: rubber bands around wrists. Rubber bands around wrists??? Inquiring minds want to know. - Ken
the rubber bands cut off all circulation, making the hands numb and unable to feel any bites <G. chris
Response:
I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
I spent a month one day in northern NH because of the black flies. I have found that they peak early, usually in late May, early June. There may be some around in late June, but if you use deet, they will stay away. Puffing on a cigar will help, just puff away like your Clinton. <g When I say "deet", I mean the 100% stuff. It is baaaaad stuff, but it will keep them away. Use in on your clothes, especially your hat, and use normal bug juice with a high concentrate of deet on exposed areas. Do not expose your fly line or your fly rod to deet. I fish Labrador the 1st week in July each year, and black flies and mosquitos are as bad as anywhere. Dress with long sleeves (a sweat shirt is good), or, a cotton turtle neck jersey is even better — it will protect your arms AND neck. Wear fingerless gloves, and put them on after you have used the bug juice. Wear a hat and spray it well with deet. I have found that bug jackets are inaffective with black flies. They pile up on the front and after awhile, you can not see. <g But you *are* water proof. d;0) Dave LaCourse "We can’t change the winds, but….. we can adjust our sails!!"
Response:
Long sleeve shirts AND rubber bands around wrists. I recommend a head net also if you absolutely must go into the northwoods during blackfly season. I do not. I don’t go after late May or before late August. Not the Adirondacks but northern Ontario. — Ken Fortenberry
What a wussy flatlander you are. <g Best fishing is during black fly season. Dave L. —– Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free Usenet News via the Web —– —– http://newsone.net/ — Discussions on every subject. —– NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam. If this or other posts
Response:
DJ Generally speaking, blackflies in areas that far North have already peaked and are more likely to be just a mild nuisance in the evening. I take my vacation 4th of July week here in Maine, partly because the worst of the blackflies is past, and partly because there’s still good surface activity on our trout ponds. Late June should be bearable in that regard.
Last week in June is well into the decline of blackflies in the Adirondacks–in a normal year. For the last couple summers it’s been harder to predict them, but everybody I know said they were not as bad as usual. In 1997 I hiked across the whole park in late June, and the blackflies were barely around. That was almost a bummer, because after a dozen mosquito bites, one gets nostalgic for a neckfull of blackfly welts. DS
Response:
Couple of things no one has mentioned black flies tend to bit more around areas that have a pulse wrists behind the ears ankles If you get Deet on nylon it’s shot it turns into sticky mess that doesn’t dry Rub dirt on your hands after putting on your bug spray Pick up some afterbite to take the sting away they come in containers a little bigger than a pen. Bring lots of friends they might find them more delicious
Response:
It keeps your sleeve ends closed ! Works on trousers too. Strip of Velcro is better, does not cut off the circulation. TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, You will be feeding the little buggers. Some tips: rubber bands around wrists. Rubber bands around wrists??? Inquiring minds want to know. - Ken — "That said, I *am* an unabashed Animal Rights supporter. I *WOULD* vote to make C&R illegal." – Tim Walker "Ethical conduct is purely a personal thing, and the only arbiter of personal ethics is your own conscience." - Mike Connor
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, You will be feeding the little buggers. Some tips: rubber bands around wrists. Rubber bands around wrists??? Inquiring minds want to know. - Ken the rubber bands cut off all circulation, making the hands numb and unable to feel any bites <G. chris
Hell, if THAT works, then smokin’ a blunt will work even better. /daytripper (I mean, if *numb* is what you want…)
Response:
I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Response:
The worst day I ever had with black flies was in 1975 in Franklin Landing were Great Bear River flows out of Great Bear Lake. There was no breeze to keep the flies down. Everywhere you looked you saw little black dots the white walls of the ship were black with flies one of the deckhands had to be taken by the hand to his room as his eyes had swollen shut from black fly bites. I put two sweaters on to try and add more distance between me and the flies they would burrow through the wool and still bite. I think I went through two or three cans of bug spray.I’ve been all over the North and that was hellish day. If it’s a dead calm day I would think twice about a hike through the bush.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Response:
DJ Generally speaking, blackflies in areas that far North have already peaked and are more likely to be just a mild nuisance in the evening. I take my vacation 4th of July week here in Maine, partly because the worst of the blackflies is past, and partly because there’s still good surface activity on our trout ponds. Late June should be bearable in that regard.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Response:
Yes, You will be feeding the little buggers. Some tips: don’t wear anything blue. don’t use anything scented (soaps, etc) rubber bands around wrists. Where abouts are you planning on fishing. Paul
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered? Thanks Dave
Response:
Yes, You will be feeding the little buggers. Some tips: rubber bands around wrists.
Rubber bands around wrists??? Inquiring minds want to know. - Ken — "That said, I *am* an unabashed Animal Rights supporter. I *WOULD* vote to make C&R illegal." – Tim Walker "Ethical conduct is purely a personal thing, and the only arbiter of personal ethics is your own conscience." - Mike Connor
Response:
Rubber bands around wrists??? Inquiring minds want to know.
Long sleeve shirts AND rubber bands around wrists. I recommend a head net also if you absolutely must go into the northwoods during blackfly season. I do not. I don’t go after late May or before late August. Not the Adirondacks but northern Ontario. — Ken Fortenberry
Response:
Dave writes-re: Blackflies I’m planning to do some fishing in the central and northern Adirondacks this summer and am trying to get up there when the dreaded black flies aren’t. Anyone have any experience with this little monster? If I were there, say, end of June, would I be slaughtered?
Yes. Prepare yourself with a pure-DEET type repellant, plus cigars and cigarettes keep them back a few feet. Despite all efforts, if out for a days fishing, expect to be bitten heavily. It’s worth noting, some of my best fishing for trout, both in PA and New England have been when blackflies were fierce….they are aquatic hatches as well. Tom Littleton
Response:
