Question:

Hey everyone, I have the opportunity to travel west in about three weeks and I am wondering which state is preferred to fly fish in…..Colorado or Montana. I will have approx. three weeks to bum around out there and I am curious as to what state would be more rewarding to fish. thanks, Freestone

Response:

Hey everyone, I have the opportunity to travel west in about three weeks and I am wondering which state is preferred to fly fish in…..Colorado or Montana. I will have approx. three weeks to bum around out there and I am curious as to what state would be more rewarding to fish.

Better go to Colorado.  Montana will be closed this summer for cleaning and repairs. Kevin, saving Warren the trouble

Response:

Better go to Colorado.  Montana will be closed this summer for cleaning and repairs.

Not even.  We will still be having winter!  We have gotten quite a bit of snow lately.  Hard to believe it is May and the weather is more like January or February.  Check out the snowpacks.  Some places are up to 166% of normal!  Definitely good news! ftp://ftp.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/data/snow/update/mt.txt — Warren change addy to yahoo for email Henry’s Fork Clave info and Bozeman, MT fishing info http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt3/HFclave.html

Response:

Hey everyone, I have the opportunity to travel west in about three weeks and I am wondering which state is preferred to fly fish in…..Colorado or Montana. I will have approx. three weeks to bum around out there and I am curious as to what state would be more rewarding to fish.

I’d go with Montana, but I am biased.  :-)  You might run into problems with runoff though.  We have been getting quite a bit of snow so I would advise checking with fly shops in the areas you plan on traveling and see what they think.  I hear the Yellowstone is already high and muddy and most of the snow hasn’t even melted yet.  Of course you may find luck fishing some of the tailwaters like the Missouri, Bighorn, etc if things are blown out. — Warren change addy to yahoo for email Henry’s Fork Clave info and Bozeman, MT fishing info http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt3/HFclave.html

Response:

I have the opportunity to travel west in about three weeks and I am wondering which state is preferred to fly fish in…..Colorado or Montana. I will have approx. three weeks to bum around out there and I am curious as to what state would be more rewarding to fish. I’d go with Montana, but I am biased.  :-)  You might run into problems with runoff though.  We have been getting quite a bit of snow so I would advise checking with fly shops in the areas you plan on traveling and see what they think…

No problems with runoff in Colorado. You need snow for that. (Wait… I guess that is a problem) Since you’re planning on fishing in about three weeks, Colorado should still have some fishable water. If you’d said July or August, I’d suggest you go elsewhere. — Rusty Hook Laramie, Wyoming

Response:

Colorado should still have some fishable water. If you’d said July or August, I’d suggest you go elsewhere.

No doubt. The main CDOW Roundtable topic on the western slope recently was entitled "Stress and Release". Your pal, — TBone

Response:

Question:

Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before and the groaning coming from the other room, spoke to his state of incapacitation. I thought the ROFFian method says to hand him a bottle of Wild Turkey, scream ‘Drink or Die, mother f*er’, haul his butt into the fishing car and careen wildly to the river.

What can I say, I forgot.  Does this mean I have to send back my decoder ring? Peter the worried

Response:

Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before … I thought the ROFFian method says to hand him a bottle of Wild Turkey, scream ‘Drink or Die, mother f*er’, haul his butt into the fishing car and careen wildly to the river.

But you’re forgetting that Scott, taking after his mother’s side of the family, is WAY too smart to be a ROFFian. — Ken Fortenberry

Response:

Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before … I thought the ROFFian method says to hand him a bottle of Wild Turkey, scream ‘Drink or Die, mother f*er’, haul his butt into the fishing car and careen wildly to the river. But you’re forgetting that Scott, taking after his mother’s side of the family, is WAY too smart to be a ROFFian.

That and the fact his dad likes to keep him away from influences that will lead him into a life of debauchery.  He can find his own way.  :) Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://home.cogeco.ca/~pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before and the groaning coming from the other room, spoke to his state of incapacitation.

I thought the ROFFian method says to hand him a bottle of Wild Turkey, scream ‘Drink or Die, mother f*er’, haul his butt into the fishing car and careen wildly to the river.

Response:

Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before and the groaning coming from the other room, spoke to his state of incapacitation. I thought the ROFFian method says to hand him a bottle of Wild Turkey, scream ‘Drink or Die, mother f*er’, haul his butt into the fishing car and careen wildly to the river.

    ah, stan, ol’ boy, you will soon learn more than you ever wanted to know concerning the rather brusque nature of interaction techniques displayed by the subject of that little anecdote.     let’s just say that no one has ever called him "gentleman jim" roberts. your friend in the old north state wayno – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

or how to screw up your first day on the Grand and still catch some fish. Scott was supposed to come with me but he had been out partying the night before and the groaning coming from the other room, spoke to his state of incapacitation.  I had put my stuff together the night before, just before I hit the sack.  This was going to be the first Grand trip after a season of steelheading so everything had to be dragged out of drawers, closets and rearranged. Six weights seemed to be a good idea to chuck some large perch streamers at the top end of the Grand.  It had been blown out by earlier rains so I was counting on high and dirty.  In these conditions, perch get washed through the dam and the browns have a field day with them. As I drive by Cedar Run, I can see that the water is a bit high but also that it is gin clear.  Scratch plan number one. I stop at the second access point – my car is the only one (miracle) – but as I’m suiting up, two more cars arrive.  The water at the access point usually holds a few fish but if these guys tromp through it first, that’ll blow my chance at them so I hurry up.  The little 6 wt. is taken since the perch streamer idea is done like dinner. I’m using a Type 6 fullsink on it – casts OK but the little rod is working – and I start swinging a little pattern – nothing.  This is a new pattern that I hope will successfully imitate small baitfish but I don’t move a single fish.  I work downstream while the car load work upstream.  The area around Cedar Run tends not to have a lot of defined seams and runs that would appeal to the nympher – mostly composed of flats connected by riffles.  However, the gang has parked themselves in a nice nymphing spot and after about 15 minutes, a dead brown of about 12" floats by.  Later, one guy walks by and I say the I noticed he had hooked one.  He’s quite pleased to describe it but I refrain from telling him the result. Should mention that in the process of hurrying I had left behind my tippet, thermometer, camera, and a couple of fly boxes. Should also mention that it was freaking cold and I was dressed for the summer-like temperatures promised for mid day. Should also mention that I didn’t get a single hit. To hell with Cedar Run and I pack up for The Trestle.  This spot has an old rail trestle bridge that is now used by walkers – it has a beautiful view of the Grand.  Directly below the bridge, there’s some slow water that has the appearance of a warm water river, but further down, the river is split by an island and as the river rejoins, there’s a beautiful nymphing run which is now my intended target but it’s probably chock-a-block with anglers. I unwrap the 20 something year old graphite Orvis Osprey – a slow 9′ 6" six weight that I bought over eBay.  The cork is still white – the rod having seen virtually no use.  It was an impulse buy and I regretted it afterward but hell, since I have it, might as well use it.  What a little gem.  About as perfect a nymphing rod as one could want. At least when I don’t catch any fish I’ll enjoin the experience. When I get to the run, there’s no one in it despite seeing fishermen above and below me.  Are they all nuts?  On goes a #18 bead head prince nymph that I had bought at the Feathered Hook last year. Within a few minutes of my travels to the dark side, I’ve hooked and landed a sleek, fat, 15-16" brown.  She put on quite a show, charging all over the place, making the JLH sing a few times and causing the gang upstream to cast covetous glances.  Swing her into the shallows, she’s lightly hooked, lift the head and slip out the nymph and she’s on her way.  A few casts later and I’ve hooked her twin sister and landed her in the same spot.  Grand browns at this time of year are at their most feisty so even a fish of this size takes a couple of minutes to land.  A few minutes later I set the hook into a larger fish but I was overly aggressive with the hookset and when it turned I had too much pressure applied.  Snap. I don’t normally hog a run but with anglers bracketing me, I don’t have much choice.  However, these hookups will be my last.  Back to the parking lot for some of Jo’s famous sandwiches and a reassessment. Can’t believe my nymphing luck.  The first set had been totally instinctive and I had been really surprised to find a fish on.  Watch out Louie, I’m starting to get the hang of this! A quick detour to a favourite spot at Inverhaugh but it yields only the briefest of hookups and a chat with a few anglers as it also gets busy while I fish.  A guide leads two rookie clients to the water and makes a big fuss out of walking across the water well downstream of me so as not to disturb my fishing water.  Thanks.  Too bad the next gang hadn’t been around to hear the instruction.  Again three, two rookies lead by a not so rookie.  He leads them into the water to cross within five feet of me and to tromp through the water I’m fishing.  As they approach, I expect to see them angle off but they keep coming. Finally, I advise them that I’m fishing this water, would they mind crossing further down.  The look of surprise on the leader’s face told me that he hadn’t even thought of the possibility that I might be actually fishing the water! Oh well, I still caught some – on a nymph to boot. Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://home.cogeco.ca/~pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

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:

I’ve found that if you use too fine a tippet in relation to strength, you’ll get major twisting if there is a hard wind.  

This is one time where a thicker or stiffer tippet would be better. Willi

Response:

I’ve found that if you use too fine a tippet in relation to strength, you’ll get major twisting if there is a hard wind.  It seems to be that even though you’ve increased your tippet strength, you still have to match the tippet to the size fly you are casting.  In essence you still need to match DIAMETER with you fly size.  I’ve seen it alot where people insist on matching the BREAKING STRENGTH to the fly size which results in the aforementioned twisting.

Really?  That’s nutty.  Absolutely – diameter (translating into a certain stiffness and/or a certain mass of line) is what matters because that’s what determines how the fly will be cast and presented. Regards, Jeff

Response:

Increases in tippet strength, IMHO, is the most significant improvement in fly fishing equipment in the last fifty years. When I started fly fishing, a tippet fine enough to use with a size 20 fly had a breaking strength of under a pound.  Tough to land a good fish on a tippet that weak. I’m hard pressed to come up with a situation where a finer tippet of the same strength wouldn’t be superior. Willi

I’ve found that if you use too fine a tippet in relation to strength, you’ll get major twisting if there is a hard wind.  It seems to be that even though you’ve increased your tippet strength, you still have to match the tippet to the size fly you are casting.  In essence you still need to match DIAMETER with you fly size.  I’ve seen it alot where people insist on matching the BREAKING STRENGTH to the fly size which results in the aforementioned twisting. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana http://www.montana.com/dno/dno.htm 406-626-4022

Response:

Increases in tippet strength, IMHO, is the most significant improvement in fly fishing equipment in the last fifty years. When I started fly fishing, a tippet fine enough to use with a size 20 fly had a breaking strength of under a pound.  Tough to land a good fish on a tippet that weak. I’m hard pressed to come up with a situation where a finer tippet of the same strength wouldn’t be superior. Willi

Response:

Small diameter is not always desirable.

Why not?  By "small diameter", what we really mean is "small diameter relative to its strength".  So if you want a bigger diameter, you could still use "small diameter for its strength", and then a bigger diameter in that brand, and you’ll have the diameter you want but stronger than the other brand. In my experience, Maxima tippet consistently runs about one mil larger than marked.

More like .002 in my experience! Nevertheless, it is an excellent tippet material because it handles abuse much better than some with better specs.

Orvis Super Strong is damn strong, though.  Or damn thin, depending on how you look at it eh? Regards, Jeff

Response:

Increases in tippet strength, IMHO, is the most significant improvement in fly fishing equipment in the last fifty years. When I started fly fishing, a tippet fine enough to use with a size 20 fly had a breaking strength of under a pound.  Tough to land a good fish on a tippet that weak. I’m hard pressed to come up with a situation where a finer tippet of the same strength wouldn’t be superior. Willi

If it is stiffer it might interfere with fly presentation. Peter G. Aitken

Response:

Hello,    As someone new to the sport I have a question regarding tippet material. Does it have to be a specific material or can you use regular fishing line of the correct diameter? I ask this because I noticed that the line I use on my spinning reel lists a dia. of .010 which is the dia. of the tippet I’m told is the correct for the size flies I will be using. Can I use this line or do I have to use a material specific for tippets?

There is a lot of development of monofilament going on with things like copolymers etc. The main effect is that of getting more breaking strength for the same diameter. In addition, the stiffness and abrasion reisitance and knot strength may be affected. Nevertheless, there is no law to prevent you from using any material you want. Small diameter is not always desirable. In my experience, Maxima tippet tconsistently runs about one mil larger than marked. Even so, the strength for a given marked diameter runs less than on other tippet such as Dai-Riki. Nevertheless, it is an excellent tippet material because it handles abuse much better than some with better specs. Bill

Response:

Leader and tippet material is just the same as ordinary Nylon monofilament fishing line.  Some prefer certain types of Nylon, "soft or hard" for instance which makes the leader/tippet, "stiff or limp".    Basically any fishing line will do however. Many people buy spools of the line they like and make up their own leaders and tippets from it.    If you are just starting out, I would recommend buying knotless tapered leaders from your local tackle shop, and a couple of spools of tippet material ( ordinary line ) in the diameters you require. You can of course learn to tie up your own leaders immediately, it is not hard to do. Have a look at   http://home.pacbell.net/ernie2/ and   http://globalflyfisher.com Both of these sites have good info on  leaders . TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de

Response:

   As someone new to the sport I have a question regarding tippet material. Does it have to be a specific material or can you use regular fishing line of the correct diameter? I ask this because I noticed that the line I use on my spinning reel lists a dia. of .010 which is the dia. of the tippet I’m told is the correct for the size flies I will be using. Can I use this line or do I have to use a material specific for tippets?

You can use it.  It should just be a good match with the end of the leader you’re using and match your fly.  The stiffnes of the line is also a factor. The only problem is that the diameter listed might not be correct.  Even with "official" tippet material where the diameter is usually more important than the breaking strength, it is often off.  But probably not so much that it will make a huge difference.  .010 is also called 1X, which is a bit on the heavy side for a lot of trout flies – I was wondering what fly you’re using. Regards, Jeff

Response:

Bonjour, You can use regular fishing line of the correct diameter. The most important in leader and tippet is to tye good knots as a bad knot will brake really easily. The most important in Nylon is to avoid using an too old one. Then remember that from a "regular" fishing line to another one you have differences in coating and other chemical treatements wich make a Nylon softer or not from another one. You have to know what you are searching for, considering lenght of your tippet, size of the fly, wet or dry… Philippe Pacific Angling on Line http://fishing.ifrance.com * Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping.  Smart is Beautiful

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, As someone new to the sport I have a question regarding tippet material. Does it have to be a specific material or can you use regular fishing line of the correct diameter? I ask this because I noticed that the line I use on my spinning reel lists a dia. of .010 which is the dia. of the tippet I’m told is the correct for the size flies I will be using. Can I use this line or do I have to use a material specific for tippets? TIA Rich Kent I no expert, but I don’t see any reason not to use it. Hell, if you’ve got a big spool of it, I’d say that’s a really good reason to use it. Welcome to the sport and as a newcomer, stick around this group. There’s info here amongst the BS.

I’ve started making my own leaders this year.  In doing so I have looked at different companies for my leader material.  I have found the diameter and strength not the same with each company.  I’ve then found that most tippet material, though the same diameter as regular monofilament, is much stronger.  With this in mind, I don’t see any reason why you couldn’t use regular monofilament as long as you understand that it might not be as strong as tippet material for the same diameter. — Vern My ROFF page: http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/ResortRd/v_deloy/ROFFintro.html Before you buy.

Response:

Hello,     As someone new to the sport I have a question regarding tippet material. Does it have to be a specific material or can you use regular fishing line of the correct diameter? I ask this because I noticed that the line I use on my spinning reel lists a dia. of .010 which is the dia. of the tippet I’m told is the correct for the size flies I will be using. Can I use this line or do I have to use a material specific for tippets? TIA Rich Kent

I no expert, but I don’t see any reason not to use it. Hell, if you’ve got a big spool of it, I’d say that’s a really good reason to use it. Welcome to the sport and as a newcomer, stick around this group. There’s info here amongst the BS.

Response:

Hello,     As someone new to the sport I have a question regarding tippet material. Does it have to be a specific material or can you use regular fishing line of the correct diameter? I ask this because I noticed that the line I use on my spinning reel lists a dia. of .010 which is the dia. of the tippet I’m told is the correct for the size flies I will be using. Can I use this line or do I have to use a material specific for tippets? TIA Rich Kent

Response:

Question:

I will be fishing the Deshutes in Mid-Sept and would like some advice on flies that I can use for both Rainbows and Steelheads.  Thanks Tony

Response:

Bring your standard dry and nymph boxes to cover mayflies etc Other folks will give you the lowdown. Ive just two suggest ions: 1. Crayfish, whatever pattern including G.P. 2. The Kaufman (www.kman.com) series ie, Freight train, Coalcar, Max canyon, signal lite etc. These were designed on the Deschutes. Its the kind of thing that independents do and Orvis doesn’t, and hasn’t for 60-70 years.  The Burlap is also a Deschutes standard. There’s also an independent  fly shop at Maupin if you go in at that side. Also don’t ignore the approach from the Columbia side. Dave

Response:

I will be fishing the Deshutes in Mid-Sept and would like some advice on flies that I can use for both Rainbows and Steelheads.  Thanks Tony

–A fly that will catch both rainbows and steelhead is a weighted black wooley bugger.  If your going just for steelhead use something with purple in it, my favorite is a freight train.  For trout I like a elk hair catis. Sharp Hooks, Pat http://www.holdzit.com Holdzit Fishing Products Inc. Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.

Response:

A good source of information is the Oasis Resort in Maupin, Oregon.  Mark and Marnie operate the business sale a ton of flies to the fishermen and glean the day-to-day knowledge. (541)395-2528.  I supply a few major Deschutes River guides flies and they pretty much stick to stimulators, caddis flies, Adams Parachutes, bead head Prince Nymphs, bead head Hare’s Ear Nymphs, and Bead Head Pheasant Tail Nymphs.  If you are looking for a good source of flies and discounted prices for your trip, give me a call/email. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I will be fishing the Deshutes in Mid-Sept and would like some advice on flies that I can use for both Rainbows and Steelheads.  Thanks Tony –A fly that will catch both rainbows and steelhead is a weighted black wooley bugger.  If your going just for steelhead use something with purple in it, my favorite is a freight train.  For trout I like a elk hair catis. Sharp Hooks, Pat http://www.holdzit.com Holdzit Fishing Products Inc. Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic? JE

Try the south fork of the Flathead river. Only has native west slope cutthroats and dolly varden. both are thriving, and are natives.   little hard to reach though…. in the bob Marshall Wilderness…. which is why they are still natives.

Response:

I’m on the other side of the mountains, but there are a few little small streams coming down out of the mountains near my house have have native brookies.  And 8 incher is a lunker, but they’re gorgeous.

Response:

Apache trout are still found in decent numbers in one watershed on the eastern Sierra, but no fishing is allowed and it is patrolled by a back country ranger whose only territory is that particular watershed.

OOOOOOPPPPS!! This was supposed to say Piute Cutthroat, not Apache trout.                                       Sorry ’bout that,                                               Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man? Jon, I don’t know a lot about many places, but wild native Brook Trout are still to be found in a few of the spring creek headwaters in the Appalachians (North Georgia, N.C.) but they are having a real tough time surviving the ever encroaching effects of man. As I’m sure you’re aware, the Brookie needs colder, clearer water than most freshwater species, and this presents a problem as the streams warm due to the activities on or near the various watershed.  Also, they cannot fend for themselves when pitted against Browns and Rainbows for a limited food supply. Sadly, another problem that the little brookies have is that they have a reputation of being too easy, and too small (we’re not talking Labrador here) so they don’t get a lot of attention.

Here in the eastern  part of Tn we still have some native brookies. It looks like they are coming back. I recently caught and released a  10 inch brook trout and caught many more of lesser caliber. Hans

Response:

Fereira) writes: Do you know if the "Eagle Lake" rainbow is considered "native"?

Yes, it is native to Eagle Lake in Northern CA but has also been transplanted to lots of otherwise dead waters or to places where water is too alkaline for other types of trout including more common strains of rainbows .  This particular strain can tolerate higher alkalinity than normal trout.  They also get REAL BIG!                                   Good Fishing,                                        Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools

Response:

Yep! Terry Weir is right. Every fish I catch is a native, wild fish! Love that salt water biodiversity too! Wayne Marshall

Response:

I think the brookies in Shenandoah NP are native. — Charlie… You weren’t supposed to tell

OOPs<g. They are so pretty though and hard enough to catch that I hope I didn’t do any harm. I can remember hiking back in a couple of miles, suprising a bear or two, and crawling up behind a boulder to make a cast into a pool that couldn’t have been much bigger than the inside of my rental car. What a lot of fun! — Charlie…

Response:

Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic? JE

I think the brookies in Shenandoah NP are native. — Charlie…

Response:

I think the brookies in Shenandoah NP are native. — Charlie…

You weren’t supposed to tell

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man? JE <snip you would like the book "Native Trout of North America" by Robert H. Smith published by Amato Publications.  this book is a search for native, pure strain fish.  lots of searching of the high desert, tiny streams, etc.  pretty good reading too.  he goes after the fish with a fly rod. I second the recommendation for Robert H. Smiths book.  It’s been my resourse for any question that have come up in the group over the past few years.   John Fereira

  Yes; also for a strictly scientific approach to this interesting subject, try Robert J. Behnke’s monograph of western trouts: _Native Trout of Western North America_ pub. by: American Fisheries Society 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, MD  20814   Cheers, and tight Lines! – Mark

Response:

: Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the : continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the [snip] : Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this : topic? Read Lewis and Clark’s Journal.  The same fish are still here in this part of the world. — Rick T. Rick Fletcher   –   http://www.chem.uidaho.edu/~fletcher/ Associate professor of chemistry  |  That’s Idaho, not Iowa.    | ad hominem University of Idaho               |  Upper Left Hand Corner.    | ad hominem Moscow, ID 83844-2343             |  No, I don’t grow potatoes. | ad hominem

Response:

Otherwise thank all your angler fellows introducing brook trout, rainbows, and – even worse- brown trout (of course with WD) into rivers where they outcompete the natives.

[deleted] Then the hypocritical irony of calling these the ‘wild fish’ and not wanting to eat ‘em because they are beautiful wild fish. TimW

Response:

ry the Atlantic ocean. Native Stripers and Blues up to 30 lbs or more on a fly. That’s fishin!                                 Terry Weir         Right on Terry.  I grew up on Long Island sound and looked forward to every autum for a shot at those really BIG Blues.           I was speaking specifically of trout in the post though.  By the way, how is the Bluefish run shaping up this year?  It’s been a long time…… JE

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic? California is loaded with native rainbows.  They are indiginous to the west slope of the sierra and are wide spread with many identifiable strains.

Do you know if the "Eagle Lake" rainbow is considered "native"? The giant Lahontan Cutthroat is gone for good, but some "almost" pure strain can still be found in the Eastern Sierra and in Pyramid Lake in Nevada.  The population in Pyramid Lake is artificially spawned each year by the Indians who control the Lake.  The original strain was wiped out with Bureau of Land Management project #1 which was the Darby Dam on the Truckee River.  

The Piute cutthroat can still be found in it’s native waters in an area a bit further south. Ralph Cutter has some great info on these trout in his book "Sierra Trout Guide".

Agreed. Robert Behnke has a good book out on Native Trout of North America (think that’s the title) but it is hard to find and expensive.

Actually Behnke’s book is called "Native Trout of Western North America".   Robert Smiths book is called "Native Trout of North America".                                  Hope this helps,                                          Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools

John Fereira Stop Unsolicited Commercial Email – Join CAUCE (http://www.cauce.org) Support HR 1748, the anti-spam bill.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic? JE you would like the book "Native Trout of North America" by Robert H. Smith published by Amato Publications.  this book is a search for native, pure strain fish.  lots of searching of the high desert, tiny streams, etc.  pretty good reading too.  he goes after the fish with a fly rod.

I second the recommendation for Robert H. Smiths book.  It’s been my resourse for any question that have come up in the group over the past few years.   John Fereira Stop Unsolicited Commercial Email – Join CAUCE (http://www.cauce.org) Support HR 1748, the anti-spam bill.

Response:

Try the Atlantic ocean. Native Stripers and Blues up to 30 lbs or more on a fly. That’s fishin!                                 Terry Weir

Response:

Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic?

California is loaded with native rainbows.  They are indiginous to the west slope of the sierra and are wide spread with many identifiable strains.  The Shasta rainbow is one strain that is found throughout northern CA, and the McCloud rainbow is still found in its native waters of the McCloud river in CA.  Strange thing, McCloud has the Shasta Rainbow and the McCloud (subspecies) in the same water along with the non-native brown trout (two strains of that one also).  Pure strain McCloud rainbows are easily discerned by their tangerine orange stripe and cheeks along with orange cuts under the chin.  Not often caught, but spectacular fish. There is not a question what it is when you catch one. Specific strains of Steelhead have been all but wiped out in many areas, But some native runs survive.  Skamania Strain (Washington state strain from Skamania River) hatchery replacements were introduced in many of the rivers to mitigate the destruction (and continued destruction) of their habitat.  Poor attempt at a solution. Apache trout are still found in decent numbers in one watershed on the eastern Sierra, but no fishing is allowed and it is patrolled by a back country ranger whose only territory is that particular watershed. Numerous fly fishing clubs have helped with stream reconstruction projects ther to help repair damage from grazing cattle. The giant Lahontan Cutthroat is gone for good, but some "almost" pure strain can still be found in the Eastern Sierra and in Pyramid Lake in Nevada.  The population in Pyramid Lake is artificially spawned each year by the Indians who control the Lake.  The original strain was wiped out with Bureau of Land Management project #1 which was the Darby Dam on the Truckee River.   Although they thought they provided for it, the dam wiped out all of the spawning area and within a few years, the 40 lb. + Lahontan Cutthroat were gone.  Used to be a cannery at the mouth of the Lake that netted fish, canned them, and shipped them throughout the world in the 1800’s.  Was a booming industry until the dam.  They did find some pockets of the Lahontan Cutthroat in some lakes on the east slope of the Sierra and that is what is currently in Pyramid Lake.  There is some controversy as to whether they are pure strain or not, but they don’t grow nearly as large as the native strain that was in Pyramid Lake.  Still catch 8 to 15 lb. Cutthroat there, but not much chance of breaking that 40 lb. record. Goldens can still be found in the Kern drainage (native waters), but few are pure strain as there were hatchery plants again in the 1800’s when rainbow hatcheries were thought to be the best thing since sliced bread. There are some pure strain fish still in there that were geologically isolated from the drainage they dumped the rainbow plants in.  Ralph Cutter has some great info on these trout in his book "Sierra Trout Guide". We also have lots of native squaw fish but they are not much of a gamefish and they predate on salmonids. Robert Behnke has a good book out on Native Trout of North America (think that’s the title) but it is hard to find and expensive.                                   Hope this helps,                                           Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools

Response:

Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?   snip< JE

 Try Maine, Jon.  There are still places producing  fairly good size native brook trout.   And, the landlock salmon fishing ain’t too shabby either.  However, I believe the landlocks were stocked as fingerlings years ago.  Of course you may have trouble finding *exactly* where to go. ;0) Dave L.

Response:

Anyone out there know where the native trout are?  I mean, where in the continental US can a person fish for trout that are native to the watershed they’re in presently, and have been there since before Man?  I know up in the Sierra’s you can still catch Volcano creek and Kern river Goldens in what I think are their ancestral (sp?) waters, but where else?  Are there still some Apache trout swimming where they always have, without the assistance of Man?  Greenbacks?  Lahontans?  Are the Cutts in Yellowstone completely pure?  Or have they been augmented by Man at any time?  I’d really love to know.  Is there a good book on this topic? JE

Take a look at Ralph Cutters book about the Sierra Nevada. Otherwise thank all your angler fellows introducing brook trout, rainbows, and – even worse- brown trout (of course with WD) into rivers where they outcompete the natives. Look at recent discussions about the reintroduction of native grayling into Yellowstone National Park and all the counterarguments of these f****** stupid fisherman who only want to catch lots of big fish without caring about ecological interconnections. The general agreement of environmental destruction (what else is the deminishing of species variety in a given biotop?) is responsible that you can

Question:

I posted a request for patterns a few weeks ago and I thank all of you who posted replies to this news group or by direct email. I am now searching for a good beginners book on steelheading. A friend as past me his "Advanced Fly Fishing For Steelhead" by Deke Meyer. But I think I should read about some of the basic also any information would be appreciated. Norm

Response:

I posted a request for patterns a few weeks ago and I thank all of you who posted replies to this news group or by direct email. I am now searching for a good beginners book on steelheading. A friend as past me his "Advanced Fly Fishing For Steelhead" by Deke Meyer. But I think I should read about some of the basic also any information would be appreciated. Norm

The Deke Meyer book is a good one and the title is a bit misleading- it is advanced only in the sense it reviews most if not all the flyfishing methods employed primarily on the west coast – discussion of great lakes fishing is largely ignored. As Deke says in the intro the book was meant to follow Fly Road Steelhead by Bill Stinson that is a more general discussion of tackle and technique well salted with fishing yarns –  much of the tackle advice in that book is a bit dated. The other book is the original Steelhead Flyfishing by Trey Combs which I think is still available from Amato publications. Ralph H "…      the sabbath rang slowly      in the pebbles of the holy streams!" Dylan Thomas, "Fern Hill"

Response:

I am now searching for a good beginners book on steelheading. A friend has passed me his "Advanced Fly Fishing For Steelhead" by Deke Meyer. But I think I should read about some of the basic also any information would be appreciated.

This is actually a good book for beginning steelheading since it covers the most fundamental technique, the wet fly swing.  Probably the best source of information for someone wanting to learn to fish for steelhead is the Scientific Anglers video called Fly Fishing for Pacific Steelhead.  Another good book was written by Bill McMillan and published in 1986.  The title is something like Dry Line Steelhead but it may be out of print.  Another good source of information is contained in the chapter on summer steelheading in John Shewey’s book called Northwest Flyfishing: Trout and Beyond.

Response:

Question:

The Entomological Society of America sells various slide libraries for eductatinal purposes. I am sure they would include aquatic insects. You — Tim Lysyk http://www.agt.net/public/cnangler/html – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am searching for individuals or company that has 35mm slides of aquatic insects of high quality.  These slides will be used in educational and

Response:

I am searching for individuals or company that has 35mm slides of aquatic insects of high quality.  These slides will be used in educational and

There is a fellow in Colorado Springs that has a bug identification company. Can’t remember the address. Might try web search..Yahoo…entomology. I’ve got links to Mayfly Central on my web site which is at Purdue University. Might alos try contacting some of the other sites I have listed.If you e-mail them they might have something for you. My web page is http://www.commonlink.com/~Midwestflytying — Visit my web site:http://www.commonlink.com/~Midwestflytying

Response:

I am searching for individuals or company that has 35mm slides of aquatic insects of high quality.  These slides will be used in educational and

Response:

Question:

Hi, Just wondered if anyone out there owns and fishes off a JonBoat..  I’ve considered buying one for the winter season to do a lot of shallow water fishing down here in South Florida.  I’m favoring a small sized boat 12′ or under, and i was hoping someone could give me there views on how these boats performed for flats/bay fishing, or just getting around for fun..   Also, if anyone has a 3Hp motor any make or model, how do u feel that performs.  I know many of them hold only like a quart of fuel, just wondered how long u can run on a quart during ideal conditions(weather).   Please email any comments, thanks!  pr

Response:

I’ve been fishing an 11 1/2′ aluminum jon boat for years on the bonefish and redfish flats of Florida, and I love it.  I use the same boat summers up here in Maryland on the Potomac for smallmouth bass.  It’s indestructible and floats in about 5 inches of water.  With one person on board, it’s plenty stable.  I carpeted the bottom to cut down on noise and to keep the fly line from catching on the slats and ribs on the bottom. For a motor (when I use one), I prefer an electric motor (35lb thrust), which moves it along pretty well.  Most of the time I pole or row.  To be honest, I use it to get myself to the flat and then wade if possible (except up north near JAX, where the bottom is too mushy), but all in all it’s a great fishing platform. Regards, Doug

Response:

Hi, I think a small john boat is great for spur of the moment fishing. Have used one off and on for over 30 years. Enen tho’ I now have a 17 ft. bass boat and a salt water boat I still use the jon boat once in awhile. Mine has a 6 horse Johnson and before thsat I used a 5 horse. It’s great for crabbing, floundering as well as fishing. Good Luck PresG

Response:

Hi, Just wondered if anyone out there owns and fishes off a JonBoat..  I’ve considered buying one for the winter season to do a lot of shallow water fishing down here in South Florida.  I’m favoring a small sized boat 12′ or under, and i was hoping someone could give me there views on how these boats performed for flats/bay fishing, or just getting around for fun.. Also, if anyone has a 3Hp motor any make or model, how do u feel that performs.  I know many of them hold only like a quart of fuel, just wondered how long u can run on a quart during ideal conditions(weather). Please email any comments, thanks!  pr

Have a 3 horse Yamaha on an Old Town 13 foot Discovery Sport Boat. Yamaha has given me no trouble for 4 years. Holds about a quart of pre-mix 100 to 1 ( yes, 100 to 1 ) gas and oil and runs for about 3 hours at trolling speed. Have used this rig from CT lakes all the way up to the Grand Lakes of Maine. Car tops, and is great for river launch. Boat weighs 80 pounds, motor 32 pounds . In my opinion, I’d can the jon boat and take a hard look at this combination. Neil

Response:

Question:

…looks like it has great potential as a fly fishing stream.  Do you know where it is? — Rick T. Rick Fletcher   –   http://www.chem.uidaho.edu/~fletcher/ Assistant professor of chemistry  |  That’s Idaho, not Iowa.    | ad hominem University of Idaho               |  Upper Left Hand Corner.    | ad hominem Moscow, ID 83844-2343             |  No, I don’t grow potatoes. | ad hominem

Response:

Nice cuts and one can actually walk away from the roads. Moose, Elk, Deer and an occasional bear (grizzly) pask

Response: