Question:

I’m a newbie to fishing, but after a dozen or so trips to local lakes, I have found that I get few or no bites on bait or lures when fish are jumping.  I assume the jumping is for insects on the surface, but it’s hard to believe the fish are so selective and coordinated that they switch from one food type to another just like that.  Anyone have similar experience? and any ideas about it??

If they are feeding then why not cast a fly to them? richard

Response:

I’m a newbie to fishing, but after a dozen or so trips to local lakes, I have found that I get few or no bites on bait or lures when fish are jumping.  I assume the jumping is for insects on the surface, but it’s hard to believe the fish are so selective and coordinated that they switch from one food type to another just like that.  Anyone have similar experience? and any ideas about it?? arjay

    Since you are a newbie, don’t believe anything anyone says about this. All you need to know is ….. if the fish don’t bite on your offering yet are obviously feeding ….. change your offering.     Did you know there is a conspiracy to take all of your money.  Oh yes! Tackle manufacturers have been investing in raising and then planting fish that ignore your bait.  If you are hooked on fishing…..you will spend the rest of your life spending huge amounts of money in the never ending attempt to find what the fish like to eat.     Some day you will think you know what it is and you will tell a newbie what to do.  He will embarrass you in front of everybody when he doesn’t catch anything.         Dan in Quebec

Response:

A funny story about trout. I was fishing at the Chatfield Spillway near Denver and saw a whole spillway full of Rainbow Trout surfacing and jumping all over the place. I and three other people broke out our flyrods and used everything we had and didn’t catch anything. A game warden came by and started laughing hysterically at us. I asked him what was up and he said "it was feeding time at the hatchery." These stocker trout "beg" for food at a certain time of the day, depending upon where the sun is in the sky.  They’ll hop out of the water and just hang out.  After being in the water for a while, they stop it, but the first week it annoys the heck out of fisherman. Dan Dow

Response:

Are they jumping out of the water, clearing it.  Those are often carp, and all I can figure is they jump for joy, not feeding!  They do this a lot early in the morning If you are seeing swirls in the water rather than fish clearing it, they are probably feeding on something on the surface.  Try topwater or flies I wrote an article on my site about an experience I had.  Kept seeing fish come to the top at Lake Oconee here in GA.  Could not get them to hit.  One finally came up right at the boat and I saw it – a brown bullhead!    I caught one later on a plastic worm. Ronnie http://fishing.about.com

Response:

I’m a newbie to fishing, but after a dozen or so trips to local lakes, I have found that I get few or no bites on bait or lures when fish are jumping.  I assume the jumping is for insects on the surface, but it’s hard to believe the fish are so selective and coordinated that they switch from one food type to another just like that.  Anyone have similar experience? and any ideas about it?? arjay

–When salmon are jumping and rolling on the surface, you might as well sit back and watch the show.  The biters are on the bottom of the stream or river, not up on top. Sharp Hooks, Pat Holdzit Fishing Products Inc. http://www.holdzit.com Before you buy.

Response:

I’m a newbie to fishing, but after a dozen or so trips to local lakes, I have found that I get few or no bites on bait or lures when fish are jumping.  I assume the jumping is for insects on the surface, but it’s hard to believe the fish are so selective and coordinated that they switch from one food type to another just like that.  Anyone have similar experience? and any ideas about it?? arjay

Response:

Hi arjay, It depends.  One area (on a river) where I fish often, the Sturgeon will "go nuts" at about dusk, these are very big fish jumping out of the water like a breaching whale.  The Sturgeon jump typically has no effect on the bite of Catfish, Bass, Walleye and Crappie that are common in the area. On the other hand, if the fish you are fishing for is surfacing and you are fishing worms on the bottom, you are probably in for a long sit.  You would need to target your bait and presentation to the feeding activity of the fish.  One afternoon last week, I was at the spot mentioned above fishing crawlers on the bottom.  Some fish was feeding sporadically on the surface and I was getting no bite.  I threw out a crawler under a float, about 15" below the surface.  The float drifted with the current into the "strike zone" where the mystery fish was surfacing and the float was down.   I was on to a pretty good bass. Jumping alone can only offer you clues.  Anytime the bite is slow, you should change the presentation (possibly many times).  If the change in presentation doesn’t work, you might want to change location. As far as selectivity… could be!  Depends on the fish.  Trout will often be completely selective, but usually not this late in the season.  Next time you get to the lake, bring a grasshopper or attractor fly and a big float. Place the float about 2-3′ above the fly and use the weight on the float to cast. Good Luck! Hope this helps, Fritz

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a newbie to fishing, but after a dozen or so trips to local lakes, I have found that I get few or no bites on bait or lures when fish are jumping.  I assume the jumping is for insects on the surface, but it’s hard to believe the fish are so selective and coordinated that they switch from one food type to another just like that.  Anyone have similar experience? and any ideas about it?? arjay

Response:

Question:

I have had this credit card thing since January from work. There is a credit of x amount of dollars that I can spend at various places. We get them for time on the job with out loss time or OSHA reportable accidents. I never have any problem finding things to buy when I really shouldn’t be buying anything. I have been thumbing through the Bass Pro catalog since the first of the year. I Could never really decide on what to get. Last year I used what I got along with some other gift certificates to get a gortex rain suit. Well I think this year I am going to get a life vest that auto inflates. They look like they would be more comfortable. Since I fish at night a lot I always like to have one on. Does anyone have one or know someone that uses the thing? I would like to know how they fare before I plunk they cash they want for one down. Doug

Response:

Doug, I’ve used them when I’m fly fishing. I prefer the manual infaltable ones as the self infalting ones are based on a chemical reaction once it gets wet. I’ve seen those go off in a good rain! I also had a friend who managed to fall out of the boat and have it go off as he was crawling back in the boat. Needless to say, he went back in the drink! I think the manual ones are pretty good if you are ina situation where you can pull the cord, slow moving, trolling, wading, etc. However, I tend to use the standard USCG approved vests when I have the boat going at a good pace. John

Response:

Thanks John I have wondered about some of the points you made. I may just end up loading up on line and what not. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Doug, I’ve used them when I’m fly fishing. I prefer the manual infaltable ones as the self infalting ones are based on a chemical reaction once it gets wet. I’ve seen those go off in a good rain! I also had a friend who managed to fall out of the boat and have it go off as he was crawling back in the boat. Needless to say, he went back in the drink! I think the manual ones are pretty good if you are ina situation where you can pull the cord, slow moving, trolling, wading, etc. However, I tend to use the standard USCG approved vests when I have the boat going at a good pace. John

Response:

Question:

0] : Vision is very important in flyfishing. : …. : I wear "progressive" bifocals for everyday getting around, but at 8", my : knot-tying distance, I can see best with no glasses at all. That’s why I : find it most convenvient to wear single-prescription (not bifocal) : glasses for fishing. They’re securely fastened around my head with a : strap. I just drop them to my chest to tie knots or extract hooks from fish. : I wear contact lenses for one and only one activity — playing tennis. : They’re just perfect for that, but they’d be awful for fishing. I can’t : see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair : of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact : lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading : glasses. Why bother? : — rw to be ornery, I’ll disagree with you. I wear contacts for about -4 diopter nearsightedness and am in my 50’s, so I have about the same problem as you. I prefer the hard contacts because they pretty much take out some considerable astigmatism I would otherwise have. My solution is to use your items (2) and (3) combined in one package which is sold as "Fisherman’s Bifocals"–polarized window glass on top and clear +3 diopter magnifiers in the bottom. Which brings up a point, that for knot tying, hook threading etc., what’s needed is considerably more magnification than is wanted for comfortable reading, in my case about +2. Mike — Michael McGuire                     Hewlett Packard Laboratories  (remove x’s from email if not      Palo Alto, CA 94303-0971   a spammer) Phone: (650)-857-5491              

Response:

I wear contact lenses for one and only one activity — playing tennis. They’re just perfect for that, but they’d be awful for fishing. I can’t see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading glasses. Why bother?

        hell fire, i am in complete accord.  before i’d go through all that song and dance just to tie on an adams, i’d just go back to the cabin, drink about half a fifth of absolut, and forget about the fishin. wayno

Response:

Tripper: Exactly my situation.  I just ordered my first pair of bifocals last week, but ordered my new polarized sunglasses in single vision.  I have a flip focal on my hat that works great for knot tying.  Before I got it I was always having to take off my lenses to tie knots and last season I had to clean the bottom-of-the-canoe gunk from them a few times (fortunately never dropped them in a stream yet). I don’t bother flipping the flip-focals though – I find they are too distracting to have on a brim in the flipped-up state, and since I use a wide brimmed hat, not a baseball type hat, I just have them pinned on the back brim and rotate the whole hat when I need the magnifiers. I get a lot of curious looks from people who wonder why I have lenses on the back of my hat. –Stan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill.

Response:

My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk.

With my prescription, the lenses would be an inch thick at the edges of ‘wide-field’ glasses. — Charlie…

Response:

aw heck, you fellas with bad eyesight obviously haven’t heard of the pj prescription. pj’s eyesight for tying a knot is abysmal, or so he claims…so, whoever happens to be "lucky" enough to fish with him is conscripted to tie on his flies.  I’ve witnessed Peter Charles submit to the pj selective service on Snowbird Creek, even tied on a dropper as i recall…ain’t no more powerful prescription out there. jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading glasses. Why bother? That’s basically what I use and, to me, it’s worth the bother just for the additional peripheral vision. I can read ‘normal’ sized print without reading glasses, but that’s right at my limit. I’ve been wearing glasses since third grade (44 years) and I plain do *not* like bifocals, especially for climbing over/under things and wading. I guess it’s just a matter of what you consider the bother is; to me distorted peripheral vision is more of a bother than an extra pair of glasses. Well, here’s a third take. I’ve been nearsighted enough to need glasses to drive since high school. And now that I’m almost half as old as Louie ;^) I’m starting to have trouble threading flies (I can read books without trouble – just can’t find the damned eye with the tippet without a struggle). And I won’t risk my eyes to any potential  injury/infection/whatever by using contact lenses. My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk. /daytripper

Response:

My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk.

        plus, having spent a full day with you on hazel creek,  i can testify that they do a helluva job as a stand-in for a groucho disguise. wayno

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, here’s a third take. I’ve been nearsighted enough to need glasses to drive since high school. And now that I’m almost half as old as Louie ;^) I’m starting to have trouble threading flies (I can read books without trouble – just can’t find the damned eye with the tippet without a struggle). And I won’t risk my eyes to any potential  injury/infection/whatever by using contact lenses. My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk. /daytripper

Yep.  That’s exactly what I use.  Sometimes, I interpose Orvis sunglasses with the built-in magnifiers but contacts I will never use. All of my hats have a flip down magnifier attached. Tom — Tom Brown The Signal Group Wake Forest, NC HEATHEN, n. A benighted creature who has the folly to worship something that he can see and feel.                – Ambrose Bierce: The Devil’s Dictionary

Response:

My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk.    plus, having spent a full day with you on hazel creek,  i can testify that they do a helluva job as a stand-in for a groucho disguise.

Hell, with my beak, ’stache, and dark eyebrows,  I *am* Groucho! /daytripper ("Say the secret word and I’ll kick your Roe-Ann County arse!" ;^)

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading glasses. Why bother? That’s basically what I use and, to me, it’s worth the bother just for the additional peripheral vision. I can read ‘normal’ sized print without reading glasses, but that’s right at my limit. I’ve been wearing glasses since third grade (44 years) and I plain do *not* like bifocals, especially for climbing over/under things and wading. I guess it’s just a matter of what you consider the bother is; to me distorted peripheral vision is more of a bother than an extra pair of glasses.

Well, here’s a third take. I’ve been nearsighted enough to need glasses to drive since high school. And now that I’m almost half as old as Louie ;^) I’m starting to have trouble threading flies (I can read books without trouble – just can’t find the damned eye with the tippet without a struggle). And I won’t risk my eyes to any potential  injury/infection/whatever by using contact lenses. My solution: a pair of wide-field prescription polaroids (glass) and a pair of those flip-down magnifiers that clip onto my hat bill. Effective, cheap, and low risk. /daytripper

Response:

I can’t see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading glasses. Why bother?

That’s basically what I use and, to me, it’s worth the bother just for the additional peripheral vision. I can read ‘normal’ sized print without reading glasses, but that’s right at my limit. I’ve been wearing glasses since third grade (44 years) and I plain do *not* like bifocals, especially for climbing over/under things and wading. I guess it’s just a matter of what you consider the bother is; to me distorted peripheral vision is more of a bother than an extra pair of glasses. — Charlie…

Response:

Vision is very important in flyfishing. The flyfisherman not only has to see tiny flies far away in sometimes turbulent water against the glare of the sun, but he has to thread spiderweb-like tippets through the eyes of those tiny flies, and then tie intricate knots. It’s pretty hard for people with impaired vision to cope with the demands of flyfishing, especially as we get older. People who are nearsighted can’t see things far away; people who are farsighted can’t see things close up. If you’re nearsighted you need a negative correction; if you’re far sighted you need a positive correction. Nearsightedness often starts at an early age (4th grade for me), but nearly everyone becomes farsighted with advancing age, as the lenses loses flexibility and the means to change focal length, so nearsighted people eventually need bifocals. I wear "progressive" bifocals for everyday getting around, but at 8", my knot-tying distance, I can see best with no glasses at all. That’s why I find it most convenvient to wear single-prescription (not bifocal) glasses for fishing. They’re securely fastened around my head with a strap. I just drop them to my chest to tie knots or extract hooks from fish. I wear contact lenses for one and only one activity — playing tennis. They’re just perfect for that, but they’d be awful for fishing. I can’t see close-up with contacts, so I’d have to wear an "extra strong" pair of reading glasses for close work. That means I’d need (1) contact lenses, (2) nonprescription sunglasses, and (3) extra-strong reading glasses. Why bother? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ something bogus to avoid spam)

Response:

Question:

Watching ESPN2 recently I chanced across a young lady (seemingly well accomplished in the fly-fishing arts) guiding the show host on a snowy winter stream near Cooke City Montana.  She was fishing dry flys downstream. According to her "when the water is clear and the fish spook easily this prevents ""lining the fish"".

Hi Hart, I didn’t read any of the other post yet, but I am sure there are some good answers. I know that on smooth water that is moving slowly the fishing can be tough on the surface. I usually add on 3 feet of 6x or 7x tippet with a #16 or 18 dry, like a Spinner, Parachute, Cripple or Sparkle Dun. I get 30 to 50 feet above the fish and cast my fly downstream  ~3 feet above it’s rise form. Stop the rod high and shake down some slack so it won’t drag. We learned this from guide Bob Quigley in the 70s on California’s Hat Creek. This way the first thing the fish sees is the fly! If you rent or buy Doug Swisher 3M video, ‘Advanced Strategies for Selective Trout’, you will see Doug demonstrate presenting a fly from any point 360 degrees to the fish. I think this is a standard technique on any western spring creek? Bill Kiene Kiene’s Fly Shop Sacramento,CA,USA 800/4000FLY www.kiene.com

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Watching ESPN2 recently I chanced across a young lady (seemingly well accomplished in the fly-fishing arts) guiding the show host on a snowy winter stream near Cooke City Montana.  She was fishing dry flys downstream. According to her "when the water is clear and the fish spook easily this prevents ""lining the fish"". Being a new student of the art, everything I read or listen to tells me dry flys Upstream, wet flys up or down stream and nymphing requires years of experience.  Now I wonder how far a trout is seeing upstream.  I have recently experienced "lining the fish" with a pod of three browns while fishing a streamer upstream.  The floating leader alone spooked the fish. Any thoughts on downstream dry fly fishing and range of sight for trout? As a side note: I have caught a couple of lesser fish when allowing the dry fly to float 20 to 30 feet behind me as I moved up stream in the hole.  I don’t consider this a method I wish to regularly adopt but peaks my curiosity about fish sight range. Wayne To fish is human…to release devine.

Response:

The book "Trout and the Fly" by John Goddard offers some interesting insight into a trout’s sight window.   You will line a trout on a downstream drift if the trout does not take the fly and you allow the fly to continue its drift well past the fish. Clint

Response:

Interesting, I started fly fishing in 1948 and find that fishing a dry fly upstream to be the most successful method.  Only in special circumstances where the water is smooth and clear and the trout are "educated" do I use the downstream method. — Ernie Harrison Remove NOSPAM to send E-Mail Selling my Fly Fishing Books Go to: http://users.ccnet.com/~emh – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I started fly fishing in 1952, and the only hard and fast rule I have discovered is that in order to be succesful, you have to adapt your method to suit the current conditions.  As far as dry flies go, I find direct upstream fishing to usually be the least successful method because you will "line" the fish, and drag is difficult to control.   Usually a quartering upstream or side approach is best. If the surface of the water is not smooth, such as a riffle, the downstream method can be quite effective. As far as what other people think of your method, if it is legal, and you are not crowding or otherwise disturbing them, don’t worry about what they think. Tight Lines!!! George

Response:

Ernie, Just goes to show that there are no *right* answers.  Jeez, was I ever bagged when I wrote my first post on this thread.  It’s a miracle I made any sense at all.  Blame it on the Sleemans and keeping bad company (in-laws.) Peter – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Interesting, I started fly fishing in 1948 and find that fishing a dry fly upstream to be the most successful method.  Only in special circumstances where the water is smooth and clear and the trout are "educated" do I use the downstream method. — Ernie Harrison Remove NOSPAM to send E-Mail Selling my Fly Fishing Books Go to: http://users.ccnet.com/~emh I started fly fishing in 1952, and the only hard and fast rule I have discovered is that in order to be succesful, you have to adapt your method to suit the current conditions.  As far as dry flies go, I find direct upstream fishing to usually be the least successful method because you will "line" the fish, and drag is difficult to control.   Usually a quartering upstream or side approach is best. If the surface of the water is not smooth, such as a riffle, the downstream method can be quite effective. As far as what other people think of your method, if it is legal, and you are not crowding or otherwise disturbing them, don’t worry about what they think. Tight Lines!!! George

Response:

_______ Are you sure you’re not a professional troller Mr. Hart because I think you know the subject of dabbling a dry fly downstream. Mr. G. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Watching ESPN2 recently I chanced across a young lady (seemingly well accomplished in the fly-fishing arts) guiding the show host on a snowy winter stream near Cooke City Montana.  She was fishing dry flys downstream. According to her "when the water is clear and the fish spook easily this prevents ""lining the fish"". Being a new student of the art, everything I read or listen to tells me dry flys Upstream, wet flys up or down stream and nymphing requires years of experience.  Now I wonder how far a trout is seeing upstream.  I have recently experienced "lining the fish" with a pod of three browns while fishing a streamer upstream.  The floating leader alone spooked the fish. Any thoughts on downstream dry fly fishing and range of sight for trout? As a side note: I have caught a couple of lesser fish when allowing the dry fly to float 20 to 30 feet behind me as I moved up stream in the hole.  I don’t consider this a method I wish to regularly adopt but peaks my curiosity about fish sight range. Wayne To fish is human…to release devine.

Response:

Wayne Hart: <<Wayne To fish is human…to release devine. Uh oh!  Glad I’m not gonna be around for awhile. Dave L.

Response:

Being a new student of the art, everything I read or listen to tells me dry flys Upstream, wet flys up or down stream and nymphing requires years of experience.  Now I wonder how far a trout is seeing upstream.  I have recently experienced "lining the fish" with a pod of three browns while fishing a streamer upstream.  The floating leader alone spooked the fish.

The library will help: the books of Vince Marinaro include up-to-date experiments on what fish can see and how far (studied since approx. 1875); Leonard Wright’s Fishing the Dry Fly as a Living Insect (about 1973) explains at length a method of fishing a dry caddis across and downstream, and the times when this produces better than other methods. — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Response:

Wayne:  I can’t add much to the series of informative replies already posted, but can share my experience that the hooking of trout when floating a dry downstream is trickier than with the upstream or across presentations.  I have always assumed that this is because when you strike, you are pulling the fly right out of the mouth.  When fishing upstream, a strike pulls the fly back into the side of the mouth.  Thus, my hooking rate declines when fishing downstream, even though I try to set the hook more softly. Mark Faulkner – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Being a new student of the art, everything I read or listen to tells me dry flys Upstream, wet flys up or down stream and nymphing requires years of experience.  Now I wonder how far a trout is seeing upstream.  I have recently experienced "lining the fish" with a pod of three browns while fishing a streamer upstream.  The floating leader alone spooked the fish. The library will help: the books of Vince Marinaro include up-to-date experiments on what fish can see and how far (studied since approx. 1875); Leonard Wright’s Fishing the Dry Fly as a Living Insect (about 1973) explains at length a method of fishing a dry caddis across and downstream, and the times when this produces better than other methods. — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – She was fishing dry flys downstream. According to her "when the water is clear and the fish spook easily this prevents ""lining the fish"". Being a new student of the art, everything I read or listen to tells me dry flys Upstream, wet flys up or down stream and nymphing requires years of experience.  Now I wonder how far a trout is seeing upstream.  I have recently experienced "lining the fish" with a pod of three browns while fishing a streamer upstream.  The floating leader alone spooked the fish. Any thoughts on downstream dry fly fishing and range of sight for trout? As a side note: I have caught a couple of lesser fish when allowing the dry fly to float 20 to 30 feet behind me as I moved up stream in the hole.  I don’t consider this a method I wish to regularly adopt but peaks my curiosity about fish sight range.

Hi Wayne, Trout see best in front, and slightly above them.  They have binocular vision and can judge distances very well in about a 30

Question:

You want: Trout and Salmon Rivers and Lochs of Scotland Bruce Sandison Merlin Unwin Books.

Question:

I’ve fished the Newport area several times, both from a boat and from shore.  Two suggestions: 1) contact The Saltwater Edge (Orvis dealer in Newport).  They are very helpful.  2) Get a copy of "Striper Moon" by J. Kenney Abrames.  It’s got a lot of Newport-area intelligence.  Good luck!

Response:

I fish the Newport area often, what infor do you need?

Response:

Do you know where abouts you plan on fishing?

Response:

Try contacting The Saltwater Edge. http://www.saltwateredge.com

Response:

 I have been scouting from Pawcatuck R. to Westport R. nothing yet. Any day now the fishing fleet should be picking them up in their offshore drift nets. I will check with them this week. rec. outdoors       outdoor adventure

Response:

Plan to fly fish striped bass this spring in Newport,RI.Any pointer-advice?

Would be interested, too. Can you forward messages you get? Thanks in advance,                            Thomas

Response:

Plan to fly fish striped bass this spring in Newport,RI.Any pointer-advice?

Response:

Question:

All the comments so far are quite interesting to me because I have yet to own a rod over 8′ in length. I built a 8′   6 wt.  st croix and a 7′2" 3 wt. st croix for myself two years ago and have only used the 8′ a dozen times.  The short light rod is just a ball to use and I have caught some good fish on it!  1 to 4 lb largemouth, tuns o sunfish, 61/2 lb. brown, 9 lb carp,  4 1/2 lb smallmouth buffalo.There aren’t many things I would trade my small short rod for. The superiority of one man’s opinion over another’s is never so great as when the opinion is about fishing. Tim ILBTim

Response:

I find a 9ft quality 5 wt. idealfdor all fresh water fishing. Unless you are fishing very small streams stick wit what you have unless money is no object.

Response:

Short rods definitely are useful and fun, especially on small brushy streams.  Lamiglass makes some short rods, with the smallest around 51/2 ft.  St. Croix used to make some nice ones back in the days of glass, but I have no idea what their line is now.

Response:

Short rods are advantageous in tight conditions with canopy type overgrowth.  A long rod in this situation would always be stuck in the canopy.  In areas where most of the cover is on the banks and not overhanging the river, a longer rod will allow you to  backcast over the obstructions more easily, is more accurate (like having a longer finger to point with) and definitely gives you better line handling and mending.  So as many answers to  fly fishing questions goes,  "It all depends".  Make your choice depending on the conditions or personal preferance. Lee Wulff once said that he didn’t fish short rods because they were better, but because they were more challenging and he enjoyed fishing them more than long rods.  Check out Joan Wulff’s book for some specialty casts to use with short rods.                                                               Dan Dan Gracia                                                               Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools If you kill that big fish you can’t catch ‘em again.  So what if they eat other fish?  If you kill the big ones there will only be little ones left (funny how that works!).

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Short rods are advantageous in tight conditions with canopy type overgrowth.  A long rod in this situation would always be stuck in the canopy.  In areas where most of the cover is on the banks and not overhanging the river, a longer rod will allow you to  backcast over the obstructions more easily, is more accurate (like having a longer finger to point with) and definitely gives you better line handling and mending.  So as many answers to  fly fishing questions goes,  "It all depends".   Make your choice depending on the conditions or personal preferance. Lee Wulff once said that he didn’t fish short rods because they were better, but because they were more challenging and he enjoyed fishing them more than long rods.  Check out Joan Wulff’s book for some specialty casts to use with short rods.                                                              Dan Dan Gracia                                                             Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools If you kill that big fish you can’t catch ‘em again.  So what if they eat other fish?  If you kill the big ones there will only be little ones left (funny how that works!).

Re: Short fly rods Don’t forget that long rods can really come in handy if you fish stillwater from a belly boat. I fish an out of production (I think) Orvis 10 1/2′ in my tube. The minor inconviences are easily outweighed by the advantages of the extra length. Like you said, "It all depends…" Good luck, Nash

Response:

IMHO, I have a Sage 7.5′ 4wt and I love it! The majority of fishing I do is on small spring streams and it is perfect.  I have other rods, longer and heavier, but this one is definitely my favorite. D.P.

The best rod I own is an Orvis "Tippet" 7.5′ 3wt 1.5 oz.. I use it for trout and panfish. It’s the first rod that I grab and the one I use when I dream about fishing.

Response:

I’ve used my Orvis Flea, 6 1/2′ 4 weight almost exclusively for the last two years. Originally bought it for small s.w. Michigan streams with low canopies but have had success on local northern Indiana ponds and even the Yellow Breeches in PA. You need a very smooth knot between leader and fly line because you’ll probably reel in that much to reach fish or to use net. On the plus side, almost any size fish gives your outfit a battle and the shorter rod makes you work on better casting mechanics for longer casts.

Response:

IMO, the biggest disadvantage to short rods is their limited ability to mend line, especially on big rivers.   I use a 9 foot rod for 95% of the fishing I do.  On smaller rivers, like the local Cache la Poudre, I prefer an 8 foot; shorter rods seem to work better for shorter casts. When I get rich some day, working for the government (right) I’d like to get a 9.5 foot six or seven weight for nymphinig big rivers. Generally speaking, the bigger the water, the bigger the rod. — -Wayne Trzyna

Response:

Doug, The Mighty Mite is a 5wt!  You may just be able to get a nice Salmon or Steelhead if you are careful.  Most likely, you could not get a Steelie or Salmon on a 6′ 1wt.  The MM is and was not a gimmic when sold.  It was offered as a short all around rod.  They are rare and collectable, dont break it! Sean

Response:

IMHO, it depends on where you plan on fishing.  If you’re on the big rivers, I’d go with a longer rod.  Physically, they are capable of putting out more line (higher rod tip speed, etc.).  If, however, you’re like me and are ducking overhanging branches and the like, I would STRONGLY recommend a short rod.  I have a 7′2" 4wt that I absoulutely LOVE!  My first rod was a 9′6" 5wt that was nice, just had to be so careful about tree fishing.  Also, I really don’t think the added length makes too much of a difference in relation to distance unless you start talking about throwing flies way out there, because I’ve never been let down by the short rod in trying to hit a spot.  My suggestion, go with the short! Terry

Response:

Also, who do you think won the war between the rods?  Lefty Kreh and the long rods? or Ed Shenk et al and the short ones?

Jim, I think a random sampling of rod vendors’ offerings is more than sufficient to answer this question. Rods 8ft or longer in length are the rule, with rods under 8ft being the overwhelming minority. (In fact, this is probably also true if the criterion were 9ft or longer for a "long" rod.) This is not to criticize short rod proponents; only to point out that there is very little question on this subject if you look to the marketplace as your measurement of "who won the war". Regards, Fred

Response:

I am interested in knowledge about short fly rods, particulary fiberglass but also graphite.  Line weights 3 – 5.  Also, rods that are for sale.   There have been waves of interest in these small rods in the past, probably started by Lee Wulff and Arnold Gingrich, but also Ed Shenk.  I am interested in your experience with the short ones, different manufacturers, lengths, shortcomings, etc., not commercialized opinion driven by marketing usually published in the fly fishing journals.  Also, who do you think won the war between the rods?  Lefty Kreh and the long rods? or Ed Shenk et al and the short ones? Thanks. J. H.

Jim: Just my own experience, but I have a 6′6" Loomis GL3 (graphite) 3-weight that I really like to use on small streams.  I have caught trout, largemouth and smallmouth bass, and lots of panfish on it and really love to use it. It does, however, leave a lot to be desired if you are fishing in a wind.  I think that part has as much to do with the line weight as the length, but the two are probably related. Finally, if your small stream fishing includes dropping nymphs along cutbanks without actual casting, a 9′ rod works a lot better for that. Still, there is something that is just FUN about throwing a light line and a tiny fly on a short rod.  I think it makes me a better fisherman with my other rods. Thanks, Bob

Response:

IMHO, I have a Sage 7.5′ 4wt and I love it! The majority of fishing I do is on small spring streams and it is perfect.  I have other rods, longer and heavier, but this one is definitely my favorite. D.P.

Response:

    IMHO, short rods (beginning with the bamboo type) have always been of interest to some fishermen because there have been promoters of fishing with them, especially the late Lee Wulff.  He could cast very long distances with a short rod, as well as land very large fish.  In the world of bamboo, a very heavy material, a short rod was a light rod.       The advent of graphite has eliminated weight as a consideration in rod length.  So now we can return to consideration of basic principles like the length of the rod as a lever for casting or its applicability for handling or manipulating line on the water.  And in this regard, a longer rod is preferable, all other things being equal.  Many of the light weight rods (by line size) are now relatively lengthy – few under 8′ and many at 9′ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -The short rod interest has really confused me as of late also.  I have always favored a shortish rod for the fishing I do in the Sierra and High  Sierra.  There really is no scientific fact for this, they are simply easier to carry and cast in tight conditions with light line. The trout are seldom over 12", so the short, light rod makes fair game of them.   The 1oz, 1 and 2wt. rods are gimmics in my opinion.  I have used one particular model and felt I did the fish I caught some real harm, by not bringing them in quick enough. The rod simply wouldnt allow it. I was using the rod to get a feel for the action and casting abilities and comparing it to light cane rods.  While I know of no 1 or 2wt. cane rods, there was a significant difference between this rod and 3 and 4wt. cane.  The cane has the same sweet action and feel (heavier yes) but brought fish to the hand much faster. I believe this is another fad the industry is going through.  Much has been written over th past two years about short, light rods.  So much so, that the once common and inexpensive short cane rods have become the rage across the country.  This is both good and bad.  Bad, because I really cant afford to buy the SB 290’s and HI Tonka Princes any longer, at the rate I break them. . But good because, these really are decent rods and deserve some respect.  As with anything "collectable" the prices will certinly rise to unaffordability soon enough. Thoughts out there? Regards, Sean

Response:

The short rod interest has really confused me as of late also.  I have always favored a shortish rod for the fishing I do in the Sierra and High Sierra.  There really is no scientific fact for this, they are simply easier to carry and cast in tight conditions with light line. The trout are seldom over 12", so the short, light rod makes fair game of them.   The 1oz, 1 and 2wt. rods are gimmics in my opinion.  I have used one particular model and felt I did the fish I caught some real harm, by not bringing them in quick enough. The rod simply wouldnt allow it. I was using the rod to get a feel for the action and casting abilities and comparing it to light cane rods.  While I know of no 1 or 2wt. cane rods, there was a significant difference between this rod and 3 and 4wt. cane.  The cane has the same sweet action and feel (heavier yes) but brought fish to the hand much faster. I believe this is another fad the industry is going through.  Much has been written over th past two years about short, light rods.  So much so, that the once common and inexpensive short cane rods have become the rage across the country.  This is both good and bad.  Bad, because I really cant afford to buy the SB 290’s and HI Tonka Princes any longer, at the rate I break them. . But good because, these really are decent rods and deserve some respect.  As with anything "collectable" the prices will certinly rise to unaffordability soon enough. Thoughts out there? Regards, Sean

Response:

Question:

Does anyone go fly fishing in Orance County at any of the local beaches?   (*particularly Huntington Beach)  I’d much rather drive 10 minutes to the beach rather than an hour to the nearest fresh water for trout. Jae

Response:

The best salt water fly fishing nearest you, in my opinion, would be in Redondo Beach; King Harbour. Go to Daves Rocky Point at 6:30 am, rent a skiff ($40 for half day) and fish your brains out for Bonita in the harbour. Be sure to have a reel with a drag system and at least an 8-9 rod. Sinking line is considered best, but I have outfished my buddies with a floating line. A 10 lb tippet will do and the Bonita is considered the "Jack Dempsey" of the tuna family. Bonita on the fly is an amazing thing!! Up in the Ventura Co., there is also some great salt water fly fishing from shore. Be sure to have a line tray! the Spy on the Fly

Response:

Question:

To Any UK or European Angler Types,   Does anyone out there have a good groundbait recipe for fish other than carp? Specifically I am looking for something attractive to small predatory or insect eating fish along the line of Bream and Perch Thanks in Advance

Response:

There is an article on ground bait in this months issue of In-Fisherman. I must admit, until I read the article, I had never heard of ground bait. (Apparently, it is very popular in Europe). The article specifically targets Bluegill (Shellcrackers). They mention using Spam, and other ingredients. Sorry, I dont have the issue with me or I would include the recipie. One thing I do remember was that they claimed that there is no better bait for Bluegill that have been attracted by groundbait than Maggots. I hope you can find a copy of the issue.

Response:

To Any UK or European Angler Types,  Does anyone out there have a good groundbait recipe for fish other than carp? Specifically I am looking for something attractive to small predatory or insect eating fish along the line of Bream and Perch Thanks in Advance

Chopped worms added either to peat (as a binder) or to a breadcrumb based groundbait always works well for perch. Tench and bream go for it too. Bream are traditionally groundbaited for with bread crumb based groundbait, containing samples of whatever the hook bait is.  There are lots of commercial groundbaits and additives which are good for roach, bream, rudd etc. Having said that, loose fed maggots are usually sufficient for perch. Steve

Response:

First I’d like to indroduce myself for this is my first posting this   newsgroup. I live in the northern part of Germany and I’m thirty years old, I’ve been   fishing for various species with a lot methods for nearly twenty years.   I’ve been a serious carp angler for ten years but nowadays I spend most of   the time fishing for seatrout in the baltic sea either with fly or   spinning baits and I enjoy flyfishing for atlantic salmon in Norway Anyway, here we go:. To Any UK or European Angler Types,   Does anyone out there have a good groundbait recipe for fish other than carp? Specifically I am looking for something attractive to small predatory or insect eating fish along the line of Bream and Perch Thanks in Advance

Hello Curtis, Well, attracting bream is quite simple, first you need a lot of groundbait   because bream feed in great schoals and eat a lot. To hold them in place   for a longer time really needs a lot of bait. For a 5 hour bream session I   would recommend at least 3 gallons of groundbait, if there is a good stock   of bream the water. The difficulty in bream fishing is to get larger specimen (4 lbs + fish),   for they tend to travel solitarily the bigger they get. Smaller bream are easy to attract and to catch, if the water holds a good   stock and they live in large schoals.. The basic substance should be breadcrumb or bread. The groundbait should   be sweet for bream, vanilla is a very common additive and caramel, sugar   or koprah molasses are widely used by European bream anglers. Add maggots   or other live bait (worms) to the groundbait, about 1/4 of a gallon or so.   A good substance to add to bream groundbait are crushed butter cookies,   they can make up to 1/3 or even more of the mix. Don’t buy them in a   supermarket, try to get substandard goods from a factory or bakery. Good hook baits for bream are: maggots lobworms combination of maggot/lobworm combination of sweetcorn and maggot breadflake The "sweet bream mix" works very well for tench  either. When fishing for roach the mixture should be less sweet than for bream.   Hemp meal is very attractive for roach and cooked hemp is a fine hook bait   for this species (the basic substance beeing breadcrumb as well). And a substance used by European competions anglers is dove shit, believe   me or not, not much, some 2% or so. The Dutch and Belgian anglers have   used that for a number of years. Good hook baits for roach and rudd are maggots or casters. and especially for rudd the breadflake You’ll get a problem when there are a lot of carp in the water, because   carp like these groundbaits too. And they drive away the smaller fish   from your swim, when the occur in larger numbers. The only way of dealing with them in such a case is to get out the carp   rods …. . Attracting perch with groundbait doesn’t work. You can use a catapult and   shoot maggots in larger quantities into the water, this will attract some   perch but will attract more and more roach and/or rudd. Kind regards Wolfgang — Rivers and the inhabitants of the watery elements are made for wise men to   contemplate and for fools to pass by without consideration. (Izaak Walton,   The compleat angler, London 1653) ## CrossPoint v3.02 ##

Response:

Question:

Does anybody have any float tube puncture experiences to relate? Whilst toodling along on a lake the other day I started to think about what would happen if my tube suddenly sprung a leak.  A life preserver is an obvious answer, but over fleece jacket and fly vest? What happens when your chest waders fill with water? How difficult is it to exit the deflated tube and then remove clothing? etc. etc. etc….. Failing any practical advice as a result of this posting, I think its time to find a pool somewhere and experiment with various scenarios. Any suggestions? B.

Response:

Does anybody have any float tube puncture experiences to relate? Whilst toodling along on a lake the other day I started to think about what would happen if my tube suddenly sprung a leak.  A life preserver is an obvious answer, but over fleece jacket and fly vest? What happens when your chest waders fill with water? How difficult is it to exit the deflated tube and then remove clothing? etc. etc. etc…..

Float fishing without a life jacket is very ill advised (I started to say stupid, but decided to be nice instead).  With all the stuff you carry fly fishing you could go right to the bottom very easily.  Anybody carry extra spools, split shot, etc?  I don’t think waders are that much of a problem, since the water in them will be neutral boyancy, though I’ve not tried that. Try a better quality life jacket under your vest.  If you’re wearing a jacket anyway, it should not be that much of a problem.  Another solution is inflatable life jackets that have a CO2 cartridge in them. You can even buy fly vests with these built in.  And, I saw an integrated fly jacket/life jacket combination in a fly shop the other day which would be a good solution. One thing I wonder about is hyperthermia, though.  If you take a dip in a cold water pond in early spring or late fall, how long before you pass out?  I sure wouldn’t want to try it.  I would think waders would really help here, though, since they are somewhat like the wet suits divers wear. — | Dartmouth College                                  Home:  603-448-5677 | | 6211 Sudikoff Laboratory, Rm 108                                       | | Hanover, NH  03755                                                     |

Response:

Does anybody have any float tube puncture experiences to relate? Whilst toodling along on a lake the other day I started to think about what would happen if my tube suddenly sprung a leak.  A life preserver is an obvious answer, but over fleece jacket and fly vest? What happens when your chest waders fill with water? How difficult is it to exit the deflated tube and then remove clothing? etc. etc. etc….. Failing any practical advice as a result of this posting, I think its time to find a pool somewhere and experiment with various scenarios. Any suggestions? B.

While it has never happened to me, my thoughts on the subject is the backrest is an inflated bladder on my float tube, so if I suffered a puncture, kick like crazy for the shore, and when the tube is too deflated to support me anymore, free my feet from the tube, hug the backrest, and keep kicking. In my younger days I surfed in the Pacific Ocean, and I wore a neoprene wet suit. The wet suit was fairly thin (for ease of movement), I would estimate about the same thickness of a 2 or 3 mm wader. The wet suit was amazingly buoyant. Enough so that I would float at chin level with no effort. I think a neoprene chest wader would help a lot with floatation also. I have also seen a set of suspenders that inflates with a CO2 cartridge. Maybe if I couldn’t swim I would consider buying it. Darryl

Response:

<stuff deleted One thing I wonder about is hyperthermia, though.  If you take a dip

                                ^^ I rarely get hyperthermia unless I’m fishing too far down Hot Creek. HypOthermia, now that’s a problem in cold water. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist!) Sean Brennan

Response:

Well, it happened to me tonight.  As I loaded my float tube, I noticed it was a bit low.  I stopped by the gas station on the way out, and filled the tube.  However, I did continue to wonder why it was low, so I did keep an eye on the tube level for a while.  Well my tube didn’t seem to be loosing air, so naturally my attention turned to the crappie and bass that were hitting tonite.  Long about dusk, I suddenly noticed the tube was getting low and -then- noticed the sound of a leak.  I wasn’t far off the bank, rarely am when fishing this local gravel pit, so I paddled over to the bank and got out.  No reason to panic, the loss of air was audible but fairly slow.  As I laid the tube in the back of mmy truck, I could still hear the leak. Altogether I had been out fishing at least 4 hours, I know because I was listening to the Broncos getting beat by the Jets, and the post game show. Sure glad the fish were biting, because the Broncs weren’t.  I suppose the radio headphones were the reason I couldn’t hear the leak. I have no clue why or how I got the puncture, probably was due to the tube being about 10 years old.  I think I’ll get a new one.  My tube is one that has a separate tube for a back rest, so in case of a rapid deflation, I might be able to stay afloat.   All things considered, I wouldn’t even consider wearing a life jacket not in the past and not in the future.  In some states, a life jacket is req’d, but I don’t think it is in CO.  This experience confirmed my belief that any small puncture will deflate very slowly, since the air pressure in a float tube is so low.  I would take a good swift slice with a knife to achieve a rapid failure, and that is not likely (at least in places where I fish . Tight Lines, Kevin

Response: