Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Now I know that graphite blanks have a *backbone* or *spine* and the line guides are suppose to be lined up in some relative position to that spine, I have long forgotten the details. My first question: Is it possible that the second time around I did not get the guides correctly on the blank? Yes, if you never splined the original or the new tip. How can I check? I’m sure it should match the way it was done on the butt section. Hold the rod out straight (parallel to the ground) and flex it up and down.  When it moves straight up and down, the spline is either on the top or the bottom.  If you notice that the tip and rest of the rod seem to be "out of sync," rotate the tip and see if you can get an obvious straight up and down.

Just to clarify, when you _attempt_ to flex the rod in a vertical plane, if it actually moves slightly off from straight up and down, the spline is not in the vertical plane.  When the spline is in the vertical plane, the rod will move straight up and down, and you then know that the spline is either on the top or bottom. TC, R

Response:

It’s SPINE, not SPLINE, dammit! /daytripper (!)

Response:

It’s SPINE, not SPLINE, dammit!

Er, actually, it’s a poTAto POtato thing…both are widely used, and really, both make about as much sense as the other.  Remember that although there is only one "high point" on the rod, it affects it in a plane. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -/daytripper (!)

Response:

It’s SPINE, not SPLINE, dammit!

How do you know that? I’ve seen the both words used depending on who’s doing the writing. Clemens uses spline in all three of his books on rod building, for example. Willi

Response:

It’s SPINE, not SPLINE, dammit! How do you know that? I’ve seen the both words used depending on who’s doing the writing. Clemens uses spline in all three of his books on rod building, for example.

I’m pretty sure that’s where I picked it up, because IIRC the older guys I originally learned rod "making" from used older bamboo terms like "strong"/"weak flat," "crown(ed)," etc.  I can’t remember if they used "spline," "spine," or either. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Willi

Response:

Now I know that graphite blanks have a *backbone* or *spine* and the line guides are suppose to be lined up in some relative position to that spine, I have long forgotten the details.

Have a look here; http://www.flyanglersonline.com/begin/graphite/part7.html My first question: Is it possible that the second time around I did not get the guides correctly on the blank? How can I check? I’m sure it should match the way it was done on the butt section. If I find that I did do it incorrectly, can I fix the rod? How would I remove the old guides without damaging the blank?

Usually yes. It depends how you put the guides on. How do I find the correct place to put new ones on the blank?

See the URL above. TL MC

Response:

Just to clarify, when you _attempt_ to flex the rod in a vertical plane, if it actually moves slightly off from straight up and down, the spline is not in the vertical plane.  When the spline is in the vertical plane, the rod will move straight up and down, and you then know that the spline is either on the top or bottom.

Please clarify, how do I flex the rod? Do I just wiggle it up an down or just press it up against something to bend it down? Hope that doesn’t seem like a silly question. Thanks, Russell

Response:

Now I know that graphite blanks have a *backbone* or *spine* and the line guides are suppose to be lined up in some relative position to that spine, I have long forgotten the details. Have a look here; http://www.flyanglersonline.com/begin/graphite/part7.html

Thanks for the link. Here are a couple of paragraphs from the link: How do you get it right? Simple, you locate the spine of the blank. To do this, place the tip of the rod blank on the floor, hold the butt end with one hand and apply some moderate pressure to the middle of the blank with the index finger of the other hand. With the tip of the blank bent, turn the rod with the hand that

Question:

Wow, I just had a great time fishing in front of the school on the Lielupe River! Thanks to you guys here on ROFF (whatever that is..). I was headed home after work, glanced over at the usually rather full fishing spot, and not one local was there, probably because of the overcast skies and promise of rain. The space with the clear zone for a backcast was wide open, and as I stood there thinking about it, 2 big old rises appeared <right there.  Easy decision: tossed the briefcase in the car, peeled off the shoes and socks, stepped into my mudboots, and assembled the 4-weight. Strolled over to the bank and watched for a minute. The skeeters were there, but so were these tiny little black flying things and the perch were rising for them all over. Not the big thrashing rises from the other day, but some respectable rises nontheless. And lots of them. I tied on a 6x tippet, gave myself about 1 meter of lead, and looked at my flycase. I recently bought a nice old Soviet cigarette case at a junk shop and lined it with foam as a nymph case for my 4-wt, and saw a fly that looked interesting. Its a type of caterpillar, I think, with a palmered hackle around a yellow-orange body on a #12(?) hook. Looks like a wolly bugger without a tail. I was thinking about what Mike said about colors, and how Perch nip at the tails and to use a wolly with a short tail, so I tied this on. Also, the water is getting shallow, and this fly can float if you lay it out gently, so I figured it would work for presentation practice, too. First cast was short and easy, as someone suggested here. Then I gradually stretched out my false casts farther and farther, thinking ‘back and UP’, and as someone else suggested, watching over my shoulder for the line to straighten. It was a LONG wait…the line would do a sort of ‘double tug’ at the end of my backcast: once when the tailing loop of the backcast would hit the far end, then again when the entire line was laid out up there. Dunno how the line can defy gravity for so long waiting to stretch out taut, but it does. Then, I swept it forward firmly and sharply, pointing it like a sword (as someone else suggested), and was amazed at how my casts were straight, long, and perfectly presented. First cast, fish on! Of course, it was some little 6-inch thing, but hey!, it was just what I wanted. I brought it in with the line, not bothering to spool up the reel, and let it go with my heartfelt thanks. Then I cast out again, watching the line behind me and waiting forever for the backcast to load up. The forward cast and watching the fly stay ‘above the line’ as Jarmo suggested made total sense, and it felt just right. Second cast, fish on! Too cool! This guy was a bit bigger (6.1 inches, probably), but I got that feeling that it was working just like it was supposed to! All those tiny details were making sense, and it was great. Then the skies opened up and it started to rain. I remembered the thread about how fish seem to bite better at one time or another, and figured the Perch seemed to like to hit just before the skies open up. A few minutes later, when the rain stopped and the sun broke through, there were no rises. As the clouds covered up again, the rises came more and more regularly until just before it rained again. At some point, I decided to experiment with flies as the caterpillar was getting soaked and starting to snag on the muck at the bottom. I took it off and tied on a very tiny yellow thing I have; I think its a #18 yellow Comparadun. Anyway, I was laying it out there exactly where the big rises were and letting it lie there, but no takes. Finally, I decided to head home and started retrieving it slowly. Wham! it got hit and spit out. Wham! it got hit again. Ahhh, so THATS the secret! So I spent the next half hour casting and gently retrieving it, hauling in fish with almost every cast. Great. Of course, these were no great monsters, and I realize that perch are pathetically easy to catch, but at least now I have a baseline to experiment with, and grow from. I know there are some BIG perch in this stretch of water, so I’m ready to start learning how to aim for them. All in all, it was a great way to spend an hour after work, and I was thinking of all the tidbits of advice from folks here about everything, from how to cast, to the effect of cloud cover, to what color and type of fly to use, to knots, to everything. Thanks, guys!! riverman (happy boy)

Response:

Wow, I just had a great time fishing in front of the school on the Lielupe River! Thanks to you guys here on ROFF (whatever that is..).

Congratulations!    Just one point though, catching small perch may seem "pathetically easy" sometimes. The larger ones can be quite a challenge. Even a medium sized perch will give you a good run for your money on a #4 wt. If you only seem to be catching small ones, try fishing a streamer anyway, occasionally, a large perch will be hanging around waiting for one of his smaller brethren to make a mistake. TL MC

Response:

Question:

  Michael, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –          First off, where exacty are you presently residing.       Clagary as you know,is a booming-better than the 70’s.With one of the lowest unemployment numbers in the Nation.       The weather is finally warming up.The Bow River has been opened all year round and this weekend all of the smaller rivers and creeks around Southern Alberta open up for the season–Can wait!!       I’ve got all my gear ready and taking the Day off work to hit the Elbow at about 8am.The rivers arerunning a little high due to the spring run off but ha,that fishing. Take Care For Now. PAUL Before you buy.

Hi Paul, I am now living in South Jersey. I work in Philadelphia. I used to live in the NW of Calgary in Around the Country Hills Area. Before I came to South Jersey I only knew how to spin fish. I learned how to cast and fish in Atco Lake on Route 30. Just small blue gills and pumpkin seeds but it was a hoot! My first fly rod was a Diawa and it was an eight weight! If you can imagine chasing blue gill on an eight weight! Still it was a blast. As I became instantly infatuated with Fly Fishing I began researching it and that was when I stumbed onto r.o.f.f. last year. I was quite active posting but lifes "other" demands get in the way. I still fish like crazy but I haven’t been "speaking" in the ng too much. Just now I am starting to beak off again. I was watching fishing Canada last night and they were doing a segment on the old man river up by Crows Nest Pass. That looked FANTASTIC! Just like I remembered it. I used to fish a spot on the Bow that is by a golf course just out of town (south west I think) and we used to get some BIG rainbows out of there! Next time I visit I warned my wife that she would not be seeing a lot of me! I plan on calling on all of the people I have been corresponding with to get some time out with them and also to do some of my own exploring! I’d like to get over to Sam Livingston’s fish hatchery and work that stretch after the spill way! Also along a small bend close to south Costco! Thanks for the interest! — Michael Era

Question:

On the subject of trolling, I posted a rather obviously titled post last week, in which I described trollers using a fishing analogy. They are in it to see what they can catch – they like seeing how many people they can get to respond or get annoyed. The sad things is that the trolls that seem to catch all the attention are the ones that are about as subtle as dynamite fishing. It can be quite enjoyable to follow a troll thread if it started as fly-fishing and is cuningly crafted, but that is not usually the case – people continue to chase the sticks of dynamite that float down through the pond. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -…..I don’t necessarily advocate reporting obvious trolls, as generally they will get bored and move on independently (as long as people tend to ignore them). People who stay for the sole purpose of harassing individual members of a group, or who engage in activities counter to the charter or FAQ (if existent) are fair game for anyone, though. You reap what you sow, and that sort of thing. —   Annette http://www.technogirl.net

Response:

did i say you can’t have an opinion? where did you see that in my comment? besides your off topic

off topic as it is – the debates about who – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – should say what are the longest threads on the NG – is it a case of talk one idea, do another – by the way – the net is not private, nor is it free – and the stupidity that surrounds the topic of what can  and can’t be said, is not much different than the constant nikon, minolta pentax abusiveness and brand loyalty name calling Carl, Complaining about threads that are seen to be off topic is part of the debate. Just as people on rec.photo.equipment.35mm can use the forum to complain about each other, so may others point to the fact that the NG’s main aim (in their minds) is to discuss 35mm equipment. I am not trying to exercise censorship but am exercising my right to an opinion. I cannot and would not want to stop this NG from evolving into rec.photo.bickering if that’s what people want. But surely I am allowed to have my say in the development. PT

Response:

i find it interesting that – off topic as it is – the debates about who should say what are the longest threads on the NG – is it a case of talk one idea, do another – by the way – the net is not private, nor is it free – and the stupidity that surrounds the topic of what can  and can’t be said, is not much different than the constant nikon, minolta pentax abusiveness and brand loyalty name calling

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I for one am sick of the way this NG is being abused by idiotic small boys who want to use it for their imbecile games. The purpose of this group is to discuss 35 mm equipment. Unfortunately 35mm is about the size of some contributors’ brains. Let’s get back to camera talk please. The little boys can continue their backbiting elsewhere. Please don’t abuse net freedom by subjecting the rest of us to your infantile behaviour. Patty

Response:

should say what are the longest threads on the NG – is it a case of talk one idea, do another – by the way – the net is not private, nor is it free – and the stupidity that surrounds the topic of what can  and can’t be said, is not much different than the constant nikon, minolta pentax abusiveness and brand loyalty name calling

Carl, Complaining about threads that are seen to be off topic is part of the debate. Just as people on rec.photo.equipment.35mm can use the forum to complain about each other, so may others point to the fact that the NG’s main aim (in their minds) is to discuss 35mm equipment. I am not trying to exercise censorship but am exercising my right to an opinion. I cannot and would not want to stop this NG from evolving into rec.photo.bickering if that’s what people want. But surely I am allowed to have my say in the development. PT

Response:

You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything. But you can’t position your soap box on the private property of someone who doesn’t want you there. If he kicks you off his property and tells you to set up your soapbox on your own property, that is *not* censorship.

Are you comparing your private property with the usenet? There are private email lists. You can create one anytime you like. Just go to topica.com or onelist.com. Then it will be all yours and you will be the dictator. But here, you are not- this is not your private property. And of course there are moderated lists. This is not.

Response:

PLONK !!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Oh, please. It’s not "censorship" or anything remotely like that. There’s a big difference between censorship and stopping someone from deliberately annoying all the users in a newsgroup every day for weeks on end. As for "ignoring" him, that’s what filters are for, but he started changing his name for the express purpose of defeating such filters. He has been determined to annoy people, and his posts have had no other goal or content. That has nothing to do with "freedom of speech." Sure it does. That’s what freedom of speech is all about- the freedom to annoy people, within some limits. You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything. That will annoy lots of people. But that’s the first amendment. Messages that you don’t like aren’t really hurting you any, they aren’t causing you any damage. When you complain about such things; that shows your immaturity. Neil — There’s a disturbance in the Force, Luke! Somewhere in the galaxy, someone must  have misused the term "prime lens" again. Censorship is not the answer. Ignoring is. Freedom of speech comes with a price. — Joe  Zorzin

Response:

Joseph Zorzin skrev: Sure it does. That’s what freedom of speech is all about- the freedom to annoy people, within some limits. You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything. That will annoy lots of people. But that’s the first amendment. Messages that you don’t like aren’t really hurting you any, they aren’t causing you any damage. When you complain about such things; that shows your immaturity.

It is not that simple. Freedom of speech does not mean the right to cause other people costs, for example. SpeedOfDarkness type of sustained personal attacks would *never* happen in the free press, nor would a magazine feel that it was his right to get a free page now and then to display his message. I don’t belive radio stations or TV channels would think they was obliged to send his rants either. My problem (a very small problem, mostly of principal nature, not practical) is that I can’t choose to not listen, that is,  I pay the cost of conveying the message, not SOD – and I have no real control over that cost. This is a Internet type of problem that wasn’t foreseen by the founding fathers, likely. I mean, what would you like to pay for your photo magazine page by page, not knowing if the next page is reasonably on topic or just a advertisment or a lunatic personal vendetta ? The ‘Net is remarkably anarchistic and "free", but there are conventions that better be followed anyway. — Anders Svensson

Response:

Steve skrev: Am I missing something here?  Since when is the Internet "private property?"

It is the combined property of those owning the infrastructure, and those who use it. Anarchy’s positive side is that anything can be tried once, the backside is that the sanctions can be weird, unusual and painful as they are not balanced by legislative and judicial forces. — Anders Svensson

Response:

Sure it does. That’s what freedom of speech is all about- the freedom to annoy people,

No. Freedom of speech is not about annoying people, and just repeating the same insults day after day, week after week, flooding the newsgroup with that juvenile crap, has nothing to do with freedom of speech. within some limits. You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything.

Try it and see. Depending on the city, you may or may not be able to get away with that. There are laws against making a nuisance of yourself. Other people have rights too, including the right not to be pestered continuously by someone who is just trying to bother them. That will annoy lots of people. But that’s the first amendment.

No, it is not. You are trivializing an important right if you think it is there to enable people to annoy other people. Messages that you don’t like aren’t really hurting you any, they aren’t causing you any damage.

How do you know? Are you authorized to decide what does or does not hurt or damage other people? When you complain about such things; that shows your immaturity.

On the contrary, your post shows yours. It is only the very juvenile who believe people have some "right" to annoy other people. Neil — There’s a terrible disturbance in the Force, Luke! Somewhere in the galaxy, someone must be misusing the term "prime lens" again.

Response:

Am I missing something here?  Since when is the Internet "private property?" But you can’t position your soap box on the private property of someone who doesn’t want you there. If he kicks you off his property and tells you to set up your soapbox on your own property, that is *not* censorship.

The servers, man, the servers all belong to somebody.  Many are the property of public universities–and those do have the right to limit what is stored on them.  Others are wholly private, owned by companies or private universities in most cases.  Some others are owned by non- US governments that don’t have the First Amendment. — Kirk "Nothing is foolproof. Fools are too ingenious" -RAH <I really am at home if you want to reply by e-mail

Response:

You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything.

But you can’t position your soap box on the private property of someone who doesn’t want you there. If he kicks you off his property and tells you to set up your soapbox on your own property, that is *not* censorship. — Kirk "Nothing is foolproof. Fools are too ingenious" -RAH <I really am at home if you want to reply by e-mail

Response:

Am I missing something here?  Since when is the Internet "private property?" – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – But you can’t position your soap box on the private property of someone who doesn’t want you there. If he kicks you off his property and tells you to set up your soapbox on your own property, that is *not* censorship.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Oh, please. It’s not "censorship" or anything remotely like that. There’s a big difference between censorship and stopping someone from deliberately annoying all the users in a newsgroup every day for weeks on end. As for "ignoring" him, that’s what filters are for, but he started changing his name for the express purpose of defeating such filters. He has been determined to annoy people, and his posts have had no other goal or content. That has nothing to do with "freedom of speech." Sure it does. That’s what freedom of speech is all about- the freedom to annoy people, within some limits. You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything. That will annoy lots of people. But that’s the first amendment. Messages that you don’t like aren’t really hurting you any, they aren’t causing you any damage. When you complain about such things; that shows your immaturity.

That isn’t really the point. The "first amendment" argument implies that everyone must by necessity be in the US, which is ridiculous. The Internet is global. The only rules that matter are the ones put in place by an individual’s provider (your comment "within some limits"), and they are not bound by any first amendment claims (even US providers), since they are private entities.  Every ISP has an acceptable use policy that prohibits certain types of acitivites. Earthlink has an AUP which includes the following: (Under items that constitute a violation of Eartlink’s AUP) d. Harassment. Using the Services to transmit any material (by email, uploading, posting, or otherwise) that harasses another. … m. News. EarthLink Members should use their best judgment when posting to any newsgroup. Many groups have charters, published guidelines, FAQs, or "community standards" describing what is and is not considered appropriate. Usenet can be a valuable resource if used properly. The continued posting of off-topic articles is prohibited. Commercial advertisements are off-topic in most newsgroups, especially regional groups not specifically named for such. The presence of such articles in a group is not indicative of the group’s "intended" use. Please familiarize yourself with basic USENET netiquette before posting to a newsgroup. I don’t necessarily advocate reporting obvious trolls, as generally they will get bored and move on independently (as long as people tend to ignore them). People who stay for the sole purpose of harassing individual members of a group, or who engage in activities counter to the charter or FAQ (if existent) are fair game for anyone, though. You reap what you sow, and that sort of thing. —   Annette http://www.technogirl.net

Response:

Oh, please. It’s not "censorship" or anything remotely like that. There’s a big difference between censorship and stopping someone from deliberately annoying all the users in a newsgroup every day for weeks on end. As for "ignoring" him, that’s what filters are for, but he started changing his name for the express purpose of defeating such filters. He has been determined to annoy people, and his posts have had no other goal or content. That has nothing to do with "freedom of speech."

Sure it does. That’s what freedom of speech is all about- the freedom to annoy people, within some limits. You can stand on a soapbox on the street corner and rant on all you want about anything. That will annoy lots of people. But that’s the first amendment. Messages that you don’t like aren’t really hurting you any, they aren’t causing you any damage. When you complain about such things; that shows your immaturity. Neil — There’s a disturbance in the Force, Luke! Somewhere in the galaxy, someone must  have misused the term "prime lens" again. Censorship is not the answer. Ignoring is. Freedom of speech comes with a price.

– Joe  Zorzin

Response:

Most of the questionable material is not offensive, but it can be annoying. However,  I don’t think that a sender’s ISP would have any basis to intervene.

It should be in the ISP’s terms of service, but responsible providers will not tolerate their members spamming anyone, including newsgroups, and especially not with abusive and offensive off-topic posts. One person’s spam is another person’s treat and I get nervous about wholesale restriction of these posts. That is not in the internet spirit either. The best solution: If the thread is annoying to you, don’t read it.

The offender in this case has already gone far beyond what any ISP should tolerate. The fact that he now has taken to changing his name here for the express purpose of preventing annoyed users from filtering him out, puts him well beyond the bounds of what anyone should be willing to tolerate. Neil

Response:

Maybe we should rename the NG. Something like rec.character.assasination? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I for one am sick of the way this NG is being abused by idiotic small boys who want to use it for their imbecile games. The purpose of this group is to discuss 35 mm equipment. Unfortunately 35mm is about the size of some contributors’ brains. Let’s get back to camera talk please. The little boys can continue their backbiting elsewhere. Please don’t abuse net freedom by subjecting the rest of us to your infantile behaviour. Patty

Response:

Censorship is not the answer. Ignoring is. Freedom of speech comes with a price.

Response:

Oh, please. It’s not "censorship" or anything remotely like that. There’s a big difference between censorship and stopping someone from deliberately annoying all the users in a newsgroup every day for weeks on end. As for "ignoring" him, that’s what filters are for, but he started changing his name for the express purpose of defeating such filters. He has been determined to annoy people, and his posts have had no other goal or content. That has nothing to do with "freedom of speech." Neil — There’s a disturbance in the Force, Luke! Somewhere in the galaxy, someone must  have misused the term "prime lens" again.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Censorship is not the answer. Ignoring is. Freedom of speech comes with a price.

Response:

I for one am sick of the way this NG is being abused by idiotic small boys who want to use it for their imbecile games. The purpose of this group is to discuss 35 mm equipment. Unfortunately 35mm is about the size of some contributors’ brains. Let’s get back to camera talk please. The little boys can continue their backbiting elsewhere. Please don’t abuse net freedom by subjecting the rest of us to your infantile behaviour. Patty

Response:

Most of the questionable material is not offensive, but it can be annoying. However,  I don’t think that a sender’s ISP would have any basis to intervene. One person’s spam is another person’s treat and I get nervous about wholesale restriction of these posts. That is not in the internet spirit either. The best solution: If the thread is annoying to you, don’t read it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Again, there is something offended individuals can do.  Sorry about the fact that I am posting this three times on different threads, but all the threads deal with the same problem of flaming and spamming going on in this newsgroup.  I wanted to be sure people know that abuse addresses exist for a reason, and should be used when they really need to be.  Clearly, this NG has been abused, thus, people should make official complaints about it.  Posting "please stop" will not stop these individuals.  Writing their ISP might, however. Actually, the complaint email address you mention is not private or secretive. If you look at the full headers for any of speed’s posts, you will find that the really want to lodge a complaint, you must forward copies of his offending threads WITH FULL HEADERS to the abuse email address you mentioned.  Only if you do this will Earthlink be able to find out exactly who he is and how to stop him — if they care, which it is possible they won’t.  Earthlink is a very large organization, and they will not likely disable his account with only one complaint.  It will require numerous emails to Earthlink from others like you who have been spammed and flamed by this individual.  Without the full headers, however, Earthlink will have no idea who he is.  You’ve made a good first step, however.  I am also sending this to another newsgroup to which he has offended as well. I think it is a real shame that individuals like "speed of darkness" have so much time on their hands to bring down the quality of the internet and the flow of free communication and speech.  And if they do have that much time, that they choose to spend it the way they do.  Unfortunately, there is little that we can do about it but complain. Truthfully, the only way to really deal with it, other than lodging complaints to the organization he comes from, is to just ignore his posts.  He replies when you reply, and that’s how these unending threads of flaming and spamming get started.  True, he is to blame largely for this whole mess, but we dont’ have to play along with it. I encourage anyone who has been seriously bothered by his posts to send a Earthlink will take care of it, as it is in their hands. Andrew Stoeckley I for one am sick of the way this NG is being abused by idiotic small boys who want to use it for their imbecile games. The purpose of this group is to discuss 35 mm equipment. Unfortunately 35mm is about the size of some contributors’ brains. Let’s get back to camera talk please. The little boys can continue their backbiting elsewhere. Please don’t abuse net freedom by subjecting the rest of us to your infantile behaviour. Patty

Response:

Question:

This has been a very different Spring, pre-runoff season here in Colorado. My local river is fishing more like it normally does in late Summer than during a typical Spring. They are beginning to draw water for the farmers and runoff hasn’t started. Weather has been warm and the river is VERY low and warm for this time of year. Hatches have started but are limited in variety. BWO’s, heavy on cloudy days and sporadic on sunny ones. Midges pretty consistent. No caddis or stoneflies. Just like late summer. I really enjoy this type of fishing. All day on cloudy days and in the morning and late in the day on sunny ones, the fish move into the heads of the pools and feed. They are surface feeding as well as chasing nymphs, often leaving wakes while feeding in water less than a foot in depth. This is slow, meticulous fishing that suits my unasked for "maturity."  Stalking, crawling, and creeping into casting position without spooking the fish is the first requirement for success. This can frequently take up to ten minutes, resting the fish after each short crawl. Long tapered leaders that can turn over a long light tippet are a help as is a slow rod that will cast a long leader with little or no line beyond the tip. Slow careful approaches that get you close enough for a short cast with very little line on the water are much more effective than longer casts that can line cruising fish. In situations that require longer casts, I really like the new, for me, Cortland Clear Creek line with its long front taper.     Many of these fish are cruising the slack shallow water picking off whatever they find instead of setting up feeding stations like the fish feeding in areas with current. These are the toughest ones. It’s hard to predict where they will feed next and the lack of current give them a long look at your fly. Any line slap near them, sends them scurrying off leaving a wake, often putting the other fish down. The fish feeding in the tongues of current are much easier. The current helps hide imperfect presentations and the fish don’t have the time to scrutinize your fly. The rule of fishing the fish closest to you really applies in this situation. Spooking a fish near you will often results in a ruckus that will put down the other fish or even send them all off to deeper water. Playing a hooked fish without spooking the rest takes some luck and some strategy. I find that steady sideways pressure leading the fish away from the others and toward deeper water immediately after the strike SOMETIMES works. If it doesn’t, you generally have two choices, rest the fish and hope they’ll return to feeding or look for a new pod of fish. I’ve caught some surprisingly large fish during these shallow water feeding sprees. Catching a 20+ inch fish in water this shallow is a kick! Willi

Response:

Question:

I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? No. You would not view the practice of C&R on starving fish a mean act ?   Really ?

What would anyone do with a ’starving’ fish –  bury it in their garden to fertilize the tomatoes? Feed it to the cat? Cat might not eat it! Ralph H

Response:

I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? No. You would not view the practice of C&R on starving fish a mean act ?   Really ? You would throw a starving dog a rubber bone ? You are a mean man Mr. Tatosian, IMO.

Tim, that was clearly a sarcastic remark in as short a form as I could provide, in response to this totally contrived troll of yours (which didn’t merit the response you would like to have received)… Yours is a tiresome routine – starting one thread after another all aimed at repeating your philosphy ad nauseum – and self-sanctified as being preferable to more civilized/less contentious topics of discussion… To what ends, I ask? Frankly I’m surprised you have any time left to actually fish – if you actually *do* fish… /dave

Response:

For all that we praise the "intelligence" of trout (mostly because sometimes we can’t catch them) they are really creatures of habit. Research studies (not fairy tales or anecdotes) have shown that trout may take several days to switch to a larger (hence more energy efficient), equally abundant, prey after several days of feeding on smaller prey.         Also, sorry to insult anyone, there has been some serious c**p thrown out in this thread. Atlantic salmon ascend long rivers, take no food and undergo physiological changes (requiring energy) related to spawning, spawn, spend an entire winter under the ice, and then head back to sea. In the process they lose from 1/3 to 1/2 their body weight. On the way out they feed, take flies well, often fight as hard as a bright fish, and recover quickly (studies show well over 90% survival, probably because of the cold oxygen-rich water). Based on this I seriously doubt that trout are harmed by being caught providing they are landed quickly and THE WATER TEMPERATURES ARE LOW. Paul Marriner

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For all that we praise the "intelligence" of trout (mostly because sometimes we can’t catch them) they are really creatures of habit. Research studies (not fairy tales or anecdotes) have shown that trout may take several days to switch to a larger (hence more energy efficient), equally abundant, prey after several days of feeding on smaller prey.         Also, sorry to insult anyone, there has been some serious c**p thrown out in this thread. Atlantic salmon ascend long rivers, take no food and undergo physiological changes (requiring energy) related to spawning, spawn, spend an entire winter under the ice, and then head back to sea. In the process they lose from 1/3 to 1/2 their body weight. On the way out they feed, take flies well, often fight as hard as a bright fish, and recover quickly (studies show well over 90% survival, probably because of the cold oxygen-rich water). Based on this I seriously doubt that trout are harmed by being caught providing they are landed quickly and THE WATER TEMPERATURES ARE LOW.

Paul, Would the same hold true in a non-anadromous population with a sparser food base ?  Please accept that the high altitude freestone creeks are not the big food suppliers as an oceanic watershed, almost barren in some cases.   I do so wish that you would not call the postings of myself and our friends ‘c**p’.   Also, you have compared this to one of the most strenuous acts of reproduction in nature.  A required one and one of major literary & philosophical meaning.  The desparate act of a fish NOT making it over the falls in some cases.  The desparate act of an old cock on its last trip upstream. The desparateness of losing 1/2 of their body weight in this struggle. Not really on the same plane as hooking and playing it for fun, is it ? Respectfully, TimW

Response:

Fish have to dash away from predators all the time; they have energy stores that help them deal with that. Trout, steelhead and salmon go through frequent and often lengthy periods when they feed little or not at all. You’d have us believe that a "sprint around the block" followed by a fast lasting a few hours will lead to death by starvation.

But… When you’re fishing a hatch, you play the fish buring one of those *brief* periods when food is abundant.  If the sprint around the block is always at diinertime, and the food is gone by the time you return, it can add up. I’m not saying, "don’t fish," I’m just saying that there are impacts involved in c&r, just like any style of fishing.   (Besides, during a heavy hatch, it can be a lot of fun to lean the rod against a tree and watch the fish work, without trying to catch them. Can improve your fishing, too.) CQ

Response:

A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it?  I mean, you’re more likely to find a selective fish in some rich, artificial tailwater than you are in a high-county lake or stream, aren’t you?  

Not when a hatch is on.  High country fish can be very selective then. It makes sense for a trout to become selective when mayflies are hatching because it’s a temporary abundance.   The nymphs, baitfish, et al, will still be there after the hatch is over. CQ

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For all that we praise the "intelligence" of trout (mostly because sometimes we can’t catch them) they are really creatures of habit. Research studies (not fairy tales or anecdotes) have shown that trout may take several days to switch to a larger (hence more energy efficient), equally abundant, prey after several days of feeding on smaller prey.         Also, sorry to insult anyone, there has been some serious c**p thrown out in this thread. Atlantic salmon ascend long rivers, take no food and undergo physiological changes (requiring energy) related to spawning, spawn, spend an entire winter under the ice, and then head back to sea. In the process they lose from 1/3 to 1/2 their body weight. On the way out they feed, take flies well, often fight as hard as a bright fish, and recover quickly (studies show well over 90% survival, probably because of the cold oxygen-rich water). Based on this I seriously doubt that trout are harmed by being caught providing they are landed quickly and THE WATER TEMPERATURES ARE LOW. Paul, Would the same hold true in a non-anadromous population with a sparser food base ?  Please accept that the high altitude freestone creeks are not the big food suppliers as an oceanic watershed, almost barren in some cases.   I do so wish that you would not call the postings of myself and our friends ‘c**p’.   Also, you have compared this to one of the most strenuous acts of reproduction in nature.  A required one and one of major literary & philosophical meaning.  The desparate act of a fish NOT making it over the falls in some cases.  The desparate act of an old cock on its last trip upstream. The desparateness of losing 1/2 of their body weight in this struggle. Not really on the same plane as hooking and playing it for fun, is it ? Respectfully, TimW

Sorry Tim I think this little bit of work from your imagination is a clunker. But then nobody bats 100. I posted my reponses previously so won’t repeat them. hope you don’t mind me asking but did you base this on any study or work that shows fish in those alpine streams you fish are so stressed by lack of food? BTW a fish with a big head and small body isn’t starving it’s just lean like a marathon runner or a cheetah. Starving fish have shrunken concave bellies. You wouldn’t want to eat one either. Ralph H

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For all that we praise the "intelligence" of trout (mostly because sometimes we can’t catch them) they are really creatures of habit. Research studies (not fairy tales or anecdotes) have shown that trout may take several days to switch to a larger (hence more energy efficient), equally abundant, prey after several days of feeding on smaller prey.         Also, sorry to insult anyone, there has been some serious c**p thrown out in this thread. Atlantic salmon ascend long rivers, take no food and undergo physiological changes (requiring energy) related to spawning, spawn, spend an entire winter under the ice, and then head back to sea. In the process they lose from 1/3 to 1/2 their body weight. On the way out they feed, take flies well, often fight as hard as a bright fish, and recover quickly (studies show well over 90% survival, probably because of the cold oxygen-rich water). Based on this I seriously doubt that trout are harmed by being caught providing they are landed quickly and THE WATER TEMPERATURES ARE LOW. Paul, Would the same hold true in a non-anadromous population with a sparser food base ?  Please accept that the high altitude freestone creeks are not the big food suppliers as an oceanic watershed, almost barren in some cases.   I do so wish that you would not call the postings of myself and our friends ‘c**p’.   Also, you have compared this to one of the most strenuous acts of reproduction in nature.  A required one and one of major literary & philosophical meaning.  The desparate act of a fish NOT making it over the falls in some cases.  The desparate act of an old cock on its last trip upstream. The desparateness of losing 1/2 of their body weight in this struggle. Not really on the same plane as hooking and playing it for fun, is it ? Respectfully, TimW

Sorry time but IMO this work from your imagination is a clunker. I’ve posted my responses elsewhere and won’t repeat them. However let me ask did you base this post on any kind of study on the alpine streams in your area that indicated the fish were so stressed by lack of food? BTW a fish with a big head and small body isn’t starving; it’s just lean like a marathon runner or a cheetah. Starving fish have concave shrunken bellies. You wouldn’t want to eat one either. Ralph H

Response:

: That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of : being a fish.   : A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it?   I have to agree here; the arguments being made of the average fish fight being so life-threatening is kindof ridiculous. This "1/2 energy/wieght/whatever lost" being mispresented. As (I think) another poster said, think of it as a sprint. Even if you are out of shape, a sprint won’t kill you — in fact, 10 minutes later you won’t even feel the effects. Same for the trout. You use up your short-term energy — sugar in the cells — but this doesn’t effect your fat reserves or anything to any large degree. Now, a prolonged fight, and environmental stresses (such as warm water) are worse, but I don’t think from an energy loss standpoint its much worse — the problems come from the fish needing more time to recuperate and can’t orient itself during this time (unlike us, who would just lay down on the ground and *breathe*; a fish can’t do that). We’ve all had hard releases — I held a fish for 20 minutes one time (actually stopped him from swimming away a couple of times), and eventually he looked just fine, swam away and took a position behind a rock — was still there later in the day. I don’t think the energy loss hurt him one bit. I’ll second that a big-head/little-bodied fish mean there’s too many fish for the food base, and you should keep it anyways. JonCook.

Response:

A guy who works in a fly shop just told me this evening about a guy who said he played a steelhead for 3 and a half hours.  I asked him how big it was and he told me the guy claimed 8 pounds.  Slightly less than a

Good Grief!  What kind of rod could he have been using.  I have landed steelhead this size on a 4 wt. rod in less than 20 minutes.  Three and a half hours is torture! -Burton

Response:

While you guys are debating C&R vs.C&K and skinny fish, and how much time landing a fish is too much time…THEY ARE BUILDING A GOLD MINE ON THE BLACFOOT RIVER IN MONTANA….and it has the potential to render all your arguments moot… I have taken the liberty of changing the thread title for you, if you want a serious discussion of the mine possibility and its detriment. This is a different thread… TimW

 Nah…I just wanted to remind you that there are bigger fish to fry.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of : being a fish. : A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it? I have to agree here; the arguments being made of the average fish fight being so life-threatening is kindof ridiculous. This "1/2 energy/wieght/whatever lost" being mispresented. As (I think) another poster said, think of it as a sprint. Even if you are out of shape, a sprint won’t kill you — in fact, 10 minutes later you won’t even feel the effects. Same for the trout. You use up your short-term energy — sugar in the cells — but this doesn’t effect your fat reserves or anything to any large degree. Now, a prolonged fight, and environmental stresses (such as warm water) are worse, but I don’t think from an energy loss standpoint its much worse — the problems come from the fish needing more time to recuperate and can’t orient itself during this time (unlike us, who would just lay down on the ground and *breathe*; a fish can’t do that). We’ve all had hard releases — I held a fish for 20 minutes one time (actually stopped him from swimming away a couple of times), and eventually he looked just fine, swam away and took a position behind a rock — was still there later in the day. I don’t think the energy loss hurt him one bit. I’ll second that a big-head/little-bodied fish mean there’s too many fish for the food base, and you should keep it anyways.

Ok then.  What I am hearing… Our [flyfishermen's] definition of the ethics of catch and release… "We may cause indiscriminate harm to a wild animal, so long as the animal does not normally  die as a result, in our search for happiness.  Our metric will only include mortality and  will not include incidental suffering or non-fatal injury" Or, something like that… I laugh at our free usage of the term ‘respect’ for a wild animal.  It is really, really laughable (if it weren’t so sad).   Wham !!! Set the Hook !!!! Wham, Lay the rod into it !! she’s runnin’ for the rapids…then this thoughtful ‘respectful’ release…sometimes with an accompanying little kiss on the lips.  Respect ?  I don’t think so.  Cause for self-congratulation, perhaps. TimW

Response:

While you guys are debating C&R vs.C&K and skinny fish, and how much time landing a fish is too much time…THEY ARE BUILDING A GOLD MINE ON THE BLACFOOT RIVER IN MONTANA….and it has the potential to render all your arguments moot…

Finally the real meat of the issues. Isn’t it time we humans get a little more ,NO! a lot more involve with the issues of rectifying and push for the preservation of our current watersheds. When their all gone who will be there to make new ones? The issues may vary from state to state, but they are the sum of all the parts. Trout are a good indicator for water quality and the quality of life to which we an ultimately attached. Seems to me that a new thread needs to be started here. Our fingers are dancing on the very tools that could start a very positive movement. What do you say guys? How about it, Tim, George, and Al? On another sad note, my ISP really sucks and I only receive less than half of the news posting and feel like a mushroom on lost thread portions. If anybody felt like CC me on your postings I would sure appreciate it. — Doug Knight                           metalfab<atefaxinc.com Junk e-mail, solicitation, sales, products and services gladly accepted at $50.00 per mailing and billed directly to your ISP.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? No. You would not view the practice of C&R on starving fish a mean act ? Really ? You would throw a starving dog a rubber bone ? You are a mean man Mr. Tatosian, IMO. Tim, that was clearly a sarcastic remark in as short a form as I could provide, in response to this totally contrived troll of yours (which didn’t merit the response you would like to have received)… Yours is a tiresome routine – starting one thread after another all aimed at repeating your philosphy ad nauseum – and self-sanctified as being preferable to more civilized/less contentious topics of discussion… To what ends, I ask?

I’ll be happy when the popularity of the sport subsides by say, 80%.  I’ll be patting myself on the back all the way down to the deep run behind Pat’s rock, which will be devoid of people and clogged with fish. TimW

Response:

While you guys are debating C&R vs.C&K and skinny fish, and how much time landing a fish is too much time…THEY ARE BUILDING A GOLD MINE ON THE BLACFOOT RIVER IN MONTANA….and it has the potential to render all your arguments moot… I have taken the liberty of changing the thread title for you, if you want a serious discussion of the mine possibility and its detriment. This is a different thread… TimW

OK Tim, You were reading my mind. What are we playing with here, threads, fish, or environmental action? Isn’t it time we all get involved. Where do I sign up? It’s time to give something back. Please make note to CC, my ISP really sucks. — Doug Knight                           metalfab<atefaxinc.com Junk e-mail, solicitation, sales, products and services gladly accepted at $50.00 per mailing and billed directly to your ISP.

Response:

Tim pardon me but this is vapour ware to the nth degree. You’re expounding proifically on a hypothetical situation about which nothing is known. Fish have to dash away from predators all the time; they have energy stores that help them deal with that. Trout, steelhead and salmon go through frequent and often lengthy periods when they feed little or not at all. You’d have us believe that a "sprint around the block" followed by a fast lasting a few hours will lead to death by starvation. If you’re going to fabricate something please at least make it credible and believable. from Your Biggest fan Ralph H – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -The pinnacle of our sport is catching a wild trout feeding selectively on dries. That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of being a fish.  It is important that the energy expended to consume an insect must not exceed the energy gained by this insects consumption. It is tough row to hoe for a fish eating this minutae.  What percentage of fish even make it to this stage ? Along comes, O.M.I. Gudd the world famous dry fly man with his 2 wt and and exact imitation.  Bingo.  Fish On.  The fight lasts 10 minutes, and the fish is going…"damned, now I gotta eat an additional 1000 midges just to get back to my fighting weight !"…well we don’t really know WHAT Mr. Brown thinks, but it would be true that he is now in an energy deficit situation…this could kill him…have you ever caught a starving fish ? Big head, tiny emaciated snake like body ? Now you tell me…how many days will it take for that fish to get to where it was before you hooked, played and released it ?  Considering that it was possibly very nearly starving when you laid that Adams out. Maybe in the unnatural tailwaters where food is abundant this is less of a problem then a freestone creek at 12,000 ft., but I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? TimW

Response:

The pinnacle of our sport is catching a wild trout feeding selectively on dries. That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of being a fish.  

A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it?  I mean, you’re more likely to find a selective fish in some rich, artificial tailwater than you are in a high-county lake or stream, aren’t you?   Along comes, O.M.I. Gudd the world famous dry fly man with his 2 wt and and exact imitation.  Bingo.  Fish On.  The fight lasts 10 minutes, and the fish is going…"damned, now I gotta eat an additional 1000 midges just to get back to my fighting weight !"…well we don’t really know WHAT Mr. Brown thinks, but it would be true that he is now in an energy deficit situation…this could kill him…have you ever caught a starving fish ? Big head, tiny emaciated snake like body ?

(I remember reading that a trout uses something like half of its stored energy in 15 seconds when it’s at full throttle.) Now you tell me…how many days will it take for that fish to get to where it was before you hooked, played and released it ?  Considering that it was possibly very nearly starving when you laid that Adams out. Maybe in the unnatural tailwaters where food is abundant this is less of a problem then a freestone creek at 12,000 ft., but I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ?

It seems like the folks fishing the rich tailwaters are more likely to be using too light of a rod for the fish that live there, so the benefit of plentiful food could be offset by the fish being played way longer than it should have been.  It may die anyway. The starving fish in the sterile alpine creek can’t be underpowered, but there is hardly any food for it to eat once it’s released. What?   If it was an overcrowded stream, you’re right.  If there are so many fish in the creek that the one you just caught is starving, kill and eat it.   That population sounds like it needs to be thinned, in my no-expert opinion.  A lot of the higher streams I’ve fished have what seem to be normal numbers of fish – they are healthy, active, and not swarming all over each other.  I’d imagine that at least some of them have native fish, and they *are* all wild fish.  There seems to be plenty of food. The only fish I’ll take out of a small, highish creek around here are brook trout or the rare brown; no cutts or rainbows.  I don’t feel bad about that, because these fish aren’t monsters and they are generally not starving.  The fight is quick and one-sided, and they are undoubtedly more stunned than exhausted when it’s over.  Of any trout, these are the ones I like to lay eyes on the most.  C&K seems like a bad idea to have catch on when it comes to these streams.   If you fish a heavier rod while practicing C&R, you release a healthier fish but probably shouldn’t call it ’sport.’  If you fish a really light, sporting rod; play the trout for ten minutes; kill, keep, and eat it, you have a fish that tastes bad. I don’t call what I do with those little cutts and redsides ’sport,’ and the brook trout I keep are delicious. The part of C&R that bugs me is hearing of 15# steelhead caught on four-weight rigs, people fishing for huge trout with two-weights, etc.   Small, alpine trout are probably bothered by C&R the least, and they are the ones that need it the most.  In my opinion. Dave DeLacey Corvallis, Or. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – TimW

Response:

I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ?

No.

Response:

The hypothesis goes (it isn’t even ‘theory’) that the fish becomes selective to cope with abundance. It makes it more efficient to focus om midges in Tim’s example so it doesn’t get distracted by say a sculpin on the bottom. I don’t get it.  Why would it be better for a trout to concentrate on midges and ignore a juicy sculpin, as long as it was big enough to eat one?

because the midges are abundant thr fish gains more calories than it expends by feeding exclusively on midges and ignoring the sculpin. It’s a hypothesis used to explain selectivity Also, why would the fish have to concentrate if there was a lot of food in the water?  Isn’t that where the phrase ‘easy pickins’ comes from?  You don’t mean that trout are easily confused, do you?!?

It’s not my idea. No I don’t mean they are confused. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (I remember reading that a trout uses something like half of its stored energy in 15 seconds when it’s at full throttle.) what exactly is it’s stored energy? The energy you store in your body is fat. Do you mean to say a trout burns up half it’s stored fat  swimming at full throttle for 15 seconds? Sounds proposterous. It is proposterous if you watch salmon moving up stream or jumping a falls Consider many stocks migrate hundreds of miles without feeding for months I think this whole line of reasoning falls on it’s keester. But a tip of the hat to Tim for trying. You’re right, that didn’t make any sense.  It’s the stored glycogen in the muscle that they use up so fast.  The book I just checked that in claims that the white muscle used for burst speed may take up to 18 hours to get rid of the lactic acid that results from the gas-guzzling, while the muscles used for regular, sustained swimming do it in an hour or less.   So you probably can’t compare swimming vs. fighting fish and then say that there isn’t any truth to what Tim Walker was saying. Also, salmon are making a one-way trip.  They don’t have to budget their energy, really.  I wouln’t be supprised at all to hear that salmon use more energy trying to get over a single tough falls than a typical trout does in a month of dodging predators, but the salmon probably dies sooner for doing it.

Salmon don’t always make a one way trip. Atlantics and steelhead usually return to the sea. Also salmon don’t stare to death they are genetically programed to die after spawning. Some stocks that are as sea fat as other go only a few yrds above tide water. Pacific salmon die of multiple organ failure that can’t simply be explain by starvation. Also genetically they can make the switch from salt to fresh water only once. The die off could be an adaption to transfer rich ocean nutrients to their native streams and enhance their offsprings chances for survival. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – if it were nearly starving and being caught put it at death’s door the whole stock in the stream simply wouldn’t last long. The first good drought or flood or an unusually hard winter would wipe them out. That’s true.  It’s strange that some of the more obviously-overcrowded lakes that I’ve seen are also shallow.  If any lake was going to winter-kill, it seems like they’d be the ones. Dave DeLacey Corvallis, Or. Ralph H

Ralph H – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? No.

You would not view the practice of C&R on starving fish a mean act ?  Really ? You would throw a starving dog a rubber bone ? You are a mean man Mr. Tatosian, IMO. TimW

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of : being a fish. : A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it? I have to agree here; the arguments being made of the average fish fight being so life-threatening is kindof ridiculous. This "1/2 energy/wieght/whatever lost" being mispresented. As (I think) another poster said, think of it as a sprint. Even if you are out of shape, a sprint won’t kill you — in fact, 10 minutes later you won’t even feel the effects. Same for the trout. You use up your short-term energy — sugar in the cells — but this doesn’t effect your fat reserves or anything to any large degree. Now, a prolonged fight, and environmental stresses (such as warm water) are worse, but I don’t think from an energy loss standpoint its much worse — the problems come from the fish needing more time to recuperate and can’t orient itself during this time (unlike us, who would just lay down on the ground and *breathe*; a fish can’t do that). We’ve all had hard releases — I held a fish for 20 minutes one time (actually stopped him from swimming away a couple of times), and eventually he looked just fine, swam away and took a position behind a rock — was still there later in the day. I don’t think the energy loss hurt him one bit. I’ll second that a big-head/little-bodied fish mean there’s too many fish for the food base, and you should keep it anyways. JonCook.

While you guys are debating C&R vs.C&K and skinny fish, and how much time landing a fish is too much time…THEY ARE BUILDING A GOLD MINE ON THE BLACFOOT RIVER IN MONTANA….and it has the potential to render all your arguments moot…

Response:

The hypothesis goes (it isn’t even ‘theory’) that the fish becomes selective to cope with abundance. It makes it more efficient to focus om midges in Tim’s example so it doesn’t get distracted by say a sculpin on the bottom.

I don’t get it.  Why would it be better for a trout to concentrate on midges and ignore a juicy sculpin, as long as it was big enough to eat one?  Also, why would the fish have to concentrate if there was a lot of food in the water?  Isn’t that where the phrase ‘easy pickins’ comes from?  You don’t mean that trout are easily confused, do you?!? (I remember reading that a trout uses something like half of its stored energy in 15 seconds when it’s at full throttle.) what exactly is it’s stored energy? The energy you store in your body is fat. Do you mean to say a trout burns up half it’s stored fat  swimming at full throttle for 15 seconds? Sounds proposterous. It is proposterous if you watch salmon moving up stream or jumping a falls Consider many stocks migrate hundreds of miles without feeding for months I think this whole line of reasoning falls on it’s keester. But a tip of the hat to Tim for trying.

You’re right, that didn’t make any sense.  It’s the stored glycogen in the muscle that they use up so fast.  The book I just checked that in claims that the white muscle used for burst speed may take up to 18 hours to get rid of the lactic acid that results from the gas-guzzling, while the muscles used for regular, sustained swimming do it in an hour or less.   So you probably can’t compare swimming vs. fighting fish and then say that there isn’t any truth to what Tim Walker was saying. Also, salmon are making a one-way trip.  They don’t have to budget their energy, really.  I wouln’t be supprised at all to hear that salmon use more energy trying to get over a single tough falls than a typical trout does in a month of dodging predators, but the salmon probably dies sooner for doing it. if it were nearly starving and being caught put it at death’s door the whole stock in the stream simply wouldn’t last long. The first good drought or flood or an unusually hard winter would wipe them out.

That’s true.  It’s strange that some of the more obviously-overcrowded lakes that I’ve seen are also shallow.  If any lake was going to winter-kill, it seems like they’d be the ones. Dave DeLacey Corvallis, Or. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ralph H

Response:

Now you tell me…how many days will it take for that fish to get to where it was before you hooked, played and released it ?  

A guy who works in a fly shop just told me this evening about a guy who said he played a steelhead for 3 and a half hours.  I asked him how big it was and he told me the guy claimed 8 pounds.  Slightly less than a half hour a pound… Phil

Response:

A fish feeding selectively is a fish wallowing in luxury, isn’t it?  

The hypothesis goes (it isn’t even ‘theory’) that the fish becomes selective to cope with abundance. It makes it more efficient to focus om midges in Tim’s example so it doesn’t get distracted by say a sculpin on the bottom. You’re right a starving fish is unlikley to be selective. (I remember reading that a trout uses something like half of its stored energy in 15 seconds when it’s at full throttle.)

what exactly is it’s stored energy? The energy you store in your body is fat. Do you mean to say a trout burns up half it’s stored fat  swimming at full throttle for 15 seconds? Sounds proposterous. It is proposterous if you watch salmon moving up stream or jumping a falls Consider many stocks migrate hundreds of miles without feeding for months I think this whole line of reasoning falls on it’s keester. But a tip of the hat to Tim for trying. very nearly starving when you laid that Adams out.

if it were nearly starving and being caught put it at death’s door the whole stock in the stream simply wouldn’t last long. The first good drought or flood or an unusually hard winter would wipe them out. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -It seems like the folks fishing the rich tailwaters are more likely to be using too light of a rod for the fish that live there, so the benefit of plentiful food could be offset by the fish being played way longer than it should have been.  It may die anyway. The starving fish in the sterile alpine creek can’t be underpowered, but there is hardly any food for it to eat once it’s released. What?   [snip] The part of C&R that bugs me is hearing of 15# steelhead caught on four-weight rigs, people fishing for huge trout with two-weights, etc.

This bugs me too and I think many have pushed the light tackle envelope too far, way too far. Small, alpine trout are probably bothered by C&R the least, and they are the ones that need it the most.  In my opinion. Dave DeLacey Corvallis, Or.

Ralph H

Response:

The pinnacle of our sport is catching a wild trout feeding selectively on dries. That the fish is feeding selectively speaks to the difficulties of being a fish.  It is important that the energy expended to consume an insect must not exceed the energy gained by this insects consumption. It is tough row to hoe for a fish eating this minutae.  What percentage of fish even make it to this stage ? Along comes, O.M.I. Gudd the world famous dry fly man with his 2 wt and and exact imitation.  Bingo.  Fish On.  The fight lasts 10 minutes, and the fish is going…"damned, now I gotta eat an additional 1000 midges just to get back to my fighting weight !"…well we don’t really know WHAT Mr. Brown thinks, but it would be true that he is now in an energy deficit situation…this could kill him…have you ever caught a starving fish ? Big head, tiny emaciated snake like body ? Now you tell me…how many days will it take for that fish to get to where it was before you hooked, played and released it ?  Considering that it was possibly very nearly starving when you laid that Adams out. Maybe in the unnatural tailwaters where food is abundant this is less of a problem then a freestone creek at 12,000 ft., but I would view pure C&R as a really mean act in this situation, wouldn’t you ? TimW

Response:

Question:

: Maybe Sandy should parcel off the 2/3rds to the readers of ROFF.  The : only thing we’d have to figure out is what section Tim is going to get : and where we’ll build the whore house. I also want to know where Wayne will park his truck to begin the bean-fest. — 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:

: Maybe Sandy should parcel off the 2/3rds to the readers of ROFF.  The : only thing we’d have to figure out is what section Tim is going to get : and where we’ll build the whore house. I also want to know where Wayne will park his truck to begin the bean-fest.

Upwind of the beavers…that’ll drive ‘em out. — John Fereira Isis Distributed Systems – Ithaca, NY

Response:

Hi Sandy-    Lets say some Californian just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in SW Montana. . . and immediately wanted to sub divide it, build a sprawling ranchette and get rid of the vermin. You need to kill the beavers quick because they’re flooding the road and you just washed your Orvis endorsed vehicle and don’t really want to drive on a wet road. And, hear this, it gets even worse: they’re eating willows. Can’t they eat dog food or bird seed or something?    To answer your question: grenades work well. Pull the pin, count to sixty real slow then throw it at one of those damn beavers.    -Ralph – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.   But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you).  But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? —

Ralph and Lisa Cutter. California School of Flyfishing http:www/flyline.com

Response:

: Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale : in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, : You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on : the third. I think with three houses, and probably fences, it’s no longer going to be the prettiest 100 acres in SW MT, beavers or no. That said, I’m kinda ambivalent about the beaver thing; I can see why one sides complains about our manipulation of nature, and I can see why someone would want to get rid of the ones on their property. So,… I would think letting a trapper come in would be the best, or is the fur market non-existant these days?  A beaver pelt used to be fairly valuable, I hope in this hypothetical example those three pelts weren’t tossed… Jon Cook.

Response:

writes: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.  But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you). But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? —

Sandy, I’d sure like to teach the beavers how to get rid of you! But, maybe the greedy real estate agent that handled the sale would be a better target. Pat

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.  But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you). But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? — Sandy, I’d sure like to teach the beavers how to get rid of you! But, maybe the greedy real estate agent that handled the sale would be a better target. Pat

Obviously Sandy hasn’t had to deal with the little "construction freaks".  Contact your local Fish and Game and they will put you in touch with a local or state trapper to remedy your problems.   It takes time and should be done in the Winter months as to not waste the hides.  They can be a real problem if you let them get a good hold on your drainage.  Good luck   Ace in Alaska

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.  But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you). But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? — Sandy, I’d sure like to teach the beavers how to get rid of you! But, maybe the greedy real estate agent that handled the sale would be a better target. Pat Obviously Sandy hasn’t had to deal with the little "construction freaks".  Contact your local Fish and Game and they will put you in touch with a local or state trapper to remedy your problems. It takes time and should be done in the Winter months as to not waste the hides.  They can be a real problem if you let them get a good hold on your drainage.  Good luck   Ace in Alaska

christ.  (Stick some dynamite up your ass and then light the fuse.  It will solve your beaver problem to my satisfaction) George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman

Response:

Quoting: christ.  (Stick some dynamite up your ass and then light the fuse. It will solve your beaver problem to my satisfaction) George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman Any other readers see a paradox here? — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

        to tell you the truth, i’ve never seen a beaver i wouldn’t love to eat.         a. wayne harrison

Response:

: My advice ?   : One small cabin on the whole 100 acres on the dryest most protected spot. : Your wealth would exceed that possible by sub-dividing and developing. Maybe, but the question is whether he could afford the mortgage payments on that wealth.  Even the locals get caught up in this stuff… I see it all over.  Pretty soon, the latecomers will start complaining about all the growth… — 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:

Who knows, maybe the deer will visit you in your dreams.

in the mountain village,    the wind rustles the leaves. deep in the night, the deer    cry out beyond the end of dreams.            – minimoto no morotada

Response:

Maybe Sandy should parcel off the 2/3rds to the readers of ROFF.  The only thing we’d have to figure out is what section Tim is going to get and where we’ll build the whore house.

I heard that a famous tributary of the Snake got its name when some trappers were sitting around and one said "someone go into town and bring a Hoback". TimW

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.  But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you). But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? — Sandy, I’d sure like to teach the beavers how to get rid of you! But, maybe the greedy real estate agent that handled the sale would be a better target. Pat

Good old leg holds and conibear traps have always worked well for me. Don Kelly

Response:

Yeah, the beavers are in their natural environment.  The Californian is not!

This thread has been a lesson in mass-hysteria.  I don’t know whether Sandy has ever been to California, but he’s lived in Montana as long as I’ve known him. Sandy: do what you must with the beavers, but PLEASE don’t subdivide! If you Montanans continue to chop up Montana into little make-believe tourist ranches, as we have done to Colorado, where will I go on vacation? — -Wayne Trzyna

Response:

Dear Ralph; Oh, Lord, man; you are great, just great!  I love it: you should be a writer or something.  

Yea, maybe he could write a guide about fishing the Sierra Nevada for trout. — John Fereira Isis Distributed Systems – Ithaca, NY

Response:

Yeah, the beavers are in their natural environment.  The Californian is not! This thread has been a lesson in mass-hysteria.  I don’t know whether Sandy has ever been to California, but he’s lived in Montana as long as I’ve known him.

I don’t know if Sandy has been to California either but I know that Ralph lives there and I lived in California all my life.  The environment that Ralph lived is nothing like the area that I lived.  So, I’m wondering, exactly what is a Californian’s natural environment, or does Jason just have some stereotypical view of what California is like. Sandy: do what you must with the beavers, but PLEASE don’t subdivide! If you Montanans continue to chop up Montana into little make-believe tourist ranches, as we have done to Colorado, where will I go on vacation?

Maybe Sandy should parcel off the 2/3rds to the readers of ROFF.  The only thing we’d have to figure out is what section Tim is going to get and where we’ll build the whore house. — John Fereira Isis Distributed Systems – Ithaca, NY

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.   But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you).  But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What?

As long as the habitat is right, they will come back even if you kill them all right now.  Consider the South Platte corridor right through Denver. They can’t keep a young tree alive in this park-like setting for the beavers. My advice ?   One small cabin on the whole 100 acres on the dryest most protected spot. Your wealth would exceed that possible by sub-dividing and developing. Who knows, maybe the deer will visit you in your dreams. TimW

Response:

This is a hot topic around here (NC) as well. Beaver populations are way up in suburbia – all their predators are gone and the beavers are protected in many areas. Many neighborhood lakes have trouble ranging from tree loss to damage to dams. I have lost a couple of trees on a lot I own to beavers. Sometimes they are trapped live and relocated, but there are fewer and fewer places to put them. I put chicken wire around the base of all the remaining trees. Nice simple solution for me – I only have a small lot to protect, and they can move on and bother someone else. But I can certainly understand how options might be limited in other cases. I am glad I don’t have to think about doing it, but I think there may be cases where it may be necessary. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So, if you want some kind of vote on who’s approach to an idiots QUESTION regarding beavers and beaver ponds is more acceptable . . . let my fellow fly fishermen post a few replies regarding "KILLING BEAVERS", is the preferred approach, okay ace?

Response:

So, if you want some kind of vote on who’s approach to an idiots QUESTION regarding beavers and beaver ponds is more acceptable . . . let my fellow fly fishermen post a few replies regarding "KILLING BEAVERS", is the preferred approach, okay ace?

I can tell this must be some sort of religious thing for you George since you seem to evoke the christian deity frequently on this topic. However, if you want a vote I would say "It all depends" (no, I’m not running for office). For example, our family has had hunting-fishing property here since the 30’s or 40’s (that’s the last 50-60 years). There have never been beaver in that area. The last 4 years or so beaver have moved in and have devastated many areas for fishing. This situation would very likely reach a new equilibrium in about 20-30 years as the stream beds moved, swamps formed etc. However, since beaver are new there, we are not willing to sacrifice a generation of fishing to reach that point- sorry but that’s too bad. However, if the original poster bought land that had been long colonized by beaver and the ecosystem and trout reproduction were in equilibrium with the beaver, then I would say 1) don’t bother them and 2) they are probably so locally widespread that you will never make much headway since they will continually recolonize the area and 3) they probably don’t negatively impact the fishing under those conditions and may actually help and 4) don’t develop (subdivide) the land. Signing off without a deprecating remark. Jon

Response:

Quoting: christ.  (Stick some dynamite up your ass and then light the fuse. It will solve your beaver problem to my satisfaction) George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman Any other readers see a paradox here? — Yeah, the beavers are in their natural environment.  The Californian is not!

JB

Response:

Quoting: christ.  (Stick some dynamite up your ass and then light the fuse. It will solve your beaver problem to my satisfaction) George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman Any other readers see a paradox here? — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Yah, the fact I missed mentioning you if you’re for killing beavers as a solution to every human who thinks they have a problem with beavers. They were here long before we arrived.  Seems "Man" cannot keep his hand off a spot on this earth for even a little bird to stand upon.  So, what is your problem that you cannot stand up for the life of one beaver?  Or two, or a family of them which make beautiful Brook Trout Ponds and rich soiled valley’s that produce in time . . . lush, green elk pastures or habitat for moose, etc? Instead of being a smart-ass and talking about fly tying and flies that are used on Beaver Ponds . . . your kind only can think of how to miss-manage our wildlife.  Right? right. So, if you want some kind of vote on who’s approach to an idiots QUESTION regarding beavers and beaver ponds is more acceptable . . . let my fellow fly fishermen post a few replies regarding "KILLING BEAVERS", is the preferred approach, okay ace? christ.. George Gehrke / Mr. Gink

Response:

Quoting: christ.  (Stick some dynamite up your ass and then light the fuse. It will solve your beaver problem to my satisfaction) George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman

Any other readers see a paradox here? — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Response:

Dear Ralph; Oh, Lord, man; you are great, just great!  I love it: you should be a writer or something.  You just took his post, stood on the complete opposite side of it, telling us like it is.  Just beautiful, man!  Those urbanites: now, with the age of delocation upon us, no wilderness is safe from their spoiling touch.  Keep up the good fight! Sincerely Jason Beary

Response:

  But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you).  But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand

1.  Normal beaver life style includes excluding the young from the family i.e. forcing them to emigrate, when they get to be two years old.  So sooner or later the parent couple will die off and the site will become vacant. 2.  You can accelerate this by the combination of opportunistic shooting and trapping, easiest in winter when ice restricts their movement. Exterminating a single family seems to do no appreciable damage to the continent-wide beaver gene pool these days. 3.  But you need to bear in mind #1, i.e. there’s another beaver family two or three miles away that will be kicking its young adults out of the nest — and when they find your site vacant they will occupy it!  The cycle of occupation/vacancy seems to be 7 or 8 years.     As someone else posted, local wildlife authorities may (or may not) have better advice about both short-term and long-term control.  Beaver can do a lot of damage where species like poplar are abundant, e.g. can fell whole stands of mature trees and just leave them there without salvaging the proceeds. — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Response:

Let’s say you just bought 100 of the prettiest acres ever put up for sale in South West Montana…complete with 3/4 of a mile of a deep, clear, undercut spring creek, large brown trout, deer, sand hill cranes, ducks, geese, eagles, osprey, snipe, pheasants, badgers and beavers. And it’s only nine miles from town. You wanna sell off two thirty acre pieces and build on the third.   But the damn beavers are flooding the road so bad you’re afraid to list your property. Worse, they’re mowing down dense, thick, old-growth willows like a drunk redneck with a chainsaw. So you start shooting beavers. (this is still all totally hypothetical, mind you).  But the damn beavers start to get smart (after killing five in the first three nights) and start waiting till way after dark to come out of their lodge. So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What? —

Response:

So what’s the best way to kill beavers? Chloroform in the lodge? Hand grenades? What?

How about live trapping and relocation? — K.G. (Kat) Cruickshank, ichthyophile. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. see my illustrations at http://www.mackerel.com/fish/home.html

Response:

Question:

Please don’t feed the this monster of a thread.  Mr. Wieser is just waiting to pounce.  Check out his page, wage legal war with him via. e-mail, but please, we beg of you, don’t get him started on r.b.p… – Bill Herring – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scott Weiser Wrote Irrelevant. If you float through private property without permission, you are trespassing.  There are only two navigable waters in Colorado, and the Cache La Poudre is not one of them. That is absolutely untrue.  That river gets "navigated" every year by hundreds if not thousands of people.  Stating that boaters are trespassing is like saying the folks who walk down the sidewalk in your front yard are trespassing–blatantly false.  Actually they probably cross the street in front of your house to avoid the possibility of armed conflict with a maniac.  

Response:

Many boaters have a bad habit of trashing the shoreline and than loudly proclaiming their rights to continue to navigate.

I must rise in protest! While it no doubt happens on rare occasion, I have NEVER seen a boater trash a shoreline ( I do not regard foot and butt prints as "trashing", and that’s about all we might leave behind)

Response:

Many boaters have a bad habit of trashing the shoreline

I don’t any who trash the shoreline, matter of fact most I know stay in their boats.  When I talked to a Ranger down on the Ark last year, he said boaters were pretty good, almost all the trash he picked up was fishing trash.  Since this issue came up, I’ve checked places like Sunshine in the Royal Gorge, the scouts and put-in at Gore, and other high traffic areas everytime I’m there, and there has never been anything in the way of trash. Matter of fact I challenge you or anyone to show me a place that is dominated by boaters, and is trashed out (at least in Colorado). –Chris

Response:

While land owners may own the land and riparian rights to the waters bottom, they do not in fact, own the water itself and I’m almost positive that any river can be "navigated" through private property.  It would certainly be nice to have the owners permission to avoid any misunderstandings and asking in advance could only help relations between the land owner and boaters.  Regardless of the legal issue here, I think I’d be inclined to opt for not trespassing if that’s what the land owner wished.  I can imagine if there was a pristine river running across my land I’d not want a bunch of canoes and kayaks traversing it every day. Many boaters have a bad habit of trashing the shoreline and than loudly proclaiming their rights to continue to navigate.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scott Weiser Wrote Irrelevant. If you float through private property without permission, you are trespassing.  There are only two navigable waters in Colorado, and the Cache La Poudre is not one of them. That is absolutely untrue.  That river gets "navigated" every year by hundreds if not thousands of people.  Stating that boaters are trespassing is like saying the folks who walk down the sidewalk in your front yard are trespassing–blatantly false.  Actually they probably cross the street in front of your house to avoid the possibility of armed conflict with a maniac.   tdq

Yesssss!  And SET the hook!  Now, let the little bugger run till he tires and reel him in… Sorry, you are quite wrong.  Floating through private property in Colorado without the permission of the landowner is a criminal trespass.  Just because people get away with it doesn’t make it legal. You might want to check out my website for a discussion of this issue. http://spot.Colorado.EDU/~weisers I guess it’s time for yet another round of this ongoing discussion.   Let the games begin! — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

. . . what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?

Well, we’re both very polite to each other while we trespass along stream banks. — Richard Culpeper "Hour after hour, day after day, far from sight of shore, We laughed and sang and slept under the hot sun on the northern ocean, Wanting never to return."         — Kimosippi ‘95 —

Response:

. . . what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette? Well, we’re both very polite to each other while we trespass along stream banks. — Richard Culpeper "Hour after hour, day after day, far from sight of shore, We laughed and sang and slept under the hot sun on the northern ocean, Wanting never to return."         — Kimosippi ‘95 —

Paddlers usually aren’t trespassing along stream banks!!!  They are merely in transit from the put-in to the take-out!! terry dq

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?   Hi everyone, This weekend I had some bad experiences with kayakers while fishing the Cache La Poudre River in Colorado.  The river was full of kayakers and whitewater rafters.  To my surprise, the whitewater rafters were usually pretty courteous when passing my way (going well away from where I was fishing and coasting by as quietly as possible), but the kayakers were another story – they’d cruise by close to me, splashing each other, talking loudly – one group of four kayakers even stopped in the section I was fishing to perform maneuvers!   I understand that the river is for everyone, and because of that I don’t cast when kayakers are around.  But I’d like to think they could show the same type of courtesy by moving through the area slowly and quietly.

Tom Visnius had a nice take on this issue as part of a story about a high-water descent of the Pigeon River Dries (NC).  The story was printed first in Messing About, the newsletter of the Western Carolina Paddlers.  Tom has since placed it in his homepage.  Read it at http:\www.cs.unca.edu/~johnsonk/club/pigeon.html. — Chris The relevant passage (by Tom Visnius): Phil and I were the only kayakers hanging out at the campground for a little while. As we waited, I asked a fly-fisherman about an etiquette issue that had been bothering me since my trip down Cataloochee Creek. On creeks in the Park, there’s not a lot of room for both hunter and boater, so it is crucial to communicate to each other how you would like to commingle. Does a boater give the fisher a wide berth, thereby floating directly over the trout that he has been sneaking up on? Or does a boater float right next to the fisher’s knees and risk an assault from a surprised sportsman? This result is not unlikely, so regardless of your right-of-way philosophy, it is worth noting that there are many fishermen who visit Smoky Mountain National Park, and boaters should attempt to communicate with them. Then proceed with caution. The fellow I talked to preferred the idea of boaters paddling close to him so as not to spook the trout.

Response:

I fished alot on the Arkansas and Animas river in Colorado.  The Animas is big enough that if your standing a few feet from one shore the rafter can go to the other side.  Most of the time I am nymphing fairly close to where I’m standing.  In the Arkansas case, its a little narrower and sometimes, if I notice them soon enough, I will step out of the water and let the kyaker or rafter float right over, or better yet to the shore side, of where I was standing. They are usually very willing to remove their feet and oars from the water as they pass by.  Most of them are quite willing to accomodate my directions if the water depth is OK. But you run into jerks in any endeavor. I wouldn’t let it ruin my day.   When it does happen I do get a little agitated and probably verbalize it but I try not to let it linger. Bill A.

Response:

People kayak the Big South occasionally, but they have keepers who take them back to the Home directly from the takeout so that they won’t be a danger to society.

I resemble…I mean resent that remark…. –Chris

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – . . . what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette? Well, we’re both very polite to each other while we trespass along stream banks. — Richard Culpeper "Hour after hour, day after day, far from sight of shore, We laughed and sang and slept under the hot sun on the northern ocean, Wanting never to return."         — Kimosippi ‘95 — Paddlers usually aren’t trespassing along stream banks!!!  They are merely in transit from the put-in to the take-out!! terry dq

Irrelevant. If you float through private property without permission, you are trespassing.  There are only two navigable waters in Colorado, and the Cache La Poudre is not one of them. — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

Scott, Do us all a big favor and go crawl back under the rock you’ve been hiding under (or was that bloated mass you were cowering under your mother?). Your recent absence from this newsgroup has been wonderful. If you really were stupid enough to cast toward and snag someone (and from your posts, it seems likely you are), you would be entirely deserving of the beating your pathetic corpse received.

So sorry, I’ll try to interject more often, it certainly spices things up doesn’t it. Like I said, civil is as civil does. I just cast, if you happen to be in the way, too damned bad, you had plenty of time to see where I was fishing and avoid it, or at least do the polite thing and pass quietly behind me so as not to put the fish down for a half hour by your antics. If you act like a jerk, you get treated like a jerk.   — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

. . . what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette? Well, we’re both very polite to each other while we trespass along stream banks.

Er, actually, you are probably trespassing when you are *in* the river, boaters and fisherpersons alike, unless you are on Forest Service land or other public land. — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

Scott Weiser Wrote Irrelevant. If you float through private property without permission, you are trespassing.  There are only two navigable waters in Colorado, and the Cache La Poudre is not one of them.

That is absolutely untrue.  That river gets "navigated" every year by hundreds if not thousands of people.  Stating that boaters are trespassing is like saying the folks who walk down the sidewalk in your front yard are trespassing–blatantly false.  Actually they probably cross the street in front of your house to avoid the possibility of armed conflict with a maniac.   tdq

Response:

I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?   Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly Organization: DirecPC   Lines: 23 NNTP-Posting-Host: host-37.customer.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC) Hi everyone, This weekend I had some bad experiences with kayakers while fishing the Cache La Poudre River in Colorado.  The river was full of kayakers and whitewater rafters.  To my surprise, the whitewater rafters were usually pretty courteous when passing my way (going well away from where I was fishing and coasting by as quietly as possible), but the kayakers were another story – they’d cruise by close to me, splashing each other, talking loudly – one group of four kayakers even stopped in the section I was fishing to perform maneuvers!   I understand that the river is for everyone, and because of that I don’t cast when kayakers are around.  But I’d like to think they could show the same type of courtesy by moving through the area slowly and quietly. I guess the easy solution to my problem is to find a section of the river that is kayaker/rafter free.  Does anyone know of any such section of the Poudre?  How about flyfishing only sections and/or catch and release sections? Any help/comments appreciated!  Thanks for reading this. Mike Stephens

Response:

I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment. Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?  

I, fortunately, have had better experiences than this, being both a fisherman and a paddler on a river at different times. I think most fishermen & paddlers can peacefully co-exist most of the time. The biggest thing paddlers have to remember is that fish like to hang out in eddies also. Fortunately though, most good paddling areas are too strong to fish effectively. Paddle On… -Tom McIntire

Response:

I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?  

(snip) It sucks. If I were fishing and someone pulled this on me, I’d tie on a #10 weighted Wooly Bugger on 15 lb. test tippet and thwack them smartly on the head.  With any luck, I’d even snag an expensive Goretex jacket and rip a great big hole in it, and maybe them. In fact, I did manage to puncture a polycheapo raft with a drunken lout in it on the Rogue River a couple of weeks ago who did exactly that. When I’m fishing, you’d better be polite, or stay out of range. — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?   (snip) It sucks. If I were fishing and someone pulled this on me, I’d tie on a #10 weighted Wooly Bugger on 15 lb. test tippet and thwack them smartly on the head.  With any luck, I’d even snag an expensive Goretex jacket and rip a great big hole in it, and maybe them. In fact, I did manage to puncture a polycheapo raft with a drunken lout in it on the Rogue River a couple of weeks ago who did exactly that. When I’m fishing, you’d better be polite, or stay out of range. Scott Weiser

I see the hugely entertaining Mr. Wieser has once again blessed our humble piece of bandwidth with his presence. The above sounds like a great idea.  Someone is rude or comes too close, so you try to put a hook in them.  A very civil solution.  Or you could just "shoot to wound".  That’ll teach ‘em! – Bill Herring "Can’t we just all get along?" – Rodney King

Response:

Can anyone tell me if they are happy with Nautiraid? I am thinking of a folding boat purchase but have not heard much about Nautiraid.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?   (snip) It sucks. If I were fishing and someone pulled this on me, I’d tie on a #10 weighted Wooly Bugger on 15 lb. test tippet and thwack them smartly on the head.  With any luck, I’d even snag an expensive Goretex jacket and rip a great big hole in it, and maybe them. In fact, I did manage to puncture a polycheapo raft with a drunken lout in it on the Rogue River a couple of weeks ago who did exactly that. When I’m fishing, you’d better be polite, or stay out of range. Scott Weiser I see the hugely entertaining Mr. Wieser has once again blessed our humble piece of bandwidth with his presence. The above sounds like a great idea.  Someone is rude or comes too close, so you try to put a hook in them.  A very civil solution.  Or you could just "shoot to wound".  That’ll teach ‘em!

Hey, *some* people are so dense they require operant conditioning and aversion therapy to get the message. Civil is as civil does. — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** The opinions expressed are my own.  If I were a lawyer, you’d be paying big bucks for this.  All complaints should be Copyright 1996 by Scott Weiser All rights of reproduction or distribution are retained by the author. PGP 2.62 public key fingerprint: A6 BD 79 21 A4 24 7B 10  F1 4C 2E BF D1 40 2A 0A

Response:

What is a #10 Wooly Bugger?  Sounds like what my brother’s girlfriend used to call his… Whoops!  Sorry, gotta get back to work… Ed

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly This weekend I had some bad experiences with kayakers while fishing the Cache La Poudre River in Colorado.  The river was full of kayakers and whitewater rafters.  To my surprise, the whitewater rafters were usually pretty courteous when passing my way (going well away from where I was fishing and coasting by as quietly as possible), but the kayakers were another story – they’d cruise by close to me, splashing each other, talking loudly – one group of four kayakers even stopped in the section I was fishing to perform maneuvers! My personal opinion is that you should discreetly suggest that they move on…try a subtle suggestion… "GET THE HELL OUTTA MY DRIFT YOU YUPPIE BASTARD OR I’LL CREASE YOUR NOODLE" (Stolen without permission from "Fear of Flyfishing"). TimW (Only kidding, violence is not a good suggestion…now, letting the air out of the tires of their shuttle vehicle, THAT can be VERY effective and satisfying).

My thoughts exactly!  I’ve  had similar problems lately on the small river I fish in southwestern Michigan.  It’s quite popular with tubers.   Right now, the window of opportunity for a flyfisherman is limited to approx. a half hour to an hour before dark.  I was out on Sunday and didn’t see a soul until just before dark.  Guess what?  I didn’t see any other fisherman but two separate groups of tubers floated by just as the fish were getting active.  While on the of the tubers was courteous enough to ask where I was fishing, his partner ignored me and floated right over a rising fish.  Then, the second group floated by a few minutes later and showed no consideration whatsoever.  There’s no way they could have finished their float trip by dark.  They have all damn day to float yet they choose to recreate at dusk showing no respect for anyone else.  It puts evil thoughts in your mind.  Of course, the obligatory floatilla of bobbing beer cans followed in close pursuit. BFisher

Response:

Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly This weekend I had some bad experiences with kayakers while fishing the Cache La Poudre River in Colorado.  The river was full of kayakers and whitewater rafters.  To my surprise, the whitewater rafters were usually pretty courteous when passing my way (going well away from where I was fishing and coasting by as quietly as possible), but the kayakers were another story – they’d cruise by close to me, splashing each other, talking loudly – one group of four kayakers even stopped in the section I was fishing to perform maneuvers!

My personal opinion is that you should discreetly suggest that they move on…try a subtle suggestion… "GET THE HELL OUTTA MY DRIFT YOU YUPPIE BASTARD OR I’LL CREASE YOUR NOODLE" (Stolen without permission from "Fear of Flyfishing"). TimW (Only kidding, violence is not a good suggestion…now, letting the air out of the tires of their shuttle vehicle, THAT can be VERY effective and satisfying).

Response:

(snip) If I were fishing and someone pulled this on me, I’d tie on a #10 weighted Wooly Bugger on 15 lb. test tippet and thwack them smartly on the head.  With any luck, I’d even snag an expensive Goretex jacket and rip a great big hole in it, and maybe them. In fact, I did manage to puncture a polycheapo raft with a drunken lout in it on the Rogue River a couple of weeks ago who did exactly that. When I’m fishing, you’d better be polite, or stay out of range.

Scott, Do us all a big favor and go crawl back under the rock you’ve been hiding under (or was that bloated mass you were cowering under your mother?). Your recent absence from this newsgroup has been wonderful. If you really were stupid enough to cast toward and snag someone (and from your posts, it seems likely you are), you would be entirely deserving of the beating your pathetic corpse received. Regards, Andy The opinions expressed above are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I read this on the fly-fishing site and pass it on for comment.  Obviously, the people who slammed his fishing spot were jerks but what’s concensus for fisher-paddler etiquette?   Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly This weekend I had some bad experiences with kayakers while fishing the Cache La Poudre River in Colorado.  The river was full of kayakers and whitewater rafters.  To my surprise, the whitewater rafters were usually pretty courteous when passing my way (going well away from where I was fishing and coasting by as quietly as possible), but the kayakers were another story – they’d cruise by close to me, splashing each other, talking loudly – one group of four kayakers even stopped in the section I was fishing to perform maneuvers!   I understand that the river is for everyone, and because of that I don’t cast when kayakers are around.  But I’d like to think they could show the same type of courtesy by moving through the area slowly and quietly. I guess the easy solution to my problem is to find a section of the river that is kayaker/rafter free.  Does anyone know of any such section of the Poudre?  How about flyfishing only sections and/or catch and release sections?

I kayak sections of the Poudre below the Narrows regularly.  The water has indeed come down enough so that fishermen (and women) are starting to appear on sections that boaters use.  Earlier in the season, these sections are not really fishable, and much of it still cannot be waded. Commercial rafters on the Poudre usually don’t conflict with fisherpeople because they don’t eddy out very often.  They sail on by _everything_, and to give their customers the most exciting ride, they tend to look for the fastest current and the biggest waves, which will take them away from fisherpeople.  This search for excitement, however, sometimes causes inexperienced guides to flip rafts on otherwise inoccuous sections of the river, and they have been known to literally run over kayakers.  We generally sit in the eddies as they go by because of this. Reasonable kayakers usually stay away from fisherpeople.  The river, after all, is to be shared, and most kayakers do their playing in territory which is not very good for fishing.  Several possiblities for conflict on the Poudre do arise, however: 1.  The Filter Plant run has good holding and wading water and is quite     fishable.  Novice kayakers still use it, though, and they may not     yet be properly "socialized." 2.  The well-known pop-up hole on the Bridges run has an eddy immediately     below it where kayakers wait their turn to attempt enders.  I have     heard that a couple of fishermen have decided that they need to fish     that particular eddy, and they will attempt to drive kayakers away.     Sometimes they will appear when kayakers are there and demand that     they leave.  I have not personally observed this behavior. 3.  I encountered a fisherman at the bottom of PineView Falls who was     casting into an eddy on the far side of the river.  The area is not     wadeable, although the eddy may have held some fish.  The river is     narrow at that point, so the cast was easy, but the presence of his     line all the way across the river created a problem for any kayak or     raft running PineView. Other possibilities for conflict exist anywhere there is an eddy.  By the way, when communicating with fisherpeople, kayakers should be aware that they may refer to an eddy as a "hole," a term which has a different meaning for us! As for good fishing, a couple of places come to mind.  As I mentioned, much of the Filter Plant run is pretty good, and has reduced kayak traffic when the water is low.  Keep #1 above in mind, however.  What traffic there is may be irritating because they don’t know any better. The section above the low bridge below Rustic is rumored to be excellent trout water, and the flatwater curves below the fish hatchery (the Indian Meadows area) are well-known for providing excellent fishing. Indian Meadows is wild trout water, with special restrictions on what you can keep.  No problem for catch-and-release. The Big South fork has some nice fishing water about half a mile from the highway.  People kayak the Big South occasionally, but they have keepers who take them back to the Home directly from the takeout so that they won’t be a danger to society.      John Cooley

Response:

Question:

I’m doing an informal survey on anglers favourite magazines and authors, (or TV hosts, etc..). Email me with yours! Thanks. Paradigm Management Group

Response:

American Angler is my favorite.  I gave up on the others, since they seemed to have become more travelogue, than anything else.  I don’t have a favorite TV show, but if I had to make a choice, I’d say "Fishing the West."

Response:

In my opinion they all seem to rehash much of the same old stuff and of course they survive on advertising.  It just that sometimes they seem to be almost in an alliance with their advertisers to the point that it seems that thats what its all about.  Their is one new magazine out of Livingston MT, "The Angler Journal" that seems to be a little less commercial.  They at least have stated the quality is their goal.

Response:

Do you get _Fly Rod & Reel_?  See, the reason I ask is that in the current issue one feature article is far from the same old thing…Flyfishing for largemouths in New York’s central park.  I doubt highly that this was an ad gig.         If you think that all the magazines rehash the same old stuff, try to think of something that’s truely original in this sport that warrants a feature article.  I for one will not sit still through six pages on the advent of a fly hackled about the hook bend, yet this seems to be the most original thing to come down the pike.  What’s left then are the destination pieces, but it’s been shown that exotic trips are a turn-off to readers.  So what’s left to hold the readers’ interest?  This recent article is an intelligent step forward.  If you have a good idea for a story, send it to the editors or better yet, write it.  They’re always looking for good stuff. Jamus

Response:

Question:

        I have a few questions regarding fly tying materials, and fly tying for profit.  First, I was wondering if anyone out there might have any suggestions about where I can find large mylar tubing (say, 3/8” diam.) for making saltwater zonkers.  I want to make these flies with a deeper body than my trout flies, but cannot find tubing that will fit the size body I want.         I also would be interested in any suggestions anyone has on selling flies directly to the fishermen, and how I would go about setting up my own fly tying business.  I am especially interested in (cheap) ways to advertize that will be successful.  I tied for local shops over the summer, and have come to the realization that it just isn’t worth it since they only pay me 1/2 the retail price of the flies.  In selling directly to the fishermen, I could undercut the shops’ pirces, but still make more money for myself.  I’m just not sure how to go about setting this up and where I would get extra tyers if the demand proves to be more than I can handle on my own.         In the case that this proves impractical, I’d aslo be interested in any information or comments you might have about companies like "Mc Kensie Fly Co." that buy new fly patterns from tyers and give them a percentage of the profits generated by their sales.  Has anyone out there heard of and/or tried this?         Thank you for taking the time to read through this posting to anyone who had the patience to get to this point, and for any information you might have for me.                                         -Michael Frank

Response:

   I have a few questions regarding fly tying materials, and fly tying for profit.  First, I was wondering if anyone out there might have any suggestions about where I can find large mylar tubing (say, 3/8” diam.) for making saltwater zonkers.  I want to make these flies with a deeper body than my trout flies, but cannot find tubing that will fit the size body I want.

I found some of this size (and several others) in gold, silver, and pearl in my local sewing and crafts shop.    I also would be interested in any suggestions anyone has on selling flies directly to the fishermen, and how I would go about setting up my own fly tying business.  I am especially interested in (cheap) ways to advertize that will be successful.  I tied for local shops over the summer, and have come to the realization that it just isn’t worth it since they only pay me 1/2 the retail price of the flies.  In selling directly to the fishermen, I could undercut the shops’ pirces, but still make more money for myself.  I’m just not sure how to go about setting this up and where I would get extra tyers if the demand proves to be more than I can handle on my own.

Be careful you don’t cut your own throat on this.  As a professional fly tyer, you won’t want to work too hard at driving down the price of flies. Nothing wrong with offering us a bargain, but you’ll make more money in the long run by selling quality than bargain basement.                                    -Michael Frank

Good luck. . Lenny Bloksberg . .

Response:

   I have a few questions regarding fly tying materials, and fly tying for profit.      I also would be interested in any suggestions anyone has on selling flies directly to the fishermen, and how I would go about

Al Troth is the only commercial fly tyer I know of who makes a good living tying flies (and guiding, and other things). The main reason is that he sells all his flies at retail. His total production has been spoken for for years. For every fly he ties, there are 10 people who want to buy it. Trouble is, not every fly tyer is as famous as Al (the inventor of the Elk Hair Caddis, for one). I wonder if free-lance tiers couldn’t form a cooperative of sorts, which would peel off a minimum percentage for advertizing, thus leaving more profit for the tiers. Seems like the net might be a good way to get this going. Although others might complain that advertizing has no place on the net. Royalies? Yeah, that’s the way to go….the only way to make good money with flies. Umpqua Feather Merchants (Glide Or) started the royalties business. Fly designs are not easily patented, and patents are not easily enforced. Umpqua does it for marketing reasons. They like to say that their flies are designed by nationally known fishing personalities. And that’s the catch. It’s not enough to have a good new fly design. You also have to be able to write about it, and get your stuff published. So if you are an author as well as a fly designer, you can make money. They usually pay 10% of the wholesale price…just like a salesman’s commission. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -setting up my own fly tying business.  I am especially interested in (cheap) ways to advertize that will be successful.  I tied for local shops over the summer, and have come to the realization that it just isn’t worth it since they only pay me 1/2 the retail price of the flies.  In selling directly to the fishermen, I could undercut the shops’ pirces, but still make more money for myself.  I’m just not sure how to go about setting this up and where I would get extra tyers if the demand proves to be more than I can handle on my own.    In the case that this proves impractical, I’d aslo be interested in any information or comments you might have about companies like "Mc Kensie Fly Co." that buy new fly patterns from tyers and give them a percentage of the profits generated by their sales.  Has anyone out there heard of and/or tried this?    Thank you for taking the time to read through this posting to anyone who had the patience to get to this point, and for any information you might have for me.                                    -Michael Frank

–

Response:

       I have a few questions regarding fly tying materials, and fly tying for profit.          I also would be interested in any suggestions anyone has on selling flies directly to the fishermen, and how I would go about Al Troth is the only commercial fly tyer I know of who makes a good living tying flies (and guiding, and other things). The main reason is that he sells all his flies at retail. His total production has been spoken for for years. For every fly he ties, there are 10 people who want to buy it. Trouble is, not every fly tyer is as famous as Al (the inventor of the Elk Hair Caddis, for one). I wonder if free-lance tiers couldn’t form a cooperative of sorts,

This is a very good idea, it merits more discussion. which would peel off a minimum percentage for advertizing, thus leaving more profit for the tiers. Seems like the net might be a good way to get this going. Although others might complain that advertizing has no place on the net.

A number of years back I had good success tying through the net. I charged $1.00 per fly, and could barely keep up with the demand. The feedback was positive, the ‘advertising’ wasn’t hard-sell or in-your-face, more like ‘hey, I tie, anybody that’s interested, let me know.’ Royalies? Yeah, that’s the way to go….the only way to make good money with flies. Umpqua Feather Merchants (Glide Or) started the royalties business. Fly designs are not easily patented..

[deleted for brevity]                                        -Michael Frank

Absolutely. I know a guy who has done this, and I believe he does quite well. He’s locally well-known, but certainly not a published or "big name" in the the flyfishing world, like Troth. — Dave Ridge Storage Technology Corp

Response: