Question:

.. how hard is it to get a hook up in the national forest  ( my cousines father is 80 and in poor health) i dont want to run a generator and make a lot of noise

  None of the NF campgrounds have power, period. — Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/RV

Response:

Im going to go fly fishing in gallatin nat forest can anyone help with any first hand knowledge will be takeing a 30 foot class A   is a dingy necessary ? how hard is it to get a hook up ( my cousines father is 80 and in poor health) i dont want to run a generator and make a lot of noise thank you glenn   please send email to

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Im going to go fly fishing in gallatin nat forest (july3 to 16 aprox) can anyone help with any first hand knowledge will be takeing a 30 foot class A   is a dingy necessary ? how hard is it to get a hook up in the national forest  ( my cousines father is 80 and in poor health) i dont want to run a generator and make a lot of noise thank you glenn   please send email to

Response:

Im going to go fly fishing in gallatin nat forest can anyone help with any first hand knowledge will be takeing a 30 foot class A   is a dingy necessary ? how hard is it to get a hook up ( my cousines father is 80 and in poor health) i dont want to run a generator and make a lot of noise

there who is familiar with the area. Just click on the URL above, it’ll take you there directly without having to "subscribe" to the newsgroup.

Response:

Im going to go fly fishing in gallatin nat forest

  When? (I’d ask why, since I wouldn’t bother any more) can anyone help with any first hand knowledge

  Yes will be takeing a 30 foot class A   is a dingy necessary ?

  Where are you planning to stay? how hard is it to get a hook up ( my cousines father is 80 and in poor health) i dont want to run a generator and make a lot of noise

  The only place I am recalling with power is the KOA at Bozeman Hotsprings (which also gives you access to the springs pools) —

Response:

Question:

  And now, back to your regularly scheduled programmming….. bite me Warren!

Go smoke a whitefish! — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/

Response:

fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish.  I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt.

My guess is that if we are thinking like a fish we would eat sticks and rocks. I keep finding them in the fish that I keep. Big Dale

Response:

Excellent synopsis Peter.  These types of discussions were what first attracted me to and later hooked me on ROFF.  My thanks to you, Willi, et all for the thought provoking insights/explanations.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled programmming….. bite me Warren!

Response:

I am a fairly new fly fisher and an even newer tier. I have been fortunate enough to have a few experienced hands tell me that I am far more picky about my flies than the fish. Also, worry about developing the tying skills and your flies will look more like the store flies as you get better. In the mean time, it’s pretty darn cool to catch a fish on something that you made by hand. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Even during hatches, not all the fish will be keyed into the same features on a fly. With some, wings may be important, others how high or low the fly floats, others size, others sparseness, other "action", others color, other orientation etc. etc.  Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it, those that look for something wrong and if found will reject it, and those that just want something to eat. Individual fish have individual feeding habits and preferences. There is no magic fly. Being successful means finding a fly that appeals to the majority of fish and turns off few. Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish. Willi

Response:

<snipped a whole bunch for the Grand Poohbah   Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending?

Willi, I can’t remember if you were there when this happened during the clave or not.  We were fishing and saw a fish swallow a bunch of moss and then spit it out.  Perhaps there was a morsel of food in that bunch of moss and the fish separated it and then spit the moss back out.  It could be that the fish sees the hook as debris to filter out from the food and takes the fly anyways.  Just a thought. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/

Response:

What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done.

Wolfgang, Like usual, I don’t know how to take what you say but did you mean the above? If so, I’d like to see it. Willi

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple. Not to be a wise-ass, but we do?  I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving? It ain’t SUPPOSED to be easy!  Nevertheless, here’s a little tip: never try to get away with making two (or three) points look like one.

Well, thanks, but, basically, I was calling you fat…. A trout’s brain IS small and relatively simple.  We could go into all kinds of tedious detail about comparative neuroanatomy (and the literature is voluminous) but it’s late and I need to get to bed.

And so is the literature that says there is, or isn’t, a God or Gods, that Communism is the best thing since, well, others say it wasn’t, and with the advent of the Web, probably quite a bit claiming Elvis, JFK, and Marilyn Monroe are having a nightly GB at Bill Gates’ house. What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done.

Granted, we…well, ok, "we" implies the wrong thing, so – someone can likely get general info, like, "shine light, fish swims away" and "fish tries to eat this, but not that," but I’m dubious we can truly know what fish "think," perceive, or whatever you call it, i.e., knowing the fish "thinks" a particular thing is or isn’t, and more importantly, why.  For example, I’d run away from a group of people having a Beastie Boys marathon, but not because I’m scared of the people, music, or the Beastie Boys, but I don’t like them, either.  On the other hand, I might sit and listen with a group of gangbangers who happened to like, oh, say, Bobby Short, Bob Wills, or certain Jane’s Addiction cuts.   One reason I’m sure "we" haven’t discovered such information (past a certain superficial level, anyway) is because especially with things like fish, which leads to fishing, is that it would get exploited before the ink was dry on the reports.  I hate to sound cynical, but I think if "we" could truly and accurately figure out what makes fish "tick," or what they "think" (again, accurately is key), companies would be on it like, well, fish on scientifically-developed foolproof (the key) lures.  Moreover, even when the ability to vocally express how a creature is feeling is there, even that isn’t a completely accurate measure…look at women, for example…. We are all familiar with the adage that suggests success in fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish.  I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt.

Yeah, and it’s always made me laugh…why the hell would I want to think like the thing I’m trying to outsmart and catch.  For example, if a lion thought like a Tommy, would another lion get confused and eat him, or even more odd, would he get confused and die of exhaustion trying to outrun himself?  Heck, maybe he’d just have a crisis of conscience and run off and become a vegan and try to convert the pride.  Soon, he’d be smoking clove cigarettes, getting arrested with Al Sharpton, and whining about Nike factories and under-sized limos. Next thing you know, he’d be hanging out with Paul McCartney, and Lord knows what else…well, actually, I think the Lord did know, which is why lions don’t flit about trying to think like Tommies…..they just catch ‘em and eat ‘em….. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Wolfgang

Response:

As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple. Not to be a wise-ass, but we do?  I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving?

It ain’t SUPPOSED to be easy!  Nevertheless, here’s a little tip: never try to get away with making two (or three) points look like one. A trout’s brain IS small and relatively simple.  We could go into all kinds of tedious detail about comparative neuroanatomy (and the literature is voluminous) but it’s late and I need to get to bed. What a trout perceives is a problem amenable to experiment….and it’s been done. We are all familiar with the adage that suggests success in fishing depends (at least in part) on thinking like a fish.  I’ve tried it. Makes my brain hurt. Wolfgang

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <Big Snip I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi I told my wife about this post and tried to get her to conduct an experiment, but she wouldn’t do it. All I wanted her to do was let me get the video camera and shoot video of her sniffing our Basset Hound’s butt and then giving me her perceptions. Among "other" things, she said I’d been on this news group way too long. <g

Post of the week, great image!! Willi

Response:

[snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos

This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi

Response:

First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to.

   I believe this is often of major importance. When fishing with a dry fly, I often cast to spots I *know* hold fish, and I get no response because the fly is riding a little low in the water. After treating it with desiccant it will be riding on the very tips of the hackles; it just amazes me how this can trigger strikes from fish that weren’t the least bit interested in the same fly moments earlier.

Response:

First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to.    I believe this is often of major importance. When fishing with a dry fly, I often cast to spots I *know* hold fish, and I get no response because the fly is riding a little low in the water. After treating it with desiccant it will be riding on the very tips of the hackles; it just amazes me how this can trigger strikes from fish that weren’t the least bit interested in the same fly moments earlier.

(I noticed you use this technique on a fish that short struck the other day on the Big T) And sometimes the opposite is true, the fish will take a partly submerged fly after rejecting the same fly floating high and dry. This happened to me yesterday. Willi

Response:

This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi

I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film.  The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. A partially drowned fly may work if the fish is keyed on emerging or drowned insects. Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is one of things that convinced me that a trout’s perception of a fly is very different from ours. In looking at the photos of underwater views of a fly, the bend of the hook and the barb is VERY prevalent. To my eye it is probably the most prevalent thing. However, a trout will overlook this but at times demand an exact match in terms of size, shape, color, etc. Willi I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film.  The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play.

That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending? The point I’m trying to make is that when we use our vision to try and explain how a trout or any other animal uses their vision, I think that alot of the assumptions made are going to be erroneous. This is especially true if, like in the case of trout vision, there are demonstrative physical differences in vision components between that animal and ourselves. Also, vision is more than how the eye perceives something, it is how the brain interprets the signals that it receives from the eye.   I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi

Response:

I’ll take dogs as an example, ….. ….. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous.

True, but no more erroneous than if we *didn’t* use our sense of smell to try to understand theirs.  ;) I agree with everything you say about our sense of vision necessarily being different from a trout’s, but it’s really the closest thing we have to work with and base our guesses on.  Otherwise we’re reduced to throwing up our hands and relying on "conclusions" drawn from what are really small, highly variable samples (our own personal experiences).  AND we’d have less to BS about. JR

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film.  The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending?

[snip] As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple.  It can only process so many visual cues.  If we make this process overly complex, I think we make it more difficult than it need be.  I believe that a trout processes the visual cues that say "food" and ignores those that suggest otherwise (e.g. the hook.)  After all, a trout’s world is full of drifting debris.  It has to have a simple, yet quick way to differentiate between a small stick and a nymph, for example. If your fly has the necessary cues, the trout takes it, despite the big, ugly hook.  This differentiation process is probably learned through repetition – the more bugs of a certain type that pass by a trout, the more likely it will fixate on them and begin to feed.  It probably has to learn what is good to eat, every time a major hatch occurs – this explains why the early part of a hatch may not engender much of response. It may well perceive colour, light refraction, etc. differently than us, but there is only a few cues we need to get right.  This is one of the reasons why I don’t like to stray too much from the original materials in an old recipe.  Skues talks about how certain materials have a special quality in the water and appear more like the natural when presented in the trout’s world.  I think if you get the hackle and tail, size, and colour right, you’ll fool trout more often than not. Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think that the most dominant visual feature is the light refracted through the dimpled surface film.  The fish first react to that and everything else is superfluous until it is an inch or so from the fly. At that point, colour, size, wing, etc. come into play. That’s how the photos of dry flies from underwater appear to us. I question that they are perceived in the same manner by a trout. Often times a fish will demand a perfect size match, or wing or color etc. but will ignore that hunk of metal sticking out of the fly’s butt. If a fish can discriminate between a size twenty and a size twenty two fly, they definitely have the acuity to see the hook bend. Do they ignore it if enough other characteristics of the fly are "correct" or do they "not see it" because of the way their little brains interpret what the signals their eyes are sending? [snip] As we all know, the trout’s brain is quite small and simple.

Not to be a wise-ass, but we do?  I mean, I think you’re right, but to pull a Wolfgang (which ain’t easy, lemme tell ya), how do we know? Granted, we can measure it as far as physical size, and do some experiments as far as electric charges, etc., but how can we (at this point, anyway) really know what a fish is "thinking" or perceiving? It can only process so many visual cues.  If we make this process overly complex, I think we make it more difficult than it need be.  I believe that a trout processes the visual cues that say "food" and ignores those that suggest otherwise (e.g. the hook.)  After all, a trout’s world is full of drifting debris.  It has to have a simple, yet quick way to differentiate between a small stick and a nymph, for example. If your fly has the necessary cues, the trout takes it, despite the big, ugly hook.  

Maybe they just intend to eat what appears to be the bug and not what appears to be whatever the hook appears to be.  When one gets a club sandwich, one doesn’t think, "Hmm, this looks good, well, except for that frilly stick in it.  I wonder if I have to eat that, too?" so perhaps it simply looks like a fish’s frilly stick or parsley sprig or whatever, or maybe they see insects on or near actual sticks, and eat the bug and either not eat or spit out the stick – maybe they see a stick and a bug, and when they spit out the stick, to their surprise and your consternation, the whole thing goes.  Or maybe, just like most living creatures, including humans, close is good enough if you are hungry enough or the food looks good enough.  If simply looking odd or different prevented predation, we’d be up to our hat brims  in things like albinos, genetic appearance deformities (that had no health ramifications), etc. because they’d be no natural predators of such things (well, except man and a few other things), they’d gradually become more prevalent. This differentiation process is probably learned through repetition – the more bugs of a certain type that pass by a trout, the more likely it will fixate on them and begin to feed.  It probably has to learn what is good to eat, every time a major hatch occurs – this explains why the early part of a hatch may not engender much of response. It may well perceive colour, light refraction, etc. differently than us, but there is only a few cues we need to get right.  This is one of the reasons why I don’t like to stray too much from the original materials in an old recipe.  Skues talks about how certain materials have a special quality in the water and appear more like the natural when presented in the trout’s world.  I think if you get the hackle and tail, size, and colour right, you’ll fool trout more often than not.

If you look at writers of the beginnings of the "dry fly era of prominence" (say from about 1870 to Mary Orvis Marbury, etc., forward), you find that there are vast differences of opinion as to replication vs. stimulation vs. "tempting" vs. simple guessing vs. planned experimentation.  Many felt that "fooling" the fish by making them think the fly was a true natural was all but impossible, and the closer you tried to get, the more "unnatural" your imitator would appear.  Maybe it was a mirror of the Impressionists, but some seem to feel that "suggesters" were more effective than imitators.  FWIW, my view has always been (and admittedly, it is both acquired from others and self-discovery) that there is much more to it than accurate-to-us appearing imitators, but YMMV.  For example, how many have had beat-up, ratty, tattered old flies, lures, etc., that produced better than new, truly accurate imitators? As to the history of the subject, if anyone is interested, I have some pretty old volumes, and some do talk about this very subject, plus I’m sure there are many others with other works, so perhaps we can piece together a history of this aspect of the sport. TC, R

Response:

<Big Snip I’ll take dogs as an example, I know them pretty well after working with them for many years. If we try and understand how they smell things based on how we smell things, we couldn’t even begin to understand the complexity, importance and usefulness of smells in their life. Their sense of smell, how they interpret smells, and how they can use them is as alien to our sense of smell as our "intellect" is to theirs. If we used our sense of smell to try and understand theirs, our knowledge would be completely erroneous. Willi

I told my wife about this post and tried to get her to conduct an experiment, but she wouldn’t do it. All I wanted her to do was let me get the video camera and shoot video of her sniffing our Basset Hound’s butt and then giving me her perceptions. Among "other" things, she said I’d been on this news group way too long. <g

Response:

Excellent synopsis Peter.  These types of discussions were what first attracted me to and later hooked me on ROFF.  My thanks to you, Willi, et all for the thought provoking insights/explanations. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a hackle dimpled surface film producing halos of light – a tail that also produces a dimpling along its length and the same light refraction – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos – a body that for the most part is in shadow – the solid outline of a dun’s wings – all of this seen against a bright sky background First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to.  As she gets closer, the colour and wing start to become important.  A fish can focus on a fly less than an inch from its nose – its close range vision is excellent – so the rest of the details have to start to make sense, the wing, the body colour, the size, etc. Trout seem to take flies for a number of reasons – obviously hunger and it matches what she’s been eating for the last half hour, curiosity, aggression, and playfulness.  I mentioned in a much earlier post, being fooled by three little browns that raced around chasing Gray Foxes.  It’s not wise to take an anthropomorphic interpretation of their behaviour, however, had they simply been hungry, they could have sat in one of the many feeding lanes and sipped Gray Foxes all afternoon.  It’s difficult to interpret their pack chasing behaviour as anything other than playful competition.  They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look. To sum it up, the fly should sit right, producing the right halos, plus it should cast a shadow of approximately the right size, and finally, it’s details should be right to pass the close range examination. This applies to picky fish in slower water condition; brookies in fast water tend to slash at anything that looks like food.  So in my neck of the woods, flies that will catch brookies on the cascade section of the Credit, will be a complete bust on the slow glides of the Grand. There’s too much variation o attempt generalize much further than this. (Much of the above wisdom, courtesy of various books by Lafontaine, Skues, et al.) Peter Visit The Streamer Page at

http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

<snipped interesting speculations of an experienced fishtricker  They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look.

kinda like on penns creek when we were there…  the march browns had to quiver a bit and just right to interest most of those finicky browns …anything just floating motionless on the water generally wouldn’t be touched.  i saw dozens of fish nail the bug just as it was starting to take off from the surface, and several coming full-body out of the water like a salmon to grab the bug in the air.  that was one of those memory etchings i look forward to collecting more of…

Response:

Even during hatches, not all the fish will be keyed into the same features on a fly. With some, wings may be important, others how high or low the fly floats, others size, others sparseness, other "action", others color, other orientation etc. etc.  Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it, those that look for something wrong and if found will reject it, and those that just want something to eat. Individual fish have individual feeding habits and preferences. There is no magic fly. Being successful means finding a fly that appeals to the majority of fish and turns off few. Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish. Willi

Response:

Just like people, I think there are fish that look for certain "right" characteristics in a fly and are triggered by it…

- "Hey, Jimmie, looks like we got a hotty floating by at three o’clock!" – "Woa, dude, check out the hackles on *that* one!" – "Hey, there, midge! Why doncha drift on over to *my* riffle, baby?" –Steve (if fish could talk)

Response:

Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish.

Not only do we merely perceive color differently than the fish (probably), we probably also overestimate color and underestimate behavior of the bug. This idea is explored in "What The Trout Said" and "Dry Fly: New Angles".

Response:

Like most fly fishermen, I judge a fly by how it looks to me. But there is an added dimension to this that we tend to overlook. A fish is a species of animal that has more differences than commonality with man. It is impossible for us to perceive a fly as a fish perceives it, in a direct way. Color is an easy example. Trout and other fishes that live in shallow/clear water, perceive colors farther in both the shorter and longer wave lengths than people. This means that it is impossible to judge how a fish perceives the color of a fly using our eyes. What looks like a color match to us, may be completely off to a fish.

And although it simply states the obvious, the fish views the fly from a completely different angle, and through a different medium, so even if they did see (eye construction- and placement-wise) in the same manner as people, their frame of reference is completely different. It’s unlikely that man and fish will ever see a fly the same, regardless of the difference in the eyes. Moreover, we can not know what differences would go ignored, which would be seen as different but "OK," and which were different and off-putting.  As a simple example, most people would recognize and accept Wendy’s square hamburger as just another burger variant and eat it if they wanted a burger (yeah, yeah, eyeball jokes, taste, etc., aside), but given a choice between a burger with, say, asparagus spears, raw oysters, and orange sherbet and a plain burger, most would likely choose the plain one (even if they’d eat all the items in other combinations).   But as Willi points out, fish seem to be like people in that they do have individual habits, and occasionally, just like kids drinking pickle juice over ice, a fish might try and eat something different.   Fish "dine" on what comes past or is within sight, they don’t seem to "plan" dinner – "Ooh, honey, doesn’t the Four Seasons sound good, and then, we can go by the Carlyle for drinks and a little Bobby…" or decide that the tacos at El Asadero sound better than the seafood at Costa Azul and head that way.  But they can sometimes be tempted by teasing them with something that looks "food-ish" enough AND different enough to tempt them into taking a chance, just like you do when the waiter suggests the entire tenderloin, rare, with Hollandaise and a large side of creamed spinach, or the dessert cart comes by with the Double Chocolate Drunken Fudge Cream Cake with Buttery-Sweet Ice Cream on top.  You know you shouldn’t, the better half is gonna bitch, but like a moth to a flame….or rather, a hog to a trough…. TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Willi

Response:

[snip] What does a trout see when our dry passes overhead? – a hackle dimpled surface film producing halos of light – a tail that also produces a dimpling along its length and the same light refraction – a protruding hook that is below the surface and produces no dimpling or halos – a body that for the most part is in shadow – the solid outline of a dun’s wings – all of this seen against a bright sky background First off, the dimpling of the surface film has to look right, it’ll be the first thing the fish responds to.  As she gets closer, the colour and wing start to become important.  A fish can focus on a fly less than an inch from its nose – its close range vision is excellent – so the rest of the details have to start to make sense, the wing, the body colour, the size, etc. Trout seem to take flies for a number of reasons – obviously hunger and it matches what she’s been eating for the last half hour, curiosity, aggression, and playfulness.  I mentioned in a much earlier post, being fooled by three little browns that raced around chasing Gray Foxes.  It’s not wise to take an anthropomorphic interpretation of their behaviour, however, had they simply been hungry, they could have sat in one of the many feeding lanes and sipped Gray Foxes all afternoon.  It’s difficult to interpret their pack chasing behaviour as anything other than playful competition.  They also keyed on moving Gray Foxes, a still natural or imitation didn’t get a look.   To sum it up, the fly should sit right, producing the right halos, plus it should cast a shadow of approximately the right size, and finally, it’s details should be right to pass the close range examination. This applies to picky fish in slower water condition; brookies in fast water tend to slash at anything that looks like food.  So in my neck of the woods, flies that will catch brookies on the cascade section of the Credit, will be a complete bust on the slow glides of the Grand. There’s too much variation o attempt generalize much further than this. (Much of the above wisdom, courtesy of various books by Lafontaine, Skues, et al.) Peter Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

Question:

Attended subject show and got to put some faces to email names.  Barry Beck was a guest tier.  Class act.  After he finished tying, he passed around a board of the fly he just tied and asked every one that "listened to the demo to take one."  Watched Harrison Steeves tie.  Another class act.  He was selling his flies for $1.50 ( That’s right- $1.50 from a world class tier on patterns he originated and made famous) and would spend an hour showing you how to tie it and others specifically asked for.  At times you forget how nice some people are that "made it to the top" in this sport. Wonder if George is going to pass out "Bastards" to those of us who have listened to him on this site.  (Sorry George- I just could not resist.) Lou

Response:

Good meeting you Lou.  A couple Roffians met at noon in the lobby for a howdy and I went to lunch with Wayne and his lovely bride. Hey, if anyone is going back today, I need some help.  There is a guy there selling vises that hang around your neck and sit on your chest. I lost his business card and I need his address and URL.  It was his first show and he is just introducing them to the market.  These vises are awesome.  Instead of being hunched over your fly tying bench, you can kick back in a recliner in front of the TV or even stand up.  They also fold flat so they are out of the way if you need to answer the phone or the like.  I thought they would be great for us cripples with bad backs or teaching fly tying where you could walk up to each student and show them the technique.  So, If anyone goes to the show, I need this guy’s info. The gear whore bug got me real bad.  Just had buy that twelve-piece hollow punch set to punch out foam disks for fly tying.  Of course, I had to include the two-way sharpener for the twelve-piece hollow punch set to punch out foam disks for fly tying.  Then I had to pay $3.50 apiece for a couple of 4"X6" foam squares that I knew I could get in size 12"X10" at my wife’s store for $1.25.  But of course, the foam went with the two-way sharpener for the twelve-piece hollow punch set to punch out foam disks for fly tying. Signed up for all the raffles.  Gonna win all the raffles.  Being first with your tickets in some of the raffle boxes has gotta count for something.  The door prize for the show is a boat motor and trailer. Thomas and Thomas is giving a way a 4wt(drool).  Bunch of other neato things there.          Have fun all. Oh, with some google searches, I found the vise: <http://www.ohio.com/bj/sports/2000/September/29/docs/031527.htm      Frank – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Attended subject show and got to put some faces to email names. Barry Beck was a guest tier.  Class act.  After he finished tying, he passed around a board of the fly he just tied and asked every one that "listened to the demo to take one."  Watched Harrison Steeves tie.  Another class act.  He was selling his flies for $1.50 ( That’s right- $1.50 from a world class tier on patterns he originated and made famous) and would spend an hour showing you how to tie it and others specifically asked for.  At times you forget how nice some people are that "made it to the top" in this sport. Wonder if George is going to pass out "Bastards" to those of us who have listened to him on this site.  (Sorry George- I just could not resist.) Lou

Response:

Great time at the show.  After we had lunch with Frank, Joe and SWMBO showed up and we chatted a while with Lou.  I think SWMBO is leaning toward getting into this fishing thing but she showed a LOT of CONCERN about Frank&Frank and the mid-stream massage babe at the last RRR.  Which brings up another point.  It looks like another RRR coming in August 2001.  Katie has ordered iron underwear and Steve has picked up a case of 12ga. insurance.  After such terrific water levels and temperatures over the past year, this should be a banner year for larger smallmouth.  Stay Tuned! I picked up three chicken necks (a little tougher than beef jerky but didn’t taste bad, damn pricey though) and a bunch more stuff at the show.  I’m starting to need a closet just to store it in and I STILL don’t have enough stuff to tie a single pattern!  I did find the 2/0 hooks and Tysons promises to come through with those chicken feathers .  So…….this is cheaper than buying flys, huh? After looking over the field, I settled on the Chota Brookie II boots.  I like being able to put traction soles on the toe of the boot on those Volkswagen size boulders on Brookie streams.  Good news Indian Joe, more insurance against having to carry me out next time! — Wayne(still looking at scars from Wilson’s Creek) To Fish is Human…To Release Divine!

Response:

Well, you can put me down for the RRR in August 2001!!   My back ought to need more water-massaging by August, fer sure. Frank (oh yes, rub it baby!!) Church – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Great time at the show.  After we had lunch with Frank, Joe and SWMBO showed up and we chatted a while with Lou.  I think SWMBO is leaning toward getting into this fishing thing but she showed a LOT of CONCERN about Frank&Frank and the mid-stream massage babe at the last RRR.  Which brings up another point.  It looks like another RRR coming in August 2001.  Katie has ordered iron underwear and Steve has picked up a case of 12ga. insurance.  After such terrific water levels and temperatures over the past year, this should be a banner year for larger smallmouth.  Stay Tuned! I picked up three chicken necks (a little tougher than beef jerky but didn’t taste bad, damn pricey though) and a bunch more stuff at the show.  I’m starting to need a closet just to store it in and I STILL don’t have enough stuff to tie a single pattern!  I did find the 2/0 hooks and Tysons promises to come through with those chicken feathers .  So…….this is cheaper than buying flys, huh? After looking over the field, I settled on the Chota Brookie II boots.  I like being able to put traction soles on the toe of the boot on those Volkswagen size boulders on Brookie streams.  Good news Indian Joe, more insurance against having to carry me out next time! — Wayne(still looking at scars from Wilson’s Creek) To Fish is Human…To Release Divine!

Response:

Great time at the show.  After we had lunch with Frank, Joe and SWMBO showed up and we chatted a while with Lou.  I think SWMBO is leaning toward getting into this fishing thing but she showed a LOT of CONCERN about Frank&Frank and the mid-stream massage babe at the last RRR.

Yeah, I’m not sure we should have shared that story.   I kept having to repeat, "This happened *before* I got there."   <g SWMBO & I got a late start due to a minor furnace problem at home, and missed the lunch and Frank by about 5 min. as it turned out.   Still managed to spot Wayne & SO in the crowd later & was asking if Lou & Frank had made it when the guy reading my r.o.f.f. fall ball hat confessed to being Lou. Great timing on that; & great to meet another roffian.   Sorry I missed ya Frank.   Turns out Wayne’s SO & mine are almost exactly the same height (or lack thereof). Roffians aside, I really enjoyed the show.   I’d never been to any similar event, and it was great to see all those goodies on display.   Having two unfinished blanks waiting in the wings, I really wasn’t in the market for any serious hardware, but SWMBO did get to try on some waders for size (progress is slow, but it’s progress), and I did enter a few raffles to dilute Frank’s chances a bit (sorry Frank, the T&T is mine.) Had no luck finding jungle cock eyes.   A couple vendors plainly said they were too expensive to bring along.   I’ll stick to Plan A for the swap. Maybe some other time. In the end, I got out cheap, only buying one book.   Had a great time, though. Joe F.

Response:

Joe,   Send me an email on my deja email with your home phone.  I have jungle cock cape.       Frank Reid

Response:

Hey Frank!  I think some of that jungle cock stuff might dress up these White Millers! — Wayne (bought some of that stuff Frank said to get…don’t know what it was or what it does but it was ONLY 50cents a pack!!) To Fish is Human…To Release Divine!

Response:

Heathen!       Frank Hey Frank!  I think some of that jungle cock stuff might dress up these White Millers! — Wayne (bought some of that stuff Frank said to get…don’t know what it was or what it does but it was ONLY 50cents a pack!!) To Fish is Human…To Release Divine!

Response:

Question:

Good Info snipped Montana is an example of a state that finally got around to doing it in the early/mid 1980’s, and most of us now know it as the Montana Stream Access Law. Actually early 70’s. It is being challenged in court right now by some big ranchers in the Ruby.

Is Ted Turner one of them? I understand his ranch is on the Ruby. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ something bogus to avoid spam)

Response:

I’m not sure. The ranch owners are "non-native Montanans" with big $$, and, apparently, being instigated and led by a guy named Reid Rosenthal, who (if I have the story correct) has been trying to get it turned to private access. He’s gone as far as stirring up the Madison county commissioners, saying that a (any?) bridge over the Ruby, even though the road on both sides is public county road, is NOT public and therefore there is no legal access to the river at that point. As I understand it, he was ’shot down in flames’. My explanation listed above is a ’simplistic’ overview of the situation. I’m sure there are other aspects I don’t know. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana http://www.montana.com/dno/dno.htm 406-626-4022

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Good Info snipped Montana is an example of a state that finally got around to doing it in the early/mid 1980’s, and most of us now know it as the Montana Stream Access Law. Actually early 70’s. It is being challenged in court right now by some big ranchers in the Ruby. Is Ted Turner one of them? I understand his ranch is on the Ruby. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ something bogus to avoid spam)

Response:

early/mid 1980’s … Montana Stream Access Law. Actually early 70’s. It is being challenged in court right now by some big ranchers in the Ruby.

As explained to me, a landowner/angler conflict on one of the Yellowstone River spring creeks and a landowner/raft conflict on another river (NW section of Montana) (the landowner drove his rig over a group’s beached raft) during the 70’s/80’s motivated passage of Montana’s stream access law sometime in the early 1980’s. I attended Montana State from 81-88, and recall when the law went into effect as many of the streams I had been fishing with permission the prior year or two were suddendly closed in protest.  Signs reading "don’t bother to ask, NO" popped up all over Montana. My roommates and I simply filled our vests with Stream Access brochures and hit the road.  We were shot over (30-06) on Bridger Creek NW of Bozeman before the landowner called the Sheriff and tried to have us arrested. The event caused the Sheriff’s department to met with other state agencies and get clarity on the finer points of the new law.  Three days after the event, a deputy offered to fish Bridger Creek by the rules to see if he would he harassed, and Fish & Game wanted feedback on whether we were harassed again, since they were willing to take action against the landowner. Key point was that we climbed over the landowners barbed wire fence at the point where it was attached to the bridge, but it is illegal for landowners to attach their fences to public structures (the bridge) and it is illegal for landowners to deny passage over public right-of-ways, and most bridges have a substantial right-of-way area just up and downstream of the road. The state generally does not enforce the rules as a matter of convenience to the landowner, but landowners can’t use such configurations to keep the public out. Several weeks later, we accessed another portion of Bridger Creek from the road (public access), but immediately had to hike out of the flood plain to get around a man-made diversion dam. The landowner saw us and a toe-to-toe threat-fest began.  Ultimately it was his wife yelling from the pickup "let’s go honey" that broke up the moment, but the technical point here was that man-made structures *in* the stream cannot be used to deny passage up and down a stream, and the public is entitled to portage around such structures within reason, even if it means going outside the high water mark. Then there was Dry Creek… Then there was Sixteen Mile Creek… Though I believe in the public access, and am willing to force the issue, I have always tried to ask anyway, as a courtesy.  They can get a sense of who I am, let me know of any issues they are having with other anglers, and hopefully both of us can relax. Thomas Gilg

Response:

Well, if the price is right, maybe we can talk. Wolfgang tell Mike I said hello

Go visit him yourself. You’ve got time to travel. Bog, man, you’re not even a hundred yet. "Goddamn, well I declare! Have you seen the like?Their walls are  built from  cannonballs; their motto is ‘don’t tread on me’" -Uncle Jerry

Response:

It’s amazing to me how the brain remembers things. The controversy and debate over stream access went on for a long time and was not passed till 1985. I had it in my head it was way before that. Oh, well… when you’re wrong, you’re wrong. And I was beginning to guide then too. I think I need to upgrade and add more ‘memory’ !! — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana http://www.montana.com/dno/dno.htm 406-626-4022

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – early/mid 1980’s … Montana Stream Access Law. Actually early 70’s. It is being challenged in court right now by some big ranchers in the Ruby. As explained to me, a landowner/angler conflict on one of the Yellowstone River spring creeks and a landowner/raft conflict on another river (NW section of Montana) (the landowner drove his rig over a group’s beached raft) during the 70’s/80’s motivated passage of Montana’s stream access law sometime in the early 1980’s. I attended Montana State from 81-88, and recall when the law went into effect as many of the streams I had been fishing with permission the prior year or two were suddendly closed in protest.  Signs reading "don’t bother to ask, NO" popped up all over Montana. My roommates and I simply filled our vests with Stream Access brochures and hit the road.  We were shot over (30-06) on Bridger Creek NW of Bozeman before the landowner called the Sheriff and tried to have us arrested. The event caused the Sheriff’s department to met with other state agencies and get clarity on the finer points of the new law.  Three days after the event, a deputy offered to fish Bridger Creek by the rules to see if he would he harassed, and Fish & Game wanted feedback on whether we were harassed again, since they were willing to take action against the landowner. Key point was that we climbed over the landowners barbed wire fence at the point where it was attached to the bridge, but it is illegal for landowners to attach their fences to public structures (the bridge) and it is illegal for landowners to deny passage over public right-of-ways, and most bridges have a substantial right-of-way area just up and downstream of the road. The state generally does not enforce the rules as a matter of convenience to the landowner, but landowners can’t use such configurations to keep the public out. Several weeks later, we accessed another portion of Bridger Creek from the road (public access), but immediately had to hike out of the flood plain to get around a man-made diversion dam. The landowner saw us and a toe-to-toe threat-fest began.  Ultimately it was his wife yelling from the pickup "let’s go honey" that broke up the moment, but the technical point here was that man-made structures *in* the stream cannot be used to deny passage up and down a stream, and the public is entitled to portage around such structures within reason, even if it means going outside the high water mark. Then there was Dry Creek… Then there was Sixteen Mile Creek… Though I believe in the public access, and am willing to force the issue, I have always tried to ask anyway, as a courtesy.  They can get a sense of who I am, let me know of any issues they are having with other anglers, and hopefully both of us can relax. Thomas Gilg

Response:

Oregon also has some active private angling clubs that have acquired access rights.  I forget the name of the one group (bait/spinners/flies), but they have locked down several prime sections of Oregon’s coastal streams.

I live in PDX. Couldja track down the names of those clubs? Thanks!

Response:

<snipped Steve, No the problem is that I have a right to fish that river, because there is a publicly available entrance to that river.  I am not trespassing on the land; I am traveling along the riverbank between the high and low water mark. There was never any No Trespassing Signs, No Hunting, and No Fishing until Troubums2 made the arrangements with the landowner. bc. — Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -Benjamin Franklin

Response:

United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia; 1974.

My arrest/control class, Lakewood, CO, 1999. And then again last week when my pepper canister sprung a leak and I got soaked with 90 minutes left in my shift. I carry my OC on the front, and some of it soaked through my pants and hit, um, some sensitive skin. That SUCKED!!!!! It was worse than drinking Coors while listening to teenage boy bands and eating day-old Original Hamburger Stand chili dogs! Mike, who prefers to solve problems with bullshit instead of pepper spray-some of it might splash back on me. "Goddamn, well I declare! Have you seen the like?Their walls are  built from  cannonballs; their motto is ‘don’t tread on me’" -Uncle Jerry

Response:

….Mike….prefers to solve problems with bullshit instead of pepper spray-some of it might splash back on me.

Considering some of the bullshit that sprays back on one here I suggest you might not want to be too hasty about that decision.    :) Wolfgang SPLAT!

Response:

blackcat, Why don’t you post the name of the fly shop as "off limits" to repay them? Ernie "blackcat" wrote Willi, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There is a section on the Upper Provo in Utah above Jordanelle Reservoir that has signs posted No Trespassing, No Fishing, and No Hunting. One of the local fly shops made a deal with the landowner and they posted all those signs last year. It’s too bad.  It is a really nice stretch of water to fish and I’ll miss it. bc.

Response:

… "private" areas for a local shop … wondering if this is a trend around the Country or is it a Colorado thing?

In recent years, several fly shops in Oregon have aggressively gone after special arrangements with land owners.  In most of the cases I’m aware of, the landowner has historically permitted limited access but is stressed/tired of it and is generally happy when someone else offers to control the access in exchange for some money. In addition to fly shops, Oregon also has some active private angling clubs that have acquired access rights.  I forget the name of the one group (bait/spinners/flies), but they have locked down several prime sections of Oregon’s coastal streams. I am also aware of rural landowners whos cattle and/or timber based income has dropped, so they are turning to selling hunting and fishing access. The lower section of one stream I regularily fish has an awsome run of chinook salmon, and ~25 individuals from mostly California (I only know of one from Oregon) have been paying $25,000 per year for exclusive access.  Though $1,000 isn’t for a regular weekend warrior, for the Joe who gets out 1-week a year and wants to be assured of a wiggle on the end of their rod, not unreasonable. Thomas Gilg – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I’ve paid more than that to have my rod wiggled for a week……john

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … "private" areas for a local shop … wondering if this is a trend around the Country or is it a Colorado thing? In recent years, several fly shops in Oregon have aggressively gone after special arrangements with land owners.  In most of the cases I’m aware of, the landowner has historically permitted limited access but is stressed/tired of it and is generally happy when someone else offers to control the access in exchange for some money. In addition to fly shops, Oregon also has some active private angling clubs that have acquired access rights.  I forget the name of the one group (bait/spinners/flies), but they have locked down several prime sections of Oregon’s coastal streams. I am also aware of rural landowners whos cattle and/or timber based income has dropped, so they are turning to selling hunting and fishing access. The lower section of one stream I regularily fish has an awsome run of chinook salmon, and ~25 individuals from mostly California (I only know of one from Oregon) have been paying $25,000 per year for exclusive access.  Though $1,000 isn’t for a regular weekend warrior, for the Joe who gets out 1-week a year and wants to be assured of a wiggle on the end of their rod, not unreasonable. Thomas Gilg

Response:

We have a little different deal going on here in Texas which has always had very little public water other than hugh lakes. The Great Texas Bass Club has about a hundred tanks on private ranches and farms leased which members can use for prices varying from 20 to 40 bucks for from 1/2 to full day. This was water that was never available to us before. There is a hell of a lot of good fishing on these places. On most of these places a float tube or small boat with an electric motor or canoe does just great. This could wrok well in other areas and is one of those things where everyone wins. Big Dale

Response:

<snipped There is plenty of land posted No Hunting – No Fishing.  This section though has the Utah State Special Fishing Regulations Signs up along that section and it was only recently that the No Hunting, No Fishing, No Trespassing signs were posted. It has been almost a year since I was last up there. And in Utah, the land owners own the river bottom, so even wading it, you are breaking the law. bc. — Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -Benjamin Franklin

Response:

<snipped Ernie, If I knew with out a doubt that it was the fly shop everyone has told me it was, I would post their name.  I just sent them an email asking them if they were the shop that guided that stretch of the Provo.   bc. — Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -Benjamin Franklin

Response:

Hmmm. So the gist of Ernie’s (and, by inference, your) opinion is that the fly shop should be castigated for the way they use that (leased) private land, correct? I don’t quite agree with that, nor do I completely disagree. But the "problem" is really that the land is private in the first place, isn’t it? –Steve – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ernie, If I knew with out a doubt that it was the fly shop everyone has told me it was, I would post their name.  I just sent them an email asking them if they were the shop that guided that stretch of the Provo.

Response:

Hmmm. So the gist of Ernie’s (and, by inference, your) opinion is that the fly shop should be castigated for the way they use that (leased) private land, correct? I don’t quite agree with that, nor do I completely disagree. But the "problem" is really that the land is private in the first place, isn’t it?

Our perceptions are greatly influenced by the familiar.  Having grown up with public ownership of riparian rights in Wisconsin, I find the notion that an individual, a club, or a corporation can own a stream bottom or even the right to float on top of it to be bizarre.  Of course, my feelings on this issue are also colored by ambivalence concerning the private ownership of land in general, and that fact that I have never owned any real estate myself.  And then the whole thing is further complicated by the old state’s rights versus central governmental control conundrum.  It’s easy enough to be skeptical about the wisdom, let alone the effectiveness, of federal control of resources nation wide, but I sometimes think that a single set of coherent policies would at least be easier to grapple with than the bewildering array of laws and rationales we have to contend with today. Wolfgang in the market for an underutilized planet

Response:

Wolfgang in the market for an underutilized planet

tanstaafl wulfie! i’ve got 22 adjoining lunacres fer sale. kinda dry fishin’ but gahdangitall, you can double haul 600′ !!! <g waldo, have space suit, will travel.

Response:

Well, if the price is right, maybe we can talk. Wolfgang tell Mike I said hello

Now there’s a candidate I could support… — Charlie…

Response:

Well, if the price is right, maybe we can talk. Wolfgang tell Mike I said hello

have yer guy call my guy to set up lunch. uhmmmm, mikey doesn’t "live" here anymore. afterall, the moon is a harsh mistress. waldo

Response:

And in Utah, the land owners own the river bottom, so even wading it, you are breaking the law.

Really? Other than some of the early US states back east, most/all of the states from the mid-west to the west were created by the federal government and given land "in the public trust". The state’s trustees (i.e. governor and legislature) were then obligated to, among other things, determine which waters had commercial uses (includes navigation, but is not limited to), and as a state *maintain public access* to such waters. Very few states followed through on this matter at statehood time, and those states that still have not done it are still obligated to. While states can drag their feet on this obligation, they cannot bypass it and relinquish public access potentials to private concerns. I was told that Washington is an example of a state that did their required homework at statehood time. Montana is an example of a state that finally got around to doing it in the early/mid 1980’s, and most of us now know it as the Montana Stream Access Law. Oregon is an example of a state that is finally getting around to it, with the Division of State Land accepting petitions from the public on what rivers to study first.  Within all of Oregon, only 13 river segments (e.g. Willamette up to Harrisburg, but not above) had been previously studied and formally declared public by the state of Oregon. The Association of Northwest Steelheaders has been leading a coalition of angling groups, including the Oregon Council of the FFF, to keep the ball rolling and to fight bills in the state legislature which have attempted to privatize many waters in the state rather than have to defeat them in a more costly fashion by going to court and bringing up the rock-solid public trust obligation. Regarding landowners "owning the river bottom".  Many older land deeds/titles may claim ownership of the bed and bank, but there is no legal standing for the deeds/titles to make such claims. Most title companies will not write new titles that claim bed/bank ownership since they know it is a false claim.  I know of realtors that likewise know the falsehood of anyone claiming bed/bank ownership, but most realtors do not have the technical/legal expertise or patience to correct the problem. Having said that, let me warn you that many landowners are sticking to the bed/bank claims and are quite willing to enforce it in any means they see fit, and I’ve been in several toe-to-toe battles with landowners where the far wiser option was to move on rather than risk a shotgun blast. A year or two ago in Oregon, and landowner had a bank fisherman arrested for violating his bed/bank ownership. As soon as the trepassing charge started heading to court, the landowner dropped the charges, most likely because he realized that the courts would overturn his claim and the river segment he was on would be studied by the state and no doubt be formally declared public. Thomas Gilg

Response:

Good Info snipped Montana is an example of a state that finally got around to doing it in the early/mid 1980’s, and most of us now know it as the Montana Stream Access Law.

Actually early 70’s. It is being challenged in court right now by some big ranchers in the Ruby. More good stuff snipped Regarding landowners "owning the river bottom".  Many older land deeds/titles may claim ownership of the bed and bank, but there is no legal standing for the deeds/titles to make such claims. Most title companies will not write new titles that claim bed/bank ownership since they know it is a false claim. I know of realtors that likewise know the falsehood of anyone claiming bed/bank ownership, but most realtors do not have the technical/legal expertise or patience to correct the problem.

Yes, to a point. I’ve seen it here where deeds are written and plats drawn and recorded that show a private property boundary to the LOW water mark of a river (or lake) yet the state says that anything between the HIGH water mark is ‘public domain’. Go figure. I also know of some folks who pay property taxes on a large river bed of which they own both sides. Sometimes, it is so confusing, you don’t know who to believe. — Tight Lines! Brian D. Nelson Diamond N Outfitters, Missoula, Montana http://www.montana.com/dno/dno.htm 406-626-4022

Response:

For more details on stream access, read:      http://www.oregonlive.com/news/99/03/st032107.html Note the comment regarding 38 other states. Thomas Gilg

Response:

I was talking with Charlie W. the other day about the difficulties in getting access to fishing on private land or access to go through private land to get to public areas to fish. Not that long ago, 10 years or so, it was fairly easy to get access from ranchers as long you approached them in a courteous manner. Charlie’s answer was that this is because the fly shops have approached every rancher with river, stream and lake access and offered them money for a lease. The result is that the ranchers that used to allow fishing access, still do but only to people paying money to the fly shops. At the time, I wasn’t too sure of his explanation. However, as I thought more about it, I realized that a number of areas where I used to get access are now "private" areas for a local shop. I know there are other factors contributing to this, but I was wondering if this is a trend around the Country or is it a Colorado thing? Willi

Response:

It is a trend around the world. As soon as a demand for such areas becomes apparent, and the owners realise that there is money to be made from them, commercial enterprise moves in. "Exclusivity" in this case is a valuable commodity. Also, many owners have been disappointed or upset, by people who have misused their generosity in the past, which does not make them kindly predisposed to allowing others access. This unfortunate trend may be observed practically everywhere. It appears to be one of the  symptoms of capitalist society in general.  Recreation is rapidly becoming one of the greatest single earning "industries", and the effects of this will inevitably continue with probably very far-reaching results. TL MC — "If you have tried everything you know, and nothing works, then perhaps it is time to accept that you don

Question:

Some stamps came out a while ago featuring flies. Anyone know where I cn get them? Ari

Response:

Some stamps came out a while ago featuring flies. Anyone know where I cn get them?

Um……U.S Post Office?

Response:

I have a first day issue of these stamps.  They were released on May 31, 1991 by the US post office. If you live in the US, look in your local phone book for a stamp collector store.  They will probably have it.  I first day issue will probably cost about $10, a strip about $5.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some stamps came out a while ago featuring flies. Anyone know where I cn get them? Ari

Response:

Some stamps came out a while ago featuring flies. Anyone know where I can get them?

I don’t know if they are still available in the Post Office or not — occasionally I see someone offer a booklet of them on eBay at auction. Fleetwood is still selling First Day Covers and Postcards so you can get a description of the stamps by going to their web site and searching for "fishing flies" http://www.unicover.com/unisearch.htm? At the time of issue the Post Office also put out a framed print of a fly fisherman with all five stamps included.  I have one around here somewhere but couldn’t find it to provide a better description. I’m not a stamp collector myself but am trying to round up copies of all the first day stuff for the Largemouth Bass stamp. Have a great weekend, — Clyde Drury Black Bass Book Collector http://members.aol.com/BassBks/index.html

Response:

Question:

I’ve been catching some small Peacock Bass in South Florida with spun deer hair poper type of flies. I’ve seen some really big Peacock Bass hitting the top of the water, but the won’t take the small poppers. Anyone know of any paterns to attract these bigger fish? Thanks Ken Baker

Response:

I’ve been catching some small Peacock Bass in South Florida with spun deer hair poper type of flies. I’ve seen some really big Peacock Bass hitting the top of the water, but the won’t take the small poppers. Anyone know of any paterns to attract these bigger fish?

The book `South Florida’s Peacock Bass’ by Carlos Hidalgo tells you a great deals about catching these great fish on flies. Go to my Website (URL below) and follow the link "South Florida’s Peacock Bass (Book by Carlos Hidalgo)". Ron Looi  ~       ~~    ~   ~   ..|..    ~           __|__                  ~ ~       /             o  o     o  o         ~     ~~  /~~   |   X    |                                /*_ .//     |||. /_  ||| ||..               ^ . ~//_^ / . -/ / – Boeing Fishin’ in Seattle!                   <  <, "www.geocities.com/RainForest/2730/"      <<

Response:

With a bassing guide I trained to guide a flyfisherman, I’ve fished the canals of Miami for the last 6 years and haven’t gotten a peacock over 4-5 pounds.  Maybe I’ve fished a total of 25-30 days for peacocks, so I’m no expert and take my thoughts about fishing for a grreat warmwater game fish. They are easiest to get on the surface when they are schooling.  A popper does the trick here.  Otherwise, in fishing along the edges, any popper of average size, but moved quickly without stopping (as one may do for largemouth) gets fish. Fishing just below the surface, a smartly moved clouser minnow (size 6-2) in chartreuse/white, chartreuse/yellow…anything with chartreuse does well.  Fishing the cm deeperhas the potential of getting a big fish. The easiest way to catch peacocks is when they are bedding.  Just drop the fly (easier said than when considering the way peacocks like to hide their beds in impossible places) on to the bed and the fish, both male and female, will continue to pick up the fly until either you catch him, or you say ‘enough is enough, you win…’ This method certainly isn’t the most most sporting.  Good luck. Adam – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been catching some small Peacock Bass in South Florida with spun deer hair poper type of flies. I’ve seen some really big Peacock Bass hitting the top of the water, but the won’t take the small poppers. Anyone know of any paterns to attract these bigger fish? Thanks Ken Baker

Response:

I’ve been catching some small Peacock Bass in South Florida with spun deer hair poper type of flies. I’ve seen some really big Peacock Bass hitting the top of the water, but the won’t take the small poppers. Anyone know of any paterns to attract these bigger fish? The book `South Florida’s Peacock Bass’ by Carlos Hidalgo tells you a great deals about catching these great fish on flies. Go to my Website (URL below) and follow the link "South Florida’s Peacock Bass (Book by Carlos Hidalgo)".

Carlos also has an article on flys for peacocks in the July Florida Sportsman Magazine.

Response:

Question:

On the stream: * What is your normal procedure once you hit the stream? * How long does it take you to get a fly on the water? (ignoring the amount   of time you take to study the water) Leaders: * Do you usually store a leader on your reel with the line? * With knotless leaders, is the the tippet considered part of the leader?   (I presume that it is but have never seen it stated.) * If so, (or with finished knotted leaders) how many flies will you   change (how many inches of tippet clipped) before you add more tippet? Casting: * When is the "proper" time to let line out when false casting (to extend   the line to the distance you wish to cast to)?  I do it instinctively now   but none of the books I’ve read, nor the few videos I’ve watched, have   brought up the subject at all.   _Rich_

Response:

Good questions. I generally hike into the stream wiht my rod assebeled but not strung. Streamside, this forces me to go slow and take some time to watch the water.  My rod/reel choice is often dictated by the wind conditions. Once, I determine what fly to fish, I’ll string the rod, replace the tippet (I use Braided Leaders), tie on a start.  My braided leaders generally stay on the reel. The process takes about 10 minutes if I go slowly enough. My tippets for dry fly action is generally 5x 30" to 36" long, 24" of 5x for wets,  and 18" of 4 or 3x for streamers.  I get good turnover with these legnths on Orvis braided 5x or 6x leaders of 9 or 12 ft. I’ll fish a tippet down to about half of the original legnth if I can get the drift I need. What’s proper is probably what works.  I feed line for an initial cast on both the backcast and forward false casts, hopefully leaving enough line to shoot if I’m fishing more than 40 feet away. I’m looking forward to other responses. jg

Response:

On the stream: * What is your normal procedure once you hit the stream? * How long does it take you to get a fly on the water? (ignoring the amount   of time you take to study the water)

My procedure depends somewhat on the type of water.  For Spring Creeks / Mountain Streams (my favorite) I will string up at the car and then take my time hiking to the stream when I am within 50 yards or so.  As a rule I try never to step in the water if at all possible and move as silently in the shadows as possible.  Wild Trout require this stealth.  If there are few trees or other cover, then I will crawl.  Once at the water, I almost always look for opportunities before casting.  Exceptions would be when I know that I will be fishing blind with nymphs/streamers or when the water is extremely off color. Leaders: * Do you usually store a leader on your reel with the line?  

I generally roll the leader/tippet right around the reel in as large a loop as possible.  I’ve tried leader wallets, etc.  and I think they’re too much hassle.  I tend to hit at least a bass impoundment 3 to 4 times per week and like to whip out the old 7 wt quickly and not have to unravel my leader.  Also, if you’re fishing for bass/saltwater species etc., then you’ll be using 2x-0x leaders/tippet and it takes punishment really well.  Smaller leader requires more care.  I do cover up to protect from sunlight with a neoprene cover. * With knotless leaders, is the the tippet considered part of the leader?  Yes.  The latter 2 ft or so is the tippet. * If so, (or with finished knotted leaders) how many flies will you   change (how many inches of tippet clipped) before you add more tippet?

I will add more tippet material after about 18 in (of 24 in) is used up.  This is really loose though.  If the quarry is not leader shy…then I’ll wait longer.  If you wait too long to add the proper tippet, however, then you won’t match up well with the leader material and the fly won’t turn over smoothly.   Casting: * When is the "proper" time to let line out when false casting (to extend   the line to the distance you wish to cast to)?  I do it instinctively now   but none of the books I’ve read, nor the few videos I’ve watched, have   brought up the subject at all.

If false casting is REALLY required then get the line out any way you feel comfortable with.  Forward or backward both is my preference, but I prefer shooting forward. K – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Question:

Anybody know of decent kitchenette/condo accomodations close to the quality water on the San Juan River in New Mexico?  Looking for a place with a kitchen and a separate bedroom. John F

Response:

Anybody know of decent kitchenette/condo accomodations close to the quality water on the San Juan River in New Mexico?  Looking for a place with a kitchen and a separate bedroom. John F

Hi John You might try Abe’s Motel & Fly Shop at Navaho Dam. I’ve never been there but they are sure nice to talk with on the phone. — Tight Lines ….. Al Beatty BT’s Fly Fishing Products On line catalog – tips & tricks at: http://www.btsflyfishing.com

Response:

        Does anybody know a good place to stay near the quality water on the San Juan, where they have units with two rooms?  Like a kitchenette with a bedroom and a sofabed in the main room?  The only place I’ve stayed there, is Abe’s, and I don’t recall they had any rooms like that.         Also, is the fishing usually good there in late September/early October?

The Best Western in Farmington!  I’m getting soft, but the hot tub and pool!! Not to much of a drive to the river. Doug — Doug & Tammy Stephens Paris, Idaho

Response:

        Does anybody know a good place to stay near the quality water on the San Juan, where they have units with two rooms?  Like a kitchenette with a bedroom and a sofabed in the main room?  The only place I’ve stayed there, is Abe’s, and I don’t recall they had any rooms like that.         Also, is the fishing usually good there in late September/early October?

each passing year with the competition.  Best to take a camper.  Stay as independent as you can be here.  We pull a camper, can sleep four, cook ourselves, wax away near the river.  Several other places are available but buyer beware.  Your money can go fast here. — George Gehrke/President Gehrke’s World’s Best Fly Fishing Products Snake River – Hell’s Canyon Asotin, WA 99402 / 509-243-4100  FAX 4644

Response:

        Does anybody know a good place to stay near the quality water on the San Juan, where they have units with two rooms?  Like a kitchenette with a bedroom and a sofabed in the main room?  The only place I’ve stayed there, is Abe’s, and I don’t recall they had any rooms like that.         Also, is the fishing usually good there in late September/early October?

Response:

Question:

Does anyone know what is available in hip waders for preschoolers and where they can be purchased? Thanks,Paul and his little buddy Zack.

Response:

Does anyone know what is available in hip waders for preschoolers and

where they can be purchased? Thanks,Paul and his little buddy Zack.

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood the subject.  I though you were talking about waders that would be hip to kids.  You know, they would probably be 8 sizes too big and hang down below the underwear? David B.

Response:

Does anyone know what is available in hip waders for preschoolers and

where they can be purchased? Thanks,Paul and his little buddy Zack.

Hi Zack and his big bud Paul-    Call Ron Pylki in Eugene Oregon at (503) 773-2181 or (503) 779-8008. He used to specialize in this kind of application through his company NeoSports. I haven’t heard from NeoSports in a while and am afraid they might no longer be in business. Even if they’re defunct, Ron should still have all the dies and stuff and be able to whip up a pair for cheap.    -Ralph —

Response:

Question:

I’ve got my pole. I’ve got my flies.  I don’t have line. I found a good reference that describes the different types of fly line, but not leaders and backing(?). What is the material for leaders?  How long? How to attach to the fly line? The text also mentioned a backing line. What is it?  How much do I use? How do I attach it to the fly line? I was thinking about learning on blue gills.  Good/ Bad idea? Thanks in advance for all replies! Ed K.

Response:

In case  you haven’t received a reply on line, leaders, etc…Your rod should have a line weight marked some where just above the cork grip. Might be #6 or some such. You’ll need a line matched to that number. The leaders are made of monofiliment. You need one about 7 1/2 feet with a stength of about 6 pound test for sunfish. To the tip of the mono, add about 2 feet of tippet material (mono) with a barrel or double surgeon’s knot. I’d go to a flyfishing store for more help or buy the L.L. Bean Beginners Guide To Flyfishing," written by Dave Whitlock. Sunfish are great to learn on and fish for forever!!

Response: