Okay, a year ago June I went off across Wisconsin and picked up my flying partner at a teeny strip (Cumberland, KUBE) near her cabin so we could go to dinner at an even teenier strip in an airpark. Only thing better than the food is the opportunity to land in the center of the golf course, with all the fancy summer homes circled around it. We knew a big front was due through, but blithely disregarded the chance of enormous thunderstorms. Just to show us we’re not so smart, it came through with perfectly clear skies, and winds that went up and up and up. We thought we were fine till we almost landed 30 miles away at another strip with an actual town around it. Heck of a tailwind. Zeroed in on the right place, a dim little runway surounded by too much fast-moving atmosphere. Real dark now. We can feel the wind now, really pushy and shoving us away from the airport. I fret aloud that she’ll be high on final, but it takes forever to get to the end of the runway. We’re flying twice as far "against the current" with this wind. By the time we reach short final approach, we’re at the right altitude but then things get intense. We probably had the flash at the same time: we’re getting shaken around like beans in a can by now, it’s real dark on the ground, and we’re aloft in a tiny mechanical contrivance with the daunting – and basically unrefusable – task of getting it to touch the ground in exactly the right spot at a high speed despite the forces of nature arrayed against us. The quartering right crosswind is nasty, the narrow runway seems to come up fast at the end, and I never quit talking. "Remember, aileron right to keep it over the runway. You can use rudder to kick it straight just before touchdown." She’s got her hands full with altimeter, speed, closing in on the numbers. I’m her other brain, her other pair of eyes, her reassurance. "Get more right. I’m watching it. More, you can’t go too far right, just keep heading right. It’s going to shove you right off the runway left onto the grass otherwise. More right. That’s very good." We finally land, level and straight, with the baby-buggy skittering of wheels you can’t avoid when you’re swooshing forward and the Wind Giants are shoving you sideways. I assure her it was nicer than many of my no-wind landings. Back-taxiing to the hangars, she asks, "were you worried?" I can honestly say, since we were too busy to freak out to the degree appropriate to the situation, that I was not. "I knew I could bully you off to the right enough, and you took care of the rest."
That’s as good a story as I’ve read. Husband and Wife teamwork…. There’s just something about that signifigant other, that when they say "fly the plane", it just makes it make sense and so much easier. Always remember, only three things to do in any emergency situation: "fly the plane, fly the plane and fly the plane".
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Okay, a year ago June I went off across Wisconsin and picked up my flying partner at a teeny strip (Cumberland, KUBE) near her cabin so we could go to dinner at an even teenier strip in an airpark. Only thing better than the food is the opportunity to land in the center of the golf course, with all the fancy summer homes circled around it. We knew a big front was due through, but blithely disregarded the chance of enormous thunderstorms. Just to show us we’re not so smart, it came through with perfectly clear skies, and winds that went up and up and up. We thought we were fine till we almost landed 30 miles away at another strip with an actual town around it. Heck of a tailwind. Zeroed in on the right place, a dim little runway surounded by too much fast-moving atmosphere. Real dark now. We can feel the wind now, really pushy and shoving us away from the airport. I fret aloud that she’ll be high on final, but it takes forever to get to the end of the runway. We’re flying twice as far "against the current" with this wind. By the time we reach short final approach, we’re at the right altitude but then things get intense. We probably had the flash at the same time: we’re getting shaken around like beans in a can by now, it’s real dark on the ground, and we’re aloft in a tiny mechanical contrivance with the daunting – and basically unrefusable – task of getting it to touch the ground in exactly the right spot at a high speed despite the forces of nature arrayed against us. The quartering right crosswind is nasty, the narrow runway seems to come up fast at the end, and I never quit talking. "Remember, aileron right to keep it over the runway. You can use rudder to kick it straight just before touchdown." She’s got her hands full with altimeter, speed, closing in on the numbers. I’m her other brain, her other pair of eyes, her reassurance. "Get more right. I’m watching it. More, you can’t go too far right, just keep heading right. It’s going to shove you right off the runway left onto the grass otherwise. More right. That’s very good." We finally land, level and straight, with the baby-buggy skittering of wheels you can’t avoid when you’re swooshing forward and the Wind Giants are shoving you sideways. I assure her it was nicer than many of my no-wind landings. Back-taxiing to the hangars, she asks, "were you worried?" I can honestly say, since we were too busy to freak out to the degree appropriate to the situation, that I was not. "I knew I could bully you off to the right enough, and you took care of the rest."
Great story thanx. BTW, any chance you could post those photos up somewhere we could see them? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is my favorite story from my short bush flying career: Really thick haze was unusual in northeastern Ontario. It was so bad that June afternoon in 1990 that I had decided against the trip from Ramsey Lake in Sudbury, Ont., our base, to pick up two guys due to come out of a camp on the Spanish River, about an 80 mile trip. The vis was just too low, less than 1/2 mile into sun, and Bob, my boss and the owner of Ramsey Airways, was pretty good about not pushing me into conditions I wasn’t ready for, being a new bush pilot (by the end of the season I was flying in just about anything). The two guys that were waiting for me were local and could stand to spend an extra night in their cabin. A mild cold front cleared out the haze overnight and next morning was one of those blindingly blue razor horizon days you get in the "Near North" when free of the influence of the Great Lakes to the south. Bob and I discussed the location of the camp and the fact that the useable area of the river was less than 3000 ft long, short for a Cessna 180 on floats with a load. I decided that the space was adequate but would take a minimum amount of fuel (just enough for the round trip plus 10 gal) to keep the load down. The C-180 was running fine except for a mystery oil leak that seemed to be coming from a pushod tube. It was a ‘76 model, indistinguishable from a 185, and was in beautiful shape. By 9 am I was cruising northwest from Subury at a couple of thousand feet in silky smooth air, watching the boreal forest slide under the floats, and keeping an eye out for a moose. Mornings like that made me think, "I can’t believe I’m getting paid to do this" (the catch: the pay for newbies is effectively minimum wage, hence only one season at it). It was no problem getting into the stretch of river where the cabin was, and soon I was at the dock loading the gear of my two passengers. On the way out I made sure that I used every foot of available river. The take-off run was between a bend and some rapids and was uneventful. I’d always heard about things going wrong with engines right after the first power change after take off. Sure enough, just after setting up 24 square for the climb, there started a once per rev beat. A funny little vibration. After shoving my heart back down my throat and pulling carb heat, I started to assess things, turning to follow the river to a lake a couple of miles south. Once over the lake I relaxed a bit, circling over it, and starting playing with the engine controls trying to figure out what it was. The vibration changed with rpm, and playing with mags, carb heat and mixture had no effect. Oil pressure and temp was fine. The vibration was too subtle to be a chunk of prop tip missing or anything like that. Decision time came after I examined the power setting and compared it to the airplane’s performance. By now I was 24 square, flying at 90 kts, and NOT CLIMBING. Something internal was "holding the engine back" and the vibration was very slowly getting worse. I chopped power, announced to my surprised seat mate, "I’m putting it down; something’s not right." and circled down to land on Lebel Lake, basically a widening of the Spanish River. Couldn’t get anybody on the unicom on the way down. An outfitter used the lake as part of his camp network and this lake had a nice dock, with boats, and the end of a trail leading to another lake. Pulled up, docked, tied up and looked at the airplane, which had oil all down the lower left side and belly. Hmmmm. Removed the top cowl… YIKES! The left forward most cylinder was held on with only one top stud! The other 3 top ones had broken off, and the bottom ones were loose, which is why the top ones failed. The oil was coming from the broken seal at the base flange of the cylinder (which was the "mystery oil leak"). The cylinder was able to wobble up and down, which was the cause of the vibration and was not far away from popping right off. Well, how to get outta there… Sent the two guys fishing in one of the boats to keep them occupied. Gotta get someone on the radio. Pan calls on 122.8 got nothing. So I decided to do a Pan call on 121.5. "PAN PAN PAN… Golf Papa Victor Zulu, any aircraft." After a while of this, came the surprise response; "Papa Victor Zulu, this is Canadian (airlines) Flight 435. Can we be of assistance?" It took about 15 minutes to relay the information, the name of the lake, etc. The airliner seemed to be some distance away and couldn’t hear me very clearly, so I had to repeat instructions, but eventually he was able to get enough information to raise Ramsey Base on unicom and talk to my boss, telling him that I was on Lebel Lake with unknown difficulties but everybody was ok. The airline then relayed back to me that Bob would be out with the Beaver after dropping off another load at a nearby lodge. After lunch I could hear the guttural throb of the 985 in the distance and called Bob on 122.8. He said, "I got some gas for ya". He thought I’d decided not to fly back because of not enough fuel. "I got lotsa gas Bob." "What’s wrong?" "Cylinder coming off." "Ohhh shhhhhh—t" (definitely not radio protocol, but under the circumstances…). Anyway, we loaded the two guys and their gear in the Beaver, secured the 180 to the shoreline beside the dock, and off we went. I went with a mechanic the next day in his personal aircraft and we removed the engine, firewall forward, right there, using a come-along and a bipod made from pine poles. I photographed the whole thing. That was fun, in spite of the blackflies. Being on an uninhabited lake in the middle of nowhere is one of the most peaceful experiences I’ve ever had. Hauled the O-470 out in the Ramsey Airways Beaver that afternoon, after an interesting and entertaining 2 hours trying to get it in the Beaver’s cabin. Three weeks later the engine was overhauled and we flew in back in and reinstalled it. The first flight out was a bit of a nail biter. Luckily, no more problems for the remaining 400 hours I flew for rest of that summer of 1990, probably the most fun summer of my life. John Kahn — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
A really great story – the commercial magazines should print such quality! This is my favorite story from my short bush flying career:
<snip You guys are gonna put ‘Flying’ out of businesss if you keep this up! Mark Hickey
A really great story – the commercial magazines should print such quality! This is my favorite story from my short bush flying career: <snip You guys are gonna put ‘Flying’ out of businesss if you keep this up!
Good.
A really great story – the commercial magazines should print such quality! Mark Hickey
This is my favorite story from my short bush flying career: Really thick haze was unusual in northeastern Ontario. It was so bad that June afternoon in 1990 that I had decided against the trip from Ramsey Lake in Sudbury, Ont., our base, to pick up two guys due to come out of a camp on the Spanish River, about an 80 mile trip. The vis was just too low, less than 1/2 mile into sun, and Bob, my boss and the owner of Ramsey Airways, was pretty good about not pushing me into conditions I wasn’t ready for, being a new bush pilot (by the end of the season I was flying in just about anything). The two guys that were waiting for me were local and could stand to spend an extra night in their cabin. A mild cold front cleared out the haze overnight and next morning was one of those blindingly blue razor horizon days you get in the "Near North" when free of the influence of the Great Lakes to the south. Bob and I discussed the location of the camp and the fact that the useable area of the river was less than 3000 ft long, short for a Cessna 180 on floats with a load. I decided that the space was adequate but would take a minimum amount of fuel (just enough for the round trip plus 10 gal) to keep the load down. The C-180 was running fine except for a mystery oil leak that seemed to be coming from a pushod tube. It was a ‘76 model, indistinguishable from a 185, and was in beautiful shape. By 9 am I was cruising northwest from Subury at a couple of thousand feet in silky smooth air, watching the boreal forest slide under the floats, and keeping an eye out for a moose. Mornings like that made me think, "I can’t believe I’m getting paid to do this" (the catch: the pay for newbies is effectively minimum wage, hence only one season at it). It was no problem getting into the stretch of river where the cabin was, and soon I was at the dock loading the gear of my two passengers. On the way out I made sure that I used every foot of available river. The take-off run was between a bend and some rapids and was uneventful. I’d always heard about things going wrong with engines right after the first power change after take off. Sure enough, just after setting up 24 square for the climb, there started a once per rev beat. A funny little vibration. After shoving my heart back down my throat and pulling carb heat, I started to assess things, turning to follow the river to a lake a couple of miles south. Once over the lake I relaxed a bit, circling over it, and starting playing with the engine controls trying to figure out what it was. The vibration changed with rpm, and playing with mags, carb heat and mixture had no effect. Oil pressure and temp was fine. The vibration was too subtle to be a chunk of prop tip missing or anything like that. Decision time came after I examined the power setting and compared it to the airplane’s performance. By now I was 24 square, flying at 90 kts, and NOT CLIMBING. Something internal was "holding the engine back" and the vibration was very slowly getting worse. I chopped power, announced to my surprised seat mate, "I’m putting it down; something’s not right." and circled down to land on Lebel Lake, basically a widening of the Spanish River. Couldn’t get anybody on the unicom on the way down. An outfitter used the lake as part of his camp network and this lake had a nice dock, with boats, and the end of a trail leading to another lake. Pulled up, docked, tied up and looked at the airplane, which had oil all down the lower left side and belly. Hmmmm. Removed the top cowl… YIKES! The left forward most cylinder was held on with only one top stud! The other 3 top ones had broken off, and the bottom ones were loose, which is why the top ones failed. The oil was coming from the broken seal at the base flange of the cylinder (which was the "mystery oil leak"). The cylinder was able to wobble up and down, which was the cause of the vibration and was not far away from popping right off. Well, how to get outta there… Sent the two guys fishing in one of the boats to keep them occupied. Gotta get someone on the radio. Pan calls on 122.8 got nothing. So I decided to do a Pan call on 121.5. "PAN PAN PAN… Golf Papa Victor Zulu, any aircraft." After a while of this, came the surprise response; "Papa Victor Zulu, this is Canadian (airlines) Flight 435. Can we be of assistance?" It took about 15 minutes to relay the information, the name of the lake, etc. The airliner seemed to be some distance away and couldn’t hear me very clearly, so I had to repeat instructions, but eventually he was able to get enough information to raise Ramsey Base on unicom and talk to my boss, telling him that I was on Lebel Lake with unknown difficulties but everybody was ok. The airline then relayed back to me that Bob would be out with the Beaver after dropping off another load at a nearby lodge. After lunch I could hear the guttural throb of the 985 in the distance and called Bob on 122.8. He said, "I got some gas for ya". He thought I’d decided not to fly back because of not enough fuel. "I got lotsa gas Bob." "What’s wrong?" "Cylinder coming off." "Ohhh shhhhhh—t" (definitely not radio protocol, but under the circumstances…). Anyway, we loaded the two guys and their gear in the Beaver, secured the 180 to the shoreline beside the dock, and off we went. I went with a mechanic the next day in his personal aircraft and we removed the engine, firewall forward, right there, using a come-along and a bipod made from pine poles. I photographed the whole thing. That was fun, in spite of the blackflies. Being on an uninhabited lake in the middle of nowhere is one of the most peaceful experiences I’ve ever had. Hauled the O-470 out in the Ramsey Airways Beaver that afternoon, after an interesting and entertaining 2 hours trying to get it in the Beaver’s cabin. Three weeks later the engine was overhauled and we flew in back in and reinstalled it. The first flight out was a bit of a nail biter. Luckily, no more problems for the remaining 400 hours I flew for rest of that summer of 1990, probably the most fun summer of my life. John Kahn — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
But,one can build the body into most of the bend, use hook shape to the advantage of simulation.
That’s true, especially for scuds, caddis pupae, etc. Still, by far my most productive fly, a bead-head PT on a TMC 3761, has a pretty straight body that takes up no more than half the total hook length (eye to point). I agree with your earlier statement, "On many subsurface patterns, and even some surface emerger types, the hook bend can serve to mimic the shape of the natural nymph, pupa or whatever", especially for those forms, like emerging pupae that have associated air bubbles. The hook bend may correspond in the trout’s eye to the curved edge of the bubble or bubble mass. Although it’s an uncommon fly, compare the picture of the daphnia fly Dave LaCourse found and posted on ROFT http://www.danica.com/flytier/hverhaar/daphnia.htm to photos of daphnia http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artjun99/wflea.html Without the hook bend, there’d be little resemblance. Makes you wonder if all those tiny things on curved #24-28 hooks that we think are midge patterns aren’t really taken by the trout as daphnia (not that it really matters). JR
Some manufacturers are now producing bright gold, green, red and blue salmon/steelhead hooks. Why waste all that bare metal when you can dress it up?
One wonders if a little metallic paint added to make the hook look more like the tied bug would make a difference. I might have to try that for fun just to see. Sandy
Maybe that big curvy part looks like an ovipositor. See my web site www.sluttyflies.com
Here’s the sex spam we were looking for. Bugs waving their ovipositors around. Hmmph. Sandy
One wonders if a little metallic paint added to make the hook look more like the tied bug would make a difference. I might have to try that for fun just to see.
They are starting to make the colored hooks in trout sizes too. I saw some at a fly shop on the Beaverhead River and Lou Teletski gave me a fly that used a red hook when we went fishing the other day. I haven’t tried them yet, but I can see how they might benefit a fly tyer. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/
They are starting to make the colored hooks in trout sizes too. I saw some at a fly shop on the Beaverhead River and Lou Teletski gave me a fly that used a red hook when we went fishing the other day. I haven’t tried them yet, but I can see how they might benefit a fly tyer.
Did you see who the hook’s maker was? If someone here’s interested in trying it for themselves, you can buy metallic paint (normally used for jewelry) here: http://www.fancifulsinc.com/ Sandy
You’d think (regardless of your species-specific sense of perception) that this big ol’ ugly THING just hanging there off the bottom of our handiwork is a lot more obvious than the many fine details we obsess over. Why on earth would any trout swimming not key on THAT?
Depending on the angle the fish sees it from, yes it’s very obvious and I have no doubt whatever that the trout sees it. But trout are also very used to seeing things on insects – broken legs and wings, a sliver of leaf or filament of weed, or even a pebble and twig case on a caddis. The trout sees it and just assumes it’s a harmless piece of flotsam, extra fiber if you will. Only if a trout has been hooked a number of times would he actually recognize it as a "bad" insect, IMO.
Did you see who the hook’s maker was? If someone here’s interested in trying it for themselves, you can buy metallic paint (normally used for jewelry) here: http://www.fancifulsinc.com/
The hooks I saw were not labeled. It looked like the shop had bought them bulk and packaged them in little zip lock bags on their own. I will call out there tomorrow and find out where they bought them at. I do recall they were expensive (like $10 for 25 hooks if I remember correctly) so your metallic paint idea might be a very good alternative. — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/
"The trout just assumes it’s a harmless piece of flotsam, extra fiber if you will." "Assumes", to deduce. The ability to come to a logical conclusion based on facts. "Trout", to be a genius. The ability to attend college courses without paying tuitions. To Trout, as to flaunt wonderful phrases upon non-thinking ass holes who fly fish as a reflex action. "Seeing Trout" extablishes the ability to understand languages such as English. "Feeding Trout", The need to eat with the foreknowledge that to not do so will result in death. "Dieting Trout", as in "Free Rising" selective trout who know the difference between choosing either a protein insect over one burden with excessive carbohydrates and undesirable fiber. Flyfisherman: That which has a brain the size of a pea and who talks to the fishes as in Mafia Fisherman. All’s Fair With Fur or Feather gg
Warren Findley: One wonders if a little metallic paint added to make the hook look more like the tied bug would make a difference. I might have to try that for fun just to see. They are starting to make the colored hooks in trout sizes too. I saw some at a fly shop on the Beaverhead River and Lou Teletski gave me a fly that used a red hook when we went fishing the other day. I haven’t tried them yet, but I can see how they might benefit a fly tyer. —
I’ve been using red nymph hooks for five or six years. It’s the only color I’ve seen in the smaller sizes. As far as glitter is concerned, good old nail polish (Wet and Wild) with the silver or gold flecks in it works well. Also, Orvis sells some head cement with silver flecks. Dave
I’ve been using red nymph hooks for five or six years. It’s the only color I’ve seen in the smaller sizes. As far as glitter is concerned, good old nail polish (Wet and Wild) with the silver or gold flecks in it works well. Also, Orvis sells some head cement with silver flecks. Dave
Do you think there’s an advantage in using colored hooks? The nail polish idea is a good one — you can get it in any crazy color these days, and Wet & Wild is pretty cheap, but the clerk at the store might look at you funny. Sandy
Reading about colored hooks now is a revelation to me Jon and I suppose it makes sense to include the hook coloring of olive, for instance, to add to the tone of an olive caddis emerger, for instance. It seems this is one of those rare instances where the present generation is going to drag me, screaming and kicking into the future. I might be an old dog learning new tricks but it doesn’t mean I have to like it. Now if you please, would someone hold my hand down hard upon this table so it won’t lift that shot of Jack Daniels to my quivering lips? Mr. G. All’s Fair With Fur or Feather gg
……. But trout are also very used to seeing things on insects – broken legs and wings, a sliver of leaf or filament of weed, or even a pebble and twig case on a caddis. The trout sees it and just assumes it’s a harmless piece of flotsam, extra fiber if you will. Only if a trout has been hooked a number of times would he actually recognize it as a "bad" insect, IMO.
Yes, that’s all plausible. JR
Do you think there’s an advantage in using colored hooks? The nail polish idea is a good one — you can get it in any crazy color these days, and Wet & Wild is pretty cheap, but the clerk at the store might look at you funny.
I called up that fly shop in Dillon and they said the hooks are manufactured by Daiichi. I checked the Daiichi website and they have red, black, nickel and gold hooks in a variety of styles. Unfortunately they do not list their hooks that would be of use to fly fishermen so I emailed the company for more information. Here is a link to their website if you care to take a look. http://www.daiichihooks.com/daiichi/index.html — Warren Findley Remove (nospamZZ) to respond via email http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt/
I called up that fly shop in Dillon and they said the hooks are manufactured by Daiichi. I checked the Daiichi website and they have red, black, nickel and gold hooks in a variety of styles. Unfortunately they do not list their hooks that would be of use to fly fishermen so I emailed the company for more information. Here is a link to their website if you care to take a look. http://www.daiichihooks.com/daiichi/index.html
Another manufacturer of colored hooks is Gamakatsu (www.gamakatsu.com). I’ve seen them in the local fly shops but never tied with them, but I’ll vouch for the quality of their product. I was a serious ocean/big game fisherman in a past life; Gamakatsu and Owner were the only hooks I’d use.
Warren? Wouldn’t you t hink a gold hook would most likely be like adding gold tinsel to a fly? I don’t know. George All’s Fair With Fur or Feather gg
I think, but have no proof for it, that hook recognition develops in fish over time and that this is a major part of what we anglers call "selective behavior". I feel this is mostly a factor with flies at/near the surface, and more an issue in slower, richer streams that offer more time for the fish to observe their prey. On many subsurface patterns, and even some surface emerger types, the hook bend can serve to mimic the shape of the natural nymph,pupa or whatever.
I agree it’s mostly a factor in slower, richer streams. I’d have thought, though, it was also more important with subsurface flies than with dries, first because the "profile" of the bend is reduced when viewed from below, and second because, as well described by Peter in the Fly Perceptions thread, it may be that the bare part of the hook is somewhat masked by the dimples and associated halos caused by the hackle and tail. JR
When I first read the header to this post I ignored because I thought it was sex site SPAM!!!!!!!
Sorry. Fine state of affairs when we *expect* to see sex spam, ain’t it? What you say may very well be true, but like I said in another post, it’s something that confirms my opinion that fish perceive our flies in a very different way from the way we do. That "big-ass curvy part" is very evident to me and seems even more prevalent in smaller flies. Maybe they ignore it because they tend to look for certain things that are "right" about a fly or for a certain trigger instead of things that are "wrong." Maybe those "educated" fish have learned to look for things that are "wrong" as well???
Well, my speculations were just musings. To me, it remains a great mystery that fish will overlook something so conspicuous. On the other hand, say a fish ignores a nymph presented once, twice, and takes it on the third cast. It might well be that, just by chance, the fly was turned the third time in a way to present a top or bottom view (with the bare hook bend hidden), while the first two times, again by chance alone, the fly passed the fish turned in a way that presented the fly more in profile, with the bend more exposed. When fishing the traditional downstream swing for steelhead here in the PNW, one tactic is to throw upstream mends to slow down the swing, allowing the fish the longest possible view of the fly (a good tactic when swinging soft hackles for trout, too). A disadvantage is that unless you use a riffle hitch or some such, the view the fish has tends to be a butt-on, reduced view. It addition to the riffle hitch, a greased line presentation also serves to give the fish a full profile view of the fly. The difference (from fishing for trout) is that you just want the steelhead to see the very most of whatever silhouette the fly happens to have, to maximize the sheer provocation value of the fly–you’re not trying to imitate any particular natural foodstuff. Here the more bare hook you have visible, maybe the better. Some manufacturers are now producing bright gold, green, red and blue salmon/steelhead hooks. Why waste all that bare metal when you can dress it up? JR
I’ve often wondered about that "big-ass curvy part", but most of the time it doesn’t seem to bother the trout’s attraction to the lure.
Good thing, too, otherwise we’d all have to find another sport. ;) I guess that’s what amazes me: that it *doesn’t* bother the fish while very minor differences in other parts of the fly will make a difference. JR
Maybe that big curvy part looks like an ovipositor. See my web site www.sluttyflies.com
I believe that many streams (I know of three) where the fish are "opportunistic" — that is, if it looks like it could be food, they will strike it. On the rivers I recently visited in Idaho, there was no hatch, yet they readily took a humpy or a Klinkhammer, the bigger the better. The guide gave my grandson a #10 red humpy and I marveled at its effectiveness. This is just the opposite of another river I fish – when there is no hatch, the fish will rise to a very small, well presented dry. Nymphing the rivers in Idaho was very successful, but again you had to give them a big nymph. My #18s and 20s were useless. Those same 18s and 20s on another river will catch many fish.
"Bigger is better" is right. I seldom use dries smaller than #12 or nymphs smaller than #14 in those Idaho waters you fished. I think the deal is that they’re relatively sterile freestone rivers. The fish jump on whatever they see that looks edible. Large, good floating Chernobyl patterns with dropper nymphs are very effective. So are large orange stimulators. You can catch these fish with an indicator attached to a bare hook. I only use the standard nymph patterns — pheasant tails, hare’s ears, prince nymphs, and lately copper johns. Also, the fish are mostly cutthroats, which are notoriously gullible. It doesn’t make for particularly challenging fishing (aside from the ass-busting hiking to get to the good spots), but it’s fun. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
John replies: I’d have thought, though, it was also more important with subsurface flies than with dries, first because the "profile" of the bend is reduced when viewed from below,
But,one can build the body into most of the bend, use hook shape to the advantage of simulation. it may be that the bare part of the hook is somewhat masked by the dimples and associated halos caused by the hackle and tail.
I disagree. If you watch how a fresh, well hackled dry fly floats, the hook penetrates the surface,except for a tightly palmered hackle. Most dries settle right on top of the surface with the body, with some hackle tips in the water and the ones on the sides doing the work of holding the fly up. Anyhow, the hook will be seen, and quite distinctly from the body silhouette. Tom L
John writes: just what do we imagine the fish make of that big long hook bend
I think, but have no proof for it, that hook recognition develops in fish over time and that this is a major part of what we anglers call "selective behavior". I feel this is mostly a factor with flies at/near the surface, and more an issue in slower, richer streams that offer more time for the fish to observe their prey. On many subsurface patterns, and even some surface emerger types, the hook bend can serve to mimic the shape of the natural nymph,pupa or whatever. Tom L
John writes: just what do we imagine the fish make of that big long hook bend I think, but have no proof for it, that hook recognition develops in fish over time and that this is a major part of what we anglers call "selective behavior". I feel this is mostly a factor with flies at/near the surface, and more an issue in slower, richer streams that offer more time for the fish to observe their prey. On many subsurface patterns, and even some surface emerger types, the hook bend can serve to mimic the shape of the natural nymph,pupa or whatever.
When I first read the header to this post I ignored because I thought it was sex site SPAM!!!!!!! What you say may very well be true, but like I said in another post, it’s something that confirms my opinion that fish perceive our flies in a very different way from the way we do. That "big-ass curvy part" is very evident to me and seems even more prevalent in smaller flies. Maybe they ignore it because they tend to look for certain things that are "right" about a fly or for a certain trigger instead of things that are "wrong." Maybe those "educated" fish have learned to look for things that are "wrong" as well??? Willi
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Willi writes: John writes: just what do we imagine the fish make of that big long hook bend I think, but have no proof for it, that hook recognition develops in fish over time and that this is a major part of what we anglers call "selective behavior". I feel this is mostly a factor with flies at/near the surface, and more an issue in slower, richer streams that offer more time for the fish to observe their prey. On many subsurface patterns, and even some surface emerger types, the hook bend can serve to mimic the shape of the natural nymph,pupa or whatever. When I first read the header to this post I ignored because I thought it was sex site SPAM!!!!!!! What you say may very well be true, but like I said in another post, it’s something that confirms my opinion that fish perceive our flies in a very different way from the way we do. That "big-ass curvy part" is very evident to me and seems even more prevalent in smaller flies. Maybe they ignore it because they tend to look for certain things that are "right" about a fly or for a certain trigger instead of things that are "wrong." Maybe those "educated" fish have learned to look for things that are "wrong" as well??? Willi
I believe that many streams (I know of three) where the fish are "opportunistic" — that is, if it looks like it could be food, they will strike it. On the rivers I recently visited in Idaho, there was no hatch, yet they readily took a humpy or a Klinkhammer, the bigger the better. The guide gave my grandson a #10 red humpy and I marveled at its effectiveness. This is just the opposite of another river I fish – when there is no hatch, the fish will rise to a very small, well presented dry. Nymphing the rivers in Idaho was very successful, but again you had to give them a big nymph. My #18s and 20s were useless. Those same 18s and 20s on another river will catch many fish. I’ve often wondered about that "big-ass curvy part", but most of the time it doesn’t seem to bother the trout’s attraction to the lure. Dave
The recent discussion about wings, fishes’ perception, etc., reminded me of something I’ve often wondered, even marveled about–one of those things that come unbidden to mind on the thousandth (or two thousandth) fishless cast of the day on a steelhead river. Those of us who agonize over the minutiae of wing size, or number of fibers in the tail, or shade of copper in the ribbing: just what do we imagine the fish make of that big long hook bend that on some patterns constitutes 50% or more of the whole gestalt (if you’ll pardon the word) presented to the fish? Think of some ties you’ve seen of English PTs or soft hackles on those short hooks with absolutely huge gaps; yet these are effective flies. You’d think (regardless of your species-specific sense of perception) that this big ol’ ugly THING just hanging there off the bottom of our handiwork is a lot more obvious than the many fine details we obsess over. Why on earth would any trout swimming not key on THAT? I’d imagine the influence of the hook bend is least when the fly is viewed from directly above (in which case for most flies, it’s invisible); almost as little when viewed from directly below; slightly greater when viewed at an oblique angle above, behind, or to side; and greatest when viewed at right angles from the side. If this is right, could it be one reason (in addition to the commonly cited ones) a straight downstream presentation of a dry is successful when casting to selective fish on calm waters? Could there be implications for presentation of nymphs in slower water? A reason why LaFontaine’s sparkle pupa (with the bend shrouded) is so effective? A reason to use nothing but the lightest wire hooks available? (A reason for me to get a life and think about more useful things?) JR
Clap, clap. a good solid dose of penicillin should cure ya willi…. Speaking from experience?
nahh, saw it on the health channel. –waldo
… in my opinion good manners make gentlemen. Uh Bill? Remember that scene in Blazing Saddles where the cowboys are sitting around the fire eating beans? john
Clap, clap. a good solid dose of penicillin should cure ya willi….
Speaking from experience? Willi
I like ROFF for a couple of things, especially because I learned a lot and find it an inexhaustible source of knowledge in flyfishing. But I was horrified by the lack of manners I personally recognised in the last time. Whether that behaviour in some threads was illmannered or not I leave you to judge, but I have to admit in retrospect, that I found some real gentlemen in this group. I am talking about these men which might have insulted somebody, but have been courageous enough to ask for apologize. One of the hardest things to do. Conclusion: I personally highly respect this, whether the apology has been accepted or not; in my opinion good manners make gentlemen.
Clap, clap.
a good solid dose of penicillin should cure ya willi…. –waldo
Clap, clap. Willi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You should know me well enough to know that I am not the kind of person who spits on military personnel and I am very sorry if anything I said led you to believe so. I urge you to accept this apology so I don’t have to drive all the way to Maine this September to put a size 11 up your arse. (You know how much I hate nymph fishing during hopper season.) — Ken Fortenberry
You should know me well enough to know that I am not the kind of person who spits on military personnel and I am very sorry if anything I said led you to believe so. I urge you to accept this apology so I don’t have to drive all the way to Maine this September to put a size 11 up your arse. (You know how much I hate nymph fishing during hopper season.) — Ken Fortenberry
Hello RBPers! I read this post just the other day, especially the part regarding Old Towns being heavier than announced, and decided to check for myself. So I weighed my 17′ Penobscot, advertised at 65 lbs, and whaddaya know? It weighed 65 pounds! So, at least in this particular instance (and assuming the scale was accurate, etc.) Old Town’s number appears to be correct. Of course, as they say, your mileage may vary, but I’ve been very happy with the Penobscot. It is my family’s first canoe, and we have had a lot of fun with it. And that, to me, is what it is all about.
Well, Our 16 ft Penobscot is a heavy dog. I weighed it and it came to almost 75 lbs. It’s advertised at 63 lbs. The only additions are flotation and knee pads. I’m still trying figure out why its such a lump of lead! Eric L. Nilson Remove {Remove-to-mail} for email
Thanks for your reply and comments, Andrew! I just didn’t want new folks (not unlike myself) to dismiss a manufacturer out-of-hand based upon one model or experience. I used RBP as one of my sources in selecting the Penobscot, so I truly believe people’s experiences here are valuable. Regarding materials, I think I would have liked to have been able to justify the Kevlar, but two to three times the price was just too much. I don’t know much about Kevlar’s real-life durability, but the weight reduction would have been nice. Maybe one of these days… Anyway, thanks again and let’s hope for an early spring! Carl Seals – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello RBPers! I read this post just the other day, especially the part regarding Old Towns being heavier than announced, and decided to check for myself. So I weighed my 17′ Penobscot, advertised at 65 lbs, and whaddaya know? It weighed 65 pounds! So, at least in this particular instance (and assuming the scale was accurate, etc.) Old Town’s number appears to be correct. Of course, as they say, your mileage may vary, but I’ve been very happy with the Penobscot. It is my family’s first canoe, and we have had a lot of fun with it. And that, to me, is what it is all about. Happy paddline! Carl Seals Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. When I said that, I meant specifically Old Town’s Discovery (polyethylene) boats. The Penobscot is Royalex, so their weights for those boats may be accurate. I’ve picked up Penobscots, and 65 lbs seems a reasonable amount (nicely designed boats too). The 15-8 Discovery’s I’ve picked up are as difficult to lift as my friends wood-canvas boat (that is 80 lbs plus). Old Town puts the weight of their Discovery’s much lower, about the same as their Royalex boats, even though the polyethylene is a much heavier material. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers
Hi Gene; One thing I outta say as long as we are talking about opinions, is; Like an old guide told me once, learn to cast sitting down, don’t argue, just do it. He was right of course. Casting while kneeling is not such a big task and makes flyfishing from a canoe a lot safer and more enjoyable. That said, of the boats you mentioned, the only one I have first hand experience with is the Old Town. I notice that it is the longest. Superficially at least, this indicates that it may be the fastest, and you can always learn to turn a fast boat, but you can never make a slow boat fast. This quality is important for dealing with wind, attainments in current and such. This is also a truism and therefore not always the case. I note that all the boats you mention are within a few pounds of the Old Town, which to me, knowing only what you have presented, makes it my choice. Anyway, there are some opinions for you. Have fun :wq
Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs
I bought an OldTown Pathfinder for much the same purpose (it’s a shorter version of the Camper) and it was fine until I got hooked on canoeing and less interested in fishing. I still flyfish from my Mad River Explorer. Stability has never been a problem, but switching between the fly rod and the paddle can be a nuisance…
Hello RBPers! I read this post just the other day, especially the part regarding Old Towns being heavier than announced, and decided to check for myself. So I weighed my 17′ Penobscot, advertised at 65 lbs, and whaddaya know? It weighed 65 pounds! So, at least in this particular instance (and assuming the scale was accurate, etc.) Old Town’s number appears to be correct. Of course, as they say, your mileage may vary, but I’ve been very happy with the Penobscot. It is my family’s first canoe, and we have had a lot of fun with it. And that, to me, is what it is all about. Happy paddline! Carl Seals I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape like a good fiberglass boat, like the Wenonah. They’re only good for dropping off buildings, running into with your SUV, or paddling whitewater. A good fiberglass boat will last for years. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello RBPers! I read this post just the other day, especially the part regarding Old Towns being heavier than announced, and decided to check for myself. So I weighed my 17′ Penobscot, advertised at 65 lbs, and whaddaya know? It weighed 65 pounds! So, at least in this particular instance (and assuming the scale was accurate, etc.) Old Town’s number appears to be correct. Of course, as they say, your mileage may vary, but I’ve been very happy with the Penobscot. It is my family’s first canoe, and we have had a lot of fun with it. And that, to me, is what it is all about. Happy paddline! Carl Seals
Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced.
When I said that, I meant specifically Old Town’s Discovery (polyethylene) boats. The Penobscot is Royalex, so their weights for those boats may be accurate. I’ve picked up Penobscots, and 65 lbs seems a reasonable amount (nicely designed boats too). The 15-8 Discovery’s I’ve picked up are as difficult to lift as my friends wood-canvas boat (that is 80 lbs plus). Old Town puts the weight of their Discovery’s much lower, about the same as their Royalex boats, even though the polyethylene is a much heavier material. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape ^^^^^^^ That’s not true, is it???
Yes, plastic, especially Old Town’s polyethylene as used in the Discovery series is the heaviest widely used canoe material. Royalex is less so, but still heavy. I’d try lifting the boats in question. The 15-8 Discovery is listed at 72 lbs, but weighs closer to 85. A Grumman 17′ is significantly lighter. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
I’m not sure I understand the context here but David asks if it is true that royalex canoes will be less abrasion resistant than glass boats. Well, I am one abrasion producing mojo and, having both a glass WW boat (an Edge) and a royalite Rival, I am here to tell you that the Rival takes abuse that would put the Edge back on the sawhorses for a serious session of patch and curse. I wish that weren’t true because I love the Edge (even though it is much less forgiving) but theroyalex/royalite will take the beating much better. I agree that your Old Town plastic boat might weigh more than they say. I also think that glasas takes hits better than many , dare I say it, New Schoolers, might think. But, for the big whap, like after the boof where there turns out to be one inch rather than one foot of landing water, plastic is better. For flat water though, no question, go with glass or kevlar.. Chris Kelly
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape like a good fiberglass boat, like the Wenonah. They’re only good for dropping off buildings, running into with your SUV, or paddling whitewater. A good fiberglass boat will last for years. I feel that’s a little extreme. He feels that weight is a problem. Being that most canoes are tandem and will be portaged and shuttled that way, an 85 pound canoe would be little problem to most folks. Weight is more of a consideration to individual kayakers. Plastic or Royalex are good, sound choices; fiberglass is too breakable.
He’s not doing whitewater, he is using the canoe solo (I hope with a 14′ boat). Usually one person gets the boat off the car, so heavy canoe are a problem. Good fiberglass cloth layups (not chopper gun cheapies) are plenty strong. A friend has been using his in whitewater for 10 years. To say they’re too "breakable" menas either you have little expereince with good fiberglass, or you are assuming the boat should be completely idiot proof, which I am not claiming. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape like a good fiberglass boat, like the Wenonah. They’re only good for dropping off buildings, running into with your SUV, or paddling whitewater. A good fiberglass boat will last for years.
I feel that’s a little extreme. He feels that weight is a problem. Being that most canoes are tandem and will be portaged and shuttled that way, an 85 pound canoe would be little problem to most folks. Weight is more of a consideration to individual kayakers. Plastic or Royalex are good, sound choices; fiberglass is too breakable.
I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers
Gene, My opinion kind of originates from the perspective of *do you want to be seated or kneeling?*… With the comfortable knee_pads sold today, I would find the kneeling position much more stable a platform in which to throw line out of…IMHO…particularly in dealing with casting itself…much more comfortable too, thus ..IMHO..I’d stay away from the flat barges…and go with a well designed kevlar. A well designed hull with rock-solid secondary stablility gives me infinitely more security than sitting in a Camper… where I had to stay as still as I could when sitting…staying still while sitting?…trying to throw line..???? It just never worked for me…With the sensitive area being your top-heavy sitting position…your arm/shoulder area becomes a focal point of solidity…..?? when trying to set a #22 baetis emerger with a tight arm..??? good luck… $.02, steve drossel
I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers Home Page URL: http://members.tripod.com/caddis1
Gene, I own a Wenonah Spirit II in their Tuff-Weave material, basically reinforced fiberglass. It is a very fine boat, and I would recommend Wenonah highly – though you didn’t say what material you were considering for the Fisherman. I also like the OldTown Camper – in fact, I’m thinking of selling my Wenonah to buy a Camper, for both the added durability of Royalex, and because I can get the Camper in olive drab with stained seats and thwarts, which will be an advantage when duck hunting from it. One thing to watch out for – with the shorter, wider boats, you get more stability at the expense of paddling efficiency. Personally, I wouldn’t go any wider than the 36 inch Camper, nor shorter than 16 feet, but then again, I’d give up some stability for paddling efficiency. Good Luck! Lou – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers Home Page URL: http://members.tripod.com/caddis1
hi Eugene , i would also look at the Swift Algonquin series,probably the i6 ft. it will weigh less then these even in their swift tech and stronger. Check out www.swiftcanoe.com Note that prices will be in canadian dollars. Bo Sinanan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers Home Page URL: http://members.tripod.com/caddis1
Which one felt best when you tried it? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am about to buy a new canoe and am looking at the following four canoes: Mad River- Tahoe 14 37 inch beam wt 55lbs OldTown- Camper 16 36 inch beam wt 59lbs Novacraft-Angler 15 37 inch beam wt 54 lbs Wenonah-Fisherman 14 39 inch beam wt 62lbs I am a fly fisherman so with these canoes am looking for stability and ease of lifting and carrying. I would very much appreciate any input anyone has on these canoes to assist me in making my choice. Regards Gene Rogers Home Page URL: http://members.tripod.com/caddis1
patrickatcyberhighwaydotnet
I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape like a good fiberglass boat, like the Wenonah. They’re only good for dropping off buildings, running into with your SUV, or paddling whitewater. A good fiberglass boat will last for years. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
I’d get the boat in fiberglass, the Fisherman is, not sure about the NovaCraft. Don’t take Old Town’s weights seriosly, it will be heavier than announced. Plastic, whether polyethylene or Royalex, will be less abrasion resistant, heavier, less repairable and will not hold its shape
^^^^^^^ That’s not true, is it??? like a good fiberglass boat, like the Wenonah. They’re only good for dropping off buildings, running into with your SUV, or paddling whitewater. A good fiberglass boat will last for years. — Delete all the occurences of the letter q to reply. — Andrew (no q) Gooding
David
Next week I’m finally taking that trip up the Little Kern to Golden Trout country that me and my fishing buddy have been talking about for two years. Plan to take the forks of the Kern Trail down to the forks, then pack in from there for a couple of days. Anyone have any useful info for fishing the area this time of year. Flies, good campsites, etc.? — -dnc-
Next week I’m finally taking that trip up the Little Kern to Golden Trout country that me and my fishing buddy have been talking about for two years. Plan to take the forks of the Kern Trail down to the forks, then pack in from there for a couple of days. Anyone have any useful info for fishing the area this time of year. Flies, good campsites, etc.?
Years ago I fished the main stem of the Kern, from Junction Meadow up to Lake South America–very similar countryside to where you’re going. (I accessed the area from the Whitney Portal trail.) As I recall, there were good campsites just about everywhere. I was in my attractor fly phase, and I caught tons of rainbows and goldens using mainly just a bi-visible. I’d fish a fly until it was chewed beyond recognition, tie on another, and keep catching them. I even kept on catching them during an afternoon thunder shower (ducking under a tree during the worst of it, then continuing after the lightning had moved up the canyon). These were wild fish, and they weren’t at all picky. You can probably get by using generic sorts of attractors: Adams, Humpy, bi-visibles, hare’s ear nymphs, zug bugs, PTs, etc., and some black Muddlers for lakes. Smaller sizes are probably best. What I remember best was the bear that I saw one morning. I had fished upstream a considerable distance from my camp on the opposite side of the river, when a black bear ambled by on the far side, heading upstream. He never saw me, until I let him get a couple of hundred feet above me, and I whistled. The bear stopped, looked around a moment, until he spotted me. We held eye contact for a moment, then he continued on. Since he’d come from the direction of my camp, I was concerned, but there was not much I could do after the fact–so, angler that I am, I kept on fishing. Later, I crossed over, and back tracked the bear toward my camp. I was amazed to discover that the bear’s tracks had made a wide circle *around* my camp, in an obvious attempt to avoid contact with humans (that would be me, such as it is). Understandable, certainly, but I never counted on that happening again. Even though my next day’s hike took my upstream also, I didn’t spot the bear again. (And, oh yes, I have had California black bears in camp, trying to get my food, on other trips. Usually they’re pretty benign; shouting, banging pots and pans, throwing rocks will run them off. I insanely chased a bear out of camp one morning. I chased him up to the top of a hill. I was stone out of breath, he was still fresh, and acted like he wanted to play some more. I skedaddled.) The moral of this story is to always exercise the best "bear discipline" you can while in bear country; and you’ll catch lots of fish, too. Enjoy your trip, Anglerboy — Trout fear me, Women want me. http://www.midtown.net/~angler/
Several people have entered into a purposeful discussion of the best way to use two flies…… related comment, but not on topic exactly…. I drove a very good friend of mine to the hospital with the second hook ( the one not in the fish) deeeeeeeppppply embedded in his finger. This hook was driven into his finger when the 10 pound steelhead he reach for… suddenly thrashed about. Months later, infection etc… he still has scars…. I fish with only one fly now…. Alan E. Hoover
Yep, had that happen also Alan. I was posing with a nice rainbow for a photo when the dropper with PT nymph flicked onto my index finger of my dominate hand. When the shutter clacked the fish went flying and I got the hook deep. It took me a couple of hours to cut that thing out with the fileting knife during lunch break. It sure was hard casting with that thing in there the remainder of the morning. -Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
Several people have entered into a purposeful discussion of the best way to use two flies…… related comment, but not on topic exactly…. I drove a very good friend of mine to the hospital with the second hook ( the one not in the fish) deeeeeeeppppply embedded in his finger. This hook was driven into his finger when the 10 pound steelhead he reach for… suddenly thrashed about. Months later, infection etc… he still has scars…. I fish with only one fly now…. Alan E. Hoover Anglers’ Rest Powhatan, Va *the trout teach many, lessons*
It took me a couple of hours to cut that thing out with the fileting k Damn, Burton. Fishing must have been slow if you took a couple of hours for lunch break! :^) I saw a flyfishing show over the weekend that featured atlantic salmon fishing in Iceland. They have an interesting regulation there. The stream must be "rested" from 11:00am until 4:00pm (that means no fishing of any kind) every day. Of course, at that latitude daylight goes until 10:00pm so there is plenty of time.
That’s an intresting concept. It might be worth trying on some of our streams in the summer. Different hours though. -Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
It took me a couple of hours to cut that thing out with the fileting knife during lunch break. It sure was hard casting with that thing in there the remainder of the morning. Damn, Burton. Fishing must have been slow if you took a couple of hours for lunch break! :^) Tight Lines, preferably attached to ‘fish’, Charley
Nah, actually it was a good morning – pretty long. It was just a long slow process cautiously getting down to the barb. I’m no surgeon and had to wing it. My fishing partner was taking a nap. When I got ready to attempt pulling it out, I left the camper so I wouldn’t wake him if I yelled. I grabbed it with tweezers and it popped right out. That was the only one I forgot to pinch the barb on – talk about fate and retribution. 
-Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
Several people have entered into a purposeful discussion of the best way to use two flies…… related comment, but not on topic exactly….
Fishing a team of 2 or 3 flies is common in Ireland and Scotland especially where Seatrout and Salmon are expected on the same water. I invariably fish a double or triple hooked Salmon pattern on the tail with two droppers for Seatrout. If it is blowing a full gale and I start to tangle I might cut one dropper off. I have one friend who regularly fishes a team of 4 flies but he is so expert that he has the nickname of "Tightlines" I drove a very good friend of mine to the hospital with the second hook ( the one not in the fish) deeeeeeeppppply embedded in his finger. This hook was driven into his finger It took me a couple of hours to cut that thing out with the fileting knife during lunch break.
This hooking yourself business has cropped up before but I’ll say it again anyway. You do not have to go to the surgery or take a knife to yourself. Put your thumb very firmly on the eye end of the hook. Tie a bit of stout lanyard around the bend of the hook and give a firm pull away from the direction of the hook’s entry. You have to be bold. It works. There’s a bit of blood and it hurts, but you will be fishing again in 5 minutes. Mind you I’ve never tried it with a hook in the eye or eyelid. Has anyone ? — Ian McCowen – Polwarth Manse, Greenlaw, Berwickshire TD10 6YR SCOTLAND (fine old books on Shooting, Fishing, Natural History bought & sold)
It took me a couple of hours to cut that thing out with the fileting knife during lunch break. It sure was hard casting with that thing in there the remainder of the morning.
Damn, Burton. Fishing must have been slow if you took a couple of hours for lunch break! :^) Tight Lines, preferably attached to ‘fish’, Charley
Here in Taupo we regularly use two nymphs on the bigger rivers. The first nymph is very heavy, we are not allowed to add lead to the line, and the second nymph, lighter. The second nymph is invariably tied off to the bend of the first hook, about 12 to 18 inches behind. If casting where it is possible, the best technique is to allow the nymphs to hit the water on the back cast, this ‘water haul’ helps to straighten out the line and fully load the rod. As several others have noted, try and cast an open loop, and also try and change the ‘plane’ at which the rod moves from the forward to back cast. Even so it is all pretty ugly to purist casters, but it gets the job done. We also tend to use shooting heads or weight forward tapers that have a short forward section. Despite all the above this type of casting is called here, chuck and duck, definitely a hard hat area. — Tony Bishop Fish with Bish Taupo New Zealand – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I : cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle : up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the : leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap : around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one : too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the : base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and : I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot : I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any : advice, Arek.
Burton, your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen. Yeah, especially when a big fish is making a run and that second fly gets it’s barb caught on a rock. Argh…!
Etched forever in my memory is such an experience with a large rainbow on the Madison River. I was fishing a salmon fly with an X-Caddis on a dropper. The fish took the caddis (as usual), and just when things were approaching the point where I was thinking about a net, the fish made a pass by the boat and the salmon fly got caught on the anchor line. The salmon fly came to an abrupt halt. The fish, caddis fly and dropper didn’t. I just stared at the errant salmon fly for some time, trying to fully absorb the reality of the situation. The image is still vivid. In fishing, as with everything else, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Fishing two flies may well double, or at least increase the probability of hooking a fish, but there is a price to be paid. That being said, I still do it on a regular basis. Tom Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Phone: (970) 229-3531 External Research Program FAX: (970) 229-6198 3404 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525-9599
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I : cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle : up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the : leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap : around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one : too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the : base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and : I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot : I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any : advice, Arek. : Arek: : The only thing I could add to the previous post is that you may : need to pay more attention to your casting. Open that casting loop a : bit so that you’re not throwing a very tight loop and you sure need to : make sure that the back cast is fully extended before starting the : forward cast so that east doesn’t meet west. I generally will use the : same diameter tippet for the point fly as I’m using for the top one. : Jim There is some debate whether to put the heavy fly at the end or the lighter fly. My experience is that if you cast a tighter loop, put the small fly on the end. If you can cast a wider loop, put the heavy fly at the end. Pete
Use a lob cast or a circle cast. Very few tangles using two flies with these casts. –tony
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. –I tie a Bimini twist, snip the loop at lengths desire for top and
dropper. I works really well. dj
2 nymphs…deadly, but beware. Your chances of foul hooking the fish as he rejects the first fly is hugely increased. Your chances of mortally wounding the fish as the trailer wraps in its gills is also greatly increased. Not that you should worry…just truth. One whitefish this weekend had a nice 6cm gash in its belly from being foul hooked on my dropper #20 coachman, guts visible. kilt it. smoked it. et it. — TimW Halfordian Golfer
: I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I : cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle : up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the : leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap : around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one : too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the : base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and : I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot : I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any : advice, Arek. : Arek: : The only thing I could add to the previous post is that you may : need to pay more attention to your casting. Open that casting loop a : bit so that you’re not throwing a very tight loop and you sure need to : make sure that the back cast is fully extended before starting the : forward cast so that east doesn’t meet west. I generally will use the : same diameter tippet for the point fly as I’m using for the top one. : Jim There is some debate whether to put the heavy fly at the end or the lighter fly. My experience is that if you cast a tighter loop, put the small fly on the end. If you can cast a wider loop, put the heavy fly at the end. Pete
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any advice, Arek.
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any
I fish this way most of the time. The "dropper" leader is usually lighter than my main leader because the fly is always smaller. I use no special knot, but have seen a blood knot reccomended, as well as the Surgeon’s knot. The length of the dropper leader should be around 4 inches (18 inches up the leader from the "point fly"), much longer than this and it twist around the main leader, too short and it takes action out of the dropper fly. I think the key is not to have a weighted fly on the dropper. Just a small nymph, wet or emerger. -Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
Arek, You can you use what ever size tippet you prefer and secure it to the gape of the first hook with a regular old improved clinch Knot. Or you can place a loop somwhere in your leader and attach the two leaders loop to leader loop…no knot. They will tangle once in awhile…It wouldn’t be fly fishing if you didn’t get a tangle or two now and then. One the leader material starts to become twisted…replace it right away….will prevent snarls. Good luck. Email me with any questions.Works for me…I am sure there are probably other methods…we do not usually false cast these set-ups much… Regards, James Uncle Jammer’s Guide Service Vermont Fly Fishing, Hunting, River and Woodland Outings http://pobox.com/~uncle
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any advice, Arek.
Hi Arek I’ve always used and "in-line dropper system." Start by tying on your first fly, then tie an 18" or so piece of tippet to the bend of the first hook. Tie your second fly on the second piece of tippet. I use a Unit Knot or Clinch Knot (improved). I have fished up to three flies in this manner but two are easier to cast. Also you can fish a dry fly as your first fly with a nymph under it using the dry as your strike indicator. Or for old folks like me whose eyes are not as good as they used to be use a larger dry fly with a real small dry fly as the dropper. The bigger dry will give you a fairly good idea where the small fly is located. Good Tying & … — Tight Lines ….. Al Beatty BT’s Fly Fishing Products http://www.btsflyfishing.com Tiemco quality hooks, under $6.00 pkg/50
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any advice, Arek.
Hello Arek, I have experienced the same problems as you describe. The best (to date) solution for me is to tie the first nymph to the end of the tippet and then attach a second piece of tippet to the bend of the first nymph with an improved cinch knot. I use 18 to 24 inches of tippet and tie on the second nymph. Using heavy nymphs requires a special technique – the chuck and duck. You might want to experiment on the placement of the heavier nymph– first or second fly. I also use the technique with the first fly being a dry fly and the second either a small nymph, soft hackle, or in some cases, another too small-to-see dry fly. The first fly becomes a fishing strike indicator. Good luck and let us know how your experimenting works out. Vic’s Fly-By-Night http://www.navicom.com
Arek writes, in part: <<I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time…… In Maine, it is illegal to use split shot with a fly. So, I first tie on a bead head (or other weighted nymph) and tie my "intended lure" onto the bead head’s hook bend with about two feet of tippet of the *same* size. I have no problems with the flies getting tangled — they are for all intents and purposes a single strand. With this method, I can experiment with the size of the bead head to get deeper or shallower depending on the type water I am fishing. Another way to do it, and it is easier, is to tie on about 2-3 feet of tippet using a double surgeon’s knot or barrell knot and leave a foot or less of the tag end intact — i.e., do not cut the tag end short. This works just as well as the first method and is easier to tie. I sometimes use a large dry fly (#12 Elk Hair Caddis tied with CDC feathers) tied to the leader and about 2 feet of tippet (same size!) tied to it’s hook bend, with an appropriate caddis nymph tied on as the dropper. The dry fly then acts as a strike indicator — I once caught a small brookie on the dry fly and while landing it, a larger brookie took the Rhyacophila nymph! I lost the larger trout, but managed to land the little fella — fun and games when you have two on at once!! Sorry for the rambling reply, but I hope it helps. Good drifts, Paul LaCourse
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. I cast short, not much longer than the lenght of the leader and the leader that the fly is on (the shorter one) tends to wrap around the leading one. I tried using a thicker line, a realy short one too; did not really help much. I tried to tie the second leader to the base of the hook, I tried the eye of the hook; if I use thin tippet and I kept loosing flies when setting the hook(poor fish..) Is there a knot I could use that will prevent that? Or what should I do? Thanx for any advice, Arek.
Arek: The only thing I could add to the previous post is that you may need to pay more attention to your casting. Open that casting loop a bit so that you’re not throwing a very tight loop and you sure need to make sure that the back cast is fully extended before starting the forward cast so that east doesn’t meet west. I generally will use the same diameter tippet for the point fly as I’m using for the top one. Jim
Arek, I have tried fishing two flies, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen.
Yeah, especially when a big fish is making a run and that second fly gets it’s barb caught on a rock. Argh…! -Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
Burton, your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen. Yeah, especially when a big fish is making a run and that second fly gets it’s barb caught on a rock. Argh…! The salmon fly came to an abrupt halt. The fish, caddis fly and dropper didn’t. I just stared at the errant salmon fly for some time, trying to fully absorb the reality of the situation. The image is still vivid.
That’s why I added the Argh! I’ve had this happen a couple of times, once with a nice steelhead on. Image my embarrasment when I finally realized I was fighting a rock. You are right the image is very vivid. -Burton — L. Burton Hawley 2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR
Arek, I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time.
What I do is tie the larger of the two flies to the end of the tippet, then tie a second tippet to the eye of the first fly. The second tippet is usually about 18" long, and often of a smaller diameter than the first tippet. The second fly is tied to the end of the second tippet. This method does not seem to have a significant effect on drift or hooking. Tangles are almost impossible to avoid if a dropper is used. Most casting tangles can be avoided with a bit of care, but your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen. Tom Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Phone: (970) 229-3531 External Research Program FAX: (970) 229-6198 3404 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525-9599
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Arek, I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. What I do is tie the larger of the two flies to the end of the tippet, then tie a second tippet to the eye of the first fly. The second tippet is usually about 18" long, and often of a smaller diameter than the first tippet. The second fly is tied to the end of the second tippet. This method does not seem to have a significant effect on drift or hooking. Tangles are almost impossible to avoid if a dropper is used. Most casting tangles can be avoided with a bit of care, but your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen. Tom Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Phone: (970) 229-3531 External Research Program FAX: (970) 229-6198 3404 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525-9599
What we used to do for two flies, was use an extension of the heavier leader material to tie the dropper to. Sometimes you needed two or three x-ratings differential to assure you wouldn’t tangle. This required good knots where the two mono sizes were joined. Jim N.
I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time.
I use a surgeon’s knot to attach a tippet, and I tie one fly to each of the two tippet tails. I leave one tail long (18") and one short (6"). I tie a big dry fly to the short tail and a nymph to the other. Then I cast great big wide loops. It works OK for me. Yes the casting is a little laborious, but it is pretty exciting when you get two lunker dace on at once! Keep your stick on the ice, Thos.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Arek, I have tried fishing two files, actually nymphs on on one line and I cannot find a right way, or right knot to use, so they will not tangle up all the time. What I do is tie the larger of the two flies to the end of the tippet, then tie a second tippet to the eye of the first fly. The second tippet is usually about 18" long, and often of a smaller diameter than the first tippet. The second fly is tied to the end of the second tippet. This method does not seem to have a significant effect on drift or hooking. Tangles are almost impossible to avoid if a dropper is used. Most casting tangles can be avoided with a bit of care, but your ability to control the situation ends when a fish takes one of the flies. That’s when the worst tangles happen.
Hi Tom and Arek, I tie the second tippet to the bend of the first fly with an improved cinch knot and then tie the second fly on the end of the tippet. I usually use about 24" of tippet. I have experimented with using the heavier fly as the first or second fly. I think fewer tangles are encountered when the heavier fly is on the bottom. Again experiment with using the a dry fly as the first fly with a lightly weighted nymph, soft hackle, or a tiny dry fly as the second fly. The first fly serves as a fishing strike indicator. — Vic Brockett Vic’s Fly-By-Night http://www.navicom.com/~vic
Anybody have any suggestions on river/stream fishing for trout within an hour or so of Dublin? I’m planning a weekend trip, and would love to know who to talk to or where to go. Thanks! –Preston
Hi a freind of mine is going over there in two weeks I could info after that.PS I sell rods to a flyclub in Cork Ireland I don’t know if that is – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anybody have any suggestions on river/stream fishing for trout within an hour or so of Dublin? I’m planning a weekend trip, and would love to know who to talk to or where to go. Thanks! –Preston
Anybody have any suggestions on river/stream fishing for trout within an hour or so of Dublin? I’m planning a weekend trip, and would love to know who to talk to or where to go. Thanks! –Preston
Hi Preston, Try the River Boyne, it has some great fishing for trout with the dry fly specially. It is about 1 hour north of Dublin and the area also has some great archaeological sites including the famous Newgrange monument. If you are in the area then be sure to get to see Newgrange. The August edition of "Trout and Salmon" has an article on the Boyne and included info on permits etc. If you can’t get a copy then the addresses that they printed for permits are as follows:- Navan Angling Club waters Permits 10 Punts per day from The Sports Den Trimgate Street Navan Trim, Athboy and District Angling Club waters Permits 5 Punts per day from Tourist Office Mill Street Trim or Gerard Lee Loman Street Trim I hope that this helps. Regards, Philip Blair. *** Nation Shall Peak Six Unto Nation. ***
I want to know if there are any good flyfishing at good prices in Montana, Idaho, Orgen, and my state Washington.
HI. i was just going to leave a message to the whole newsgroug about Montana Fly Fishing at my Dude Ranch Hawley Mountain near McLeod, Mt on the Boulder River. You can call 406-932-5791 or E-Mail me your address and I ll send you a Brochure. See my Message under GONE FISHING TO MONTANA. BBlewett
Does anyone know of a fishing expo in the NYC area. A friend of mine said there is one comming to boston. Just curious if it would make it to NYC, it would save me a road trip. Thanks, DAVE — Dave Blizard "Pork, the other white meat."
There is a Fly Fishing Only show the second satruday in March in White Plains, NY by the Theodore Fly Fishers. It’s a really great show done with style. Not too crowded as you would expect at the Suffern Show. Have fun!
I am seeking information on wet flies and their overall effectiveness. I used them quite a bit last summer and found them productive when both dry flies and nymphs were not. I would be interested in other people’s opinions and experiences with this category of flies; what conditions, patterns etc. Thank you in advance Craig Horning
I am seeking information on wet flies and their overall effectiveness. I used them quite a bit last summer and found them productive when both dry flies and nymphs were not. I would be interested in other people’s opinions and experiences with this category of flies; what conditions, patterns etc. Thank you in advance Craig Horning
I have always enjoyed using soft hackled flies, especially as tied in Sylvester Nemes book, The Soft Hackled Fly Addict. Although I can’t give up my parachutes, wulfs and GR hares ears, I do enjoy little yelow soft hackles and variations tied with peacock herl and others with Hares Ear. I must admit, I generally use leftover partridge, grouse, sparrow or even mottled inexpensive capes instead of using some of the harder to find or expensive bird feathers used in Nemes’ book.(but then I’m kinda cheap) I find they work well fished like a dry, or fish them like a nymph. Depending on the situation and lie, I find they sometimes work well during a hatch, maybe taken as emergers. Anyway, I always have some with me in 18-14 sizes, and some Hares ear soft hackles, tied with a longer body on a 9672 in up to size 10, unweighted, to use when GR hares ears are too heavy for shallow water. Kevin Williams, Indianapolis, IN
Hello All Well in reference to wet flies…a wet fly man/woman will catch more day in and day out than any dry fly man/woman can hope for. At least that is what the late great Charles Brooks said…and I agree. I have a pattern I have varied off a dark spruce. I call it a little bow’. I don’t know anything else to call it. It is tyed on a size 10-14 9671 mustad…it has a dark olive tail…a peacock herl body…and have way up the thorax…so to speak…put in a couple wraps of red floss. Then continue wrapping up the body with the peacock herl and tye off. Then put on a couple wraps of grizzly colored pattridge…at the head. It works wonderful…try a few different thread colors…6/0 is the size I like or 8/0 unithread. I found dark olive and red threads work real well…and yes it can make a difference. It is a faster water fly…but I have caught 10 fish in half hour with this fly…and have yet to find a place it doesn’t work. From montana…to southern Idaho…and that is alot of water. Enjoy and let me know how it works
Are they any better than flies with hackle? Is it not difficult to get them to float? Regards Knut Uleberg.
: Are they any better than flies with hackle? : Is it not difficult to get them to float? Hi Knut, My application of no-hackle dry-flies is almost always stillwater, or slow-water fishing and almost always with the deer-hair comparaduns. The rivers here in the rockies will drown a no hackle, but unless you are a strict halfordian, this is no great thing anyway. For the swift waters, I’ll sometimes use 3 or more premium hackles per fly. Happy Holidays, Tim Walker
writes: No hackle flies are especially good on calm water. Trout seem to examine body length and color more in calm water, and no-hackle flies ride better in the surface film to allow trout a longer and better look. Matching size and color of the naturals is especially critical with no-hackle flies. Hope this helps. Cordially, Bob Elliott