Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

....got a few new photos, from Saturday, of the tail end
of the Pmd hatch on the spring creeks near Livingston, MT.
One of the things I noticed was how remarkably yellow these
little mayflies look at a distance, and how much greener
and grayer they look close up.

http://montana-riverboats.com/Pages/.../RealBugs.html

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

pittendrigh wrote:
...got a few new photos, from Saturday, of the tail end
of the Pmd hatch on the spring creeks near Livingston, MT.
One of the things I noticed was how remarkably yellow these
little mayflies look at a distance, and how much greener
and grayer they look close up.

http://montana-riverboats.com/Pages/.../RealBugs.html

Awhile ago the question of color of flies came up in ROFF. Some people
(including me) thought that fish would likely see colors very
differently from people. Others (rdean, for example) thought that there
would be a one-to-one relationship between the colors fish see and the
colors fish see, so it wouldn't matter.

There was an interesting article in Scientific American a couple of
months ago that's relevant.

Humans have three types of "cones," the color-sensitive receptors in the
retina. More "primitive" vertebrate species (reptiles, birds, and
presumably fish) have four types of cones, with their sensitivity
extending well into the UV (ultraviolet) part of the spectrum.

Most mammals have only two types of cones. Mammals hypothetically lost
part of their variety of cone receptors during a long period of
evolution when they were primarily nocturnal, when color perception was
unimportant, and when sensitivity to brightness was of paramount importance.

Primates (including humans) apparently re-evolved a third type of cone
(toward the blue end of the spectrum), probably because they had to
distinguish between different types of ripe fruit.

Nevertheless, human color perception is presumptively impoverished
compared to the color perception of birds, reptiles, and fish.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw wrote:

Awhile ago the question of color of flies came up in ROFF. Some people
(including me) thought that fish would likely see colors very
differently from people. Others (rdean, for example) thought that there
would be a one-to-one relationship between the colors fish see and the
colors fish (we?) see, so it wouldn't matter.


Most mammals have only two types of cones

what about Cone Heads?

..........basically I agree. Color is an interesting subject.
Perhaps they see it differently, but if rdean is right,
it doesn't matter. Either way
there is no way to know, except by hunch and by
trial and error. Raptors can see ultra violet reflected by gopher
urine.
So our perception of gopher **** is not one to one with
raptors.

I just thought it was interesting. Pmds do indeed look
very yellow from a distance. And they look gray-olive
up close. Does it matter to the fly tyer?

**** I dunno.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

pittendrigh wrote:

.........basically I agree. Color is an interesting subject.
Perhaps they see it differently, but if rdean is right,

That would be a first.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw wrote in news:44c55670$0$24181
:


Primates (including humans) apparently re-evolved a third type of cone
(toward the blue end of the spectrum), probably because they had to
distinguish between different types of ripe fruit.



Some primates have interesting dimorphisms. In the squirrel monkey, for
example, all of one sex are trichromats, and something like 70% of the
other sex are bichromats.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

pittendrigh wrote:
.........basically I agree.

rw wrote:
That would be a first.


I think I agree with most (certainly not all) of what
you say, at least for on-topic stuff.
But it occured to me I am more likely to respond
when I do disagree.

Maybe everybody does that. Maybe that's why usenet
tends to be so contentious.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/24/06 7:30 PM, in article
, "rw"
wrote:

pittendrigh wrote:
...got a few new photos, from Saturday, of the tail end
of the Pmd hatch on the spring creeks near Livingston, MT.
One of the things I noticed was how remarkably yellow these
little mayflies look at a distance, and how much greener
and grayer they look close up.

http://montana-riverboats.com/Pages/...iers/Sandy_Pit
tendrigh/Mayflies/PaleMorningDuns/RealBugs/RealBugs.html

Awhile ago the question of color of flies came up in ROFF. Some people
(including me) thought that fish would likely see colors very
differently from people. Others (rdean, for example) thought that there
would be a one-to-one relationship between the colors fish see and the
colors fish see, so it wouldn't matter.

There was an interesting article in Scientific American a couple of
months ago that's relevant.

Humans have three types of "cones," the color-sensitive receptors in the
retina. More "primitive" vertebrate species (reptiles, birds, and
presumably fish) have four types of cones, with their sensitivity
extending well into the UV (ultraviolet) part of the spectrum.

Most mammals have only two types of cones. Mammals hypothetically lost
part of their variety of cone receptors during a long period of
evolution when they were primarily nocturnal, when color perception was
unimportant, and when sensitivity to brightness was of paramount importance.

Primates (including humans) apparently re-evolved a third type of cone
(toward the blue end of the spectrum), probably because they had to
distinguish between different types of ripe fruit.

Nevertheless, human color perception is presumptively impoverished
compared to the color perception of birds, reptiles, and fish.

Dr. Seidman, paging Dr. Seidman. Dr. Seidman to the ROFF(T) operating
theater please.

:-)

Bill

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

pittendrigh wrote:
pittendrigh wrote:

.........basically I agree.


rw wrote:
That would be a first.



I think I agree with most (certainly not all) of what
you say, at least for on-topic stuff.
But it occured to me I am more likely to respond
when I do disagree.

Maybe everybody does that. Maybe that's why usenet
tends to be so contentious.

You evidently misunderstood me -- probably my fault. The text I quoted
was: " .........basically I agree. Color is an interesting subject.
Perhaps they see it differently, but if rdean is right,"

Rdean being right is what would be a first.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"pittendrigh" wrote in message
ups.com...

rw wrote:

Awhile ago the question of color of flies came up in ROFF. Some people
(including me) thought that fish would likely see colors very
differently from people. Others (rdean, for example) thought that there
would be a one-to-one relationship between the colors fish see and the
colors fish (we?) see, so it wouldn't matter.


Most mammals have only two types of cones

what about Cone Heads?

.........basically I agree. Color is an interesting subject.
Perhaps they see it differently, but if rdean is right,
it doesn't matter.

It will come as no surprise to those who have studied the matter of color
perception in depth (nor to those familiar with the corpus of his work) that
dicklet IS right. The confusion over color vision goes way back to
prehistoric times when the cave painters at Lascaux (and sundry other
archeological sites) first perpetrated the hoax that color exists (in some
objective sense) in the real world. No one has yet determined how they
managed this trick with the limited technology of the time and given the
presumably primitive state of scientific knowledge available to them, but
the subsequent photographic evidence is indisputable. Prior to the seminal
work of Niepce, Daguerre, Talbot and other photographic pioneers in the
early nineteenth century, the fraud was universally accepted.....largely as
a result of the huge volume of deceitful work done by painters, glazers,
dyers, etc. Even such supposedly objective and honest luminaries as the
proto-scientists of The Enlightenment were in on the gag.....see Sir Isaac
Newton's "Opticks" for an illuminating example. It was only in light of the
startling discoveries concerning the chemical characteristics of various
silver salts (as well as numerous other light sensitive chemicals.....see:
http://www.edinphoto.org.uk/1_P/1_ph...es_table_1.htm
for an extensive inventory) that it became possible to demonstrate that the
world is actually monochromatic. Unfortunately, the debate continues to
rage to this day because, in the first place, no one could prove beyond
dispute whether the world is sepia, violet, grayscale, or any of several
other (and mostly lesser) contenders and, in the second, because of the
iniquitous influence of such charlatans and mountebanks as George Eastman
and his ilk. Then too, the insidious and ubiquitous advent of so-called
"Technicolor" inundated the masses with a never ending stream of transparent
propaganda which was later (and continues to be) augmented by the pernicious
influence of Ted Turner and the evil geniuses at Adobe. Somewhat ironically
(and fortunately....for those of us with a keen interest in epistomology and
ontology, anyway), the strategy of the latter has backfired on them as they
inadvertantly wrote into their software a capacity to return doctored images
to their true black and white.......um.......color.

Either way
there is no way to know, except by hunch and by
trial and error.

Well, there's also science......and thinking......and stuff.

Raptors can see ultra violet reflected by gopher
urine.

I have it from an unimpeachable authority that there's no way to know that
except by hunch and trail and error.

So our perception of gopher **** is not one to one with
raptors.


Well, maybe not to you, but I certainly can't tell them apart.

I just thought it was interesting.

Nope......not in the least.

Pmds do indeed look
very yellow from a distance. And they look gray-olive
up close.

A number 10 welding filter will fix that.

Does it matter to the fly tyer?

****, I dunno.

**** I dunno.

And yet, basically, you agree.

Wolfgang
no animals, words, images.....or anything else for that matter..... were
photoshopped in the production of this message.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:44c55670$0$24181
:


Primates (including humans) apparently re-evolved a third type of cone
(toward the blue end of the spectrum), probably because they had to
distinguish between different types of ripe fruit.




Some primates have interesting dimorphisms. In the squirrel monkey, for
example, all of one sex are trichromats, and something like 70% of the
other sex are bichromats.

Interesting.

Red-green color blindness is far more common in men than in women.
That's because the genes for the red and green cones are located on the
X chromosome, of which women have two and men have one. A woman can have
one defective X chromosome and still have normal color vision, because
the other chromosome will make up for it.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"rw" wrote in message
m...
pittendrigh wrote:
...got a few new photos, from Saturday, of the tail end
of the Pmd hatch on the spring creeks near Livingston, MT.
One of the things I noticed was how remarkably yellow these
little mayflies look at a distance, and how much greener
and grayer they look close up.

http://montana-riverboats.com/Pages/.../RealBugs.html

Awhile ago the question of color of flies came up in ROFF. Some people
(including me) thought that fish would likely see colors very differently
from people. Others (rdean, for example) thought that there would be a
one-to-one relationship between the colors fish see and the colors fish
see, so it wouldn't matter.


I am not sure color really makes much difference, a least for dry flies, as
the fly is backlit anyway, and presumably, all the fish sees is a shadow. I
have used a black wing, grey wing, and white wing BWO within minutes of each
other and been successful with each. The choice of fly related to the water
and sun condition more than my perception of which wing color would fool the
wiley trout. Of course, just to be safe, I meticulously match body and tail
color to the killer samples of the flies I pick up at local shops, and from
local guides. ;^)

FWIW, I recently read that Tappley (of Taps Tips fame) conducted an
experiment with some of his friends one season, wherein each participant
fished "Tap's NearNuff" exclusively, changing only size, and at the end of
the season reported the results. The consensus was that using that one
pattern all season did not affect their success rate. I suspect that fishing
an Adams would have similar results, especially since, as AK Best recently
wrote (in Fly Rod and Reel, I believe), there are at least 4,000 variations
possible!

Jim Ray

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

jimbo wrote:

FWIW, I recently read that Tappley (of Taps Tips fame) conducted an
experiment with some of his friends one season, wherein each participant
fished "Tap's NearNuff" exclusively, changing only size, and at the end of
the season reported the results. The consensus was that using that one
pattern all season did not affect their success rate.

What does that fly look like? What's the recipe?

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).

I suspect that fishing
an Adams would have similar results, especially since, as AK Best recently
wrote (in Fly Rod and Reel, I believe), there are at least 4,000 variations
possible!

Agreed, the Adams is the most versatile dry fly. I prefer the parachute
style and always carry sizes from #10 to #20.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"rw" wrote in message
m...

Agreed, the Adams is the most versatile dry fly. I prefer the parachute
style and always carry sizes from #10 to #20.


I'll ditto the Adams pattern, my favorite, mine rage from #12-20 in both
light and dark.
I also have the Parachute Adams in 14-20 light and dark as well.
These are the 4 dry-fly patterns I fish the most.
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).



If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or something
like that. PT would be another option


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).



If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or something
like that. PT would be another option


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.
First time that's ever happened to me, but learned that you could possibly
fish a dry-fly as a wet-fly.
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:


If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).




If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or something
like that. PT would be another option

I'd like a link to the Usual pattern, or a recipe. Several people have
recommended it. I don't think it's a common Western US pattern.

The problem with doing a Google search for the Usual is that its name is
so, well, usual. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Tom Nakashima wrote:

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.
First time that's ever happened to me, but learned that you could possibly
fish a dry-fly as a wet-fly.

I had the same experience last year when fishing the Little River in
the Smokies. I was fishing a #16 para Adams (the first and last fly I
tie on) upstream and it got swamped in a riffle. I just let it go and
tightened up my line to follow it and a little bow took it while it was
drifting past me underwater.


Chuck Vance (that was the closest I got to nymph fishing the
whole trip)

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw typed:
Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:


If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be
a PT (or maybe a Skip's Nymph).

If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could
fish it as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe
or something like that. PT would be another option

I'd like a link to the Usual pattern, or a recipe.

http://tinyurl.com/ld4wf
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/25/06 2:31 PM, in article , "Tom
Nakashima" wrote:


"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).



If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or something
like that. PT would be another option


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.
First time that's ever happened to me, but learned that you could possibly
fish a dry-fly as a wet-fly.

I do that all the time, and sometimes even on purpose :-)

In particular, with an EHC or trude pattern*, swung at the end of the drift
and given a little bit of action just under the menis...surface of the
water, it can be a deadly method!

With the Adams- and one reason I like the parachute style- the fly sits
pretty low already, and when it becomes almost-wet, or completely wet!, I
think it might resemble an emerging bug. Fish seem to like it anyhow.

Bill

*or Wolfgang's beloved Pass Lake

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Tim J. wrote:
rw typed:
I'd like a link to the Usual pattern, or a recipe.

http://tinyurl.com/ld4wf

Tom Littleton ties the best Usual I've ever used. I got
it in a fly swap it's long since gone but it was a very
productive fly.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/25/06 2:46 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

Chuck Vance (that was the closest I got to nymph fishing the
whole trip)

Elitist.

:-)

Bill

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in news:ea5o25$6vi$1
@news.Stanford.EDU:

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.


When you're trying to do this, its called wet fly fishing. Very
productive, very big fish, but unfortunately out of style. Next time you
find yourself upstream from an intermittant rise, try to take the fish with
a wet fly, like a partridge and green. I tie a very buggy looking hair
wing wet that works very well.

Fish the wet fly like a wet fly-- quartering downstream cast, mend upstream
to slow down the swing, and try to start the big part of the swing right in
front of the trout you're fishing to. The more fish you take when you do
this in the perfect conditions, like the downstream intermittant riser, the
more confidence you'll develop in the technique for general fishing
purposes.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

William Claspy wrote:

On 7/25/06 2:46 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

Chuck Vance (that was the closest I got to nymph fishing the
whole trip)

Elitist.

:-)

And your point is? :-)


Chuck Vance (who has been doing way too little fishing these
days, and would probably even consider throwing a woolly bugger if we
would just get some rain and the rivers would rise a bit down here)

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"rw" wrote in message
m...
jimbo wrote:

FWIW, I recently read that Tappley (of Taps Tips fame) conducted an
experiment with some of his friends one season, wherein each participant
fished "Tap's NearNuff" exclusively, changing only size, and at the end
of the season reported the results. The consensus was that using that one
pattern all season did not affect their success rate.

What does that fly look like? What's the recipe?

I'll try to find the article tonight. I think it was in American Angler.
Basically, as I recall, it was a brown quill body, brown hackled fly. If and
when I find it, I'll post the pattern. A Google search wasn't much help.
(Probably don't recall the name as accurately as I should.)

Jim

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/25/06 2:56 PM, in article
, "Ken Fortenberry"
wrote:

Tim J. wrote:
rw typed:
I'd like a link to the Usual pattern, or a recipe.

http://tinyurl.com/ld4wf

Tom Littleton ties the best Usual I've ever used. I got
it in a fly swap it's long since gone but it was a very
productive fly.

http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=FS2002&id=22

I wasn't in on that swap, but I must have gotten one of those from Tom at
Penns one year. Very good fly indeed. I also got one of Willi's snowshoe
hare emergers when I fished with him in Colorado, and which he also had in
that same swap- and is another effective fly.

Of course, with 41 flies in a swap, at least a couple of 'em are bound to be
good! :-)

Bill

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw wrote in
:

Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:


If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a
PT (or maybe a Skip's Nymph).




If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could
fish it as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe
or something like that. PT would be another option

I'd like a link to the Usual pattern, or a recipe. Several people have
recommended it. I don't think it's a common Western US pattern.

The problem with doing a Google search for the Usual is that its name
is so, well, usual. :-)


It's a Fran Betters pattern, so it comes out of the Catskills area, I
think. I know Mary Dette sells a ton of them.

As Forty mentions, our Tom is quite the Usual expert. He has some great
advice on how to tie very small versions with bunny feet.

You'll notice that some versions have up wings and some have down wings.
Tie 'em both, and see what rings your bell, but I think the original was
up wing. Either way, its a two-minute tie, if that long. You can
imitate just about anything you want with it. For one Adirondacks trip
to W. Canada Creek, I tied a bunch in white to match the white fly hatch.
For some reason, it was a killing pattern for my group in the Catskills
this spring.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Tom Nakashima wrote:
"rw" wrote

Agreed, the Adams is the most versatile dry fly. I prefer the parachute
style and always carry sizes from #10 to #20.

I'll ditto the Adams pattern, my favorite, mine rage from #12-20 in both
light and dark.
I also have the Parachute Adams in 14-20 light and dark as well.
These are the 4 dry-fly patterns I fish the most.

I much prefer the traditional Adams to the para style, though I know the
latter tends to be much more popular these days.

I see the traditional tie better on the water under a wider range of
conditions. It also seems to produce better, which of course may merely
be a function of the "confidence factor."


--
John Russell aka JR

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Tim J. wrote:

Conan The Librarian typed:

Chuck Vance (who has been doing way too little fishing these
days, and would probably even consider throwing a woolly bugger if we
would just get some rain and the rivers would rise a bit down here)

Hey - Maybe we could set up a series of pipes and pumps. . . nah, bad idea.
;-)

Hilarious ... and so timely, to boot. :-)


Your pal,
Chucko

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Conan The Librarian typed:
William Claspy wrote:

On 7/25/06 2:46 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

Chuck Vance (that was the closest I got to nymph fishing the
whole trip)

Elitist.

And your point is? :-)

Chuck Vance (who has been doing way too little fishing these
days, and would probably even consider throwing a woolly bugger if we
would just get some rain and the rivers would rise a bit down here)

Hey - Maybe we could set up a series of pipes and pumps. . . nah, bad idea.
;-)
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/25/06 3:02 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

William Claspy wrote:

On 7/25/06 2:46 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

Chuck Vance (that was the closest I got to nymph fishing the
whole trip)

Elitist.

:-)

And your point is? :-)

No point, just trying a cast or two to see if I can get a rise.

:-)

Bill

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

JR wrote:
Tom Nakashima wrote:

"rw" wrote


Agreed, the Adams is the most versatile dry fly. I prefer the
parachute style and always carry sizes from #10 to #20.

I'll ditto the Adams pattern, my favorite, mine rage from #12-20 in
both light and dark.
I also have the Parachute Adams in 14-20 light and dark as well.
These are the 4 dry-fly patterns I fish the most.


I much prefer the traditional Adams to the para style, though I know the
latter tends to be much more popular these days.

I see the traditional tie better on the water under a wider range of
conditions. It also seems to produce better, which of course may merely
be a function of the "confidence factor."

I prefer the parachute pattern for four reasons:

(1) It sits lower in the water, as someone else said. The fish seem to
like that.

(2) I hate tying the wings onto a traditional Adams.

(3) It's symmetrical, and so doesn't tend to twist the tippet, as a
traditional Adams does unless it's perfectly tied.

(4) I can see it better. (Different folks, different strokes.) I use
white Antron for the post.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
"Tom Nakashima" wrote in news:ea5o25$6vi$1
@news.Stanford.EDU:

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.


When you're trying to do this, its called wet fly fishing. Very
productive, very big fish, but unfortunately out of style. Next time you
find yourself upstream from an intermittant rise, try to take the fish
with
a wet fly, like a partridge and green. I tie a very buggy looking hair
wing wet that works very well.

Fish the wet fly like a wet fly-- quartering downstream cast, mend
upstream
to slow down the swing, and try to start the big part of the swing right
in
front of the trout you're fishing to. The more fish you take when you do
this in the perfect conditions, like the downstream intermittant riser,
the
more confidence you'll develop in the technique for general fishing
purposes.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Thanks for the technique advice on the wet-fly.
Two questions, what did you mean by; unfortunately out of style?
And when you said; "fish the wet fly like a wet fly" did you possibly mean;
fish the dry fly like a wet fly?
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"rw" wrote in message
m...

I prefer the parachute pattern for four reasons:

(1) It sits lower in the water, as someone else said. The fish seem to
like that.

I thought the Parachute Adams sits higher in the water, due to the
parachute.


(2) I hate tying the wings onto a traditional Adams.

But that's not the main reason for favoring the Parachute Adams over the
Adams?


(3) It's symmetrical, and so doesn't tend to twist the tippet, as a
traditional Adams does unless it's perfectly tied.

Interesting, never had a problem with twist with the Adams...your casting
technique?
I've notice some casters to have a natural twist of the tippet with any fly.


(4) I can see it better. (Different folks, different strokes.) I use white
Antron for the post.

That I do agree, the Parachute Adams is more visible, due to the parachute
riding high on top of the water and usually a lighter color.

I do enjoy using both the Adams and the Parachute Adams before anything else
goes on unless I know the hatch.
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

rw wrote in news:44c67168$0$24195
:

I prefer the parachute pattern for four reasons:

(1) It sits lower in the water, as someone else said. The fish seem to
like that.

(2) I hate tying the wings onto a traditional Adams.

(3) It's symmetrical, and so doesn't tend to twist the tippet, as a
traditional Adams does unless it's perfectly tied.

(4) I can see it better. (Different folks, different strokes.) I use
white Antron for the post.



Boy, wait until you try the Usual!! Same advantages, easier and faster
tie, and you don't need a neck.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
"Tom Nakashima" wrote in
:


"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
"Tom Nakashima" wrote in news:ea5o25$6vi$1
@news.Stanford.EDU:

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16
Adams when the line & fly when under.


When you're trying to do this, its called wet fly fishing. Very
productive, very big fish, but unfortunately out of style. Next time
you find yourself upstream from an intermittant rise, try to take the
fish with
a wet fly, like a partridge and green. I tie a very buggy looking
hair wing wet that works very well.

Fish the wet fly like a wet fly-- quartering downstream cast, mend
upstream
to slow down the swing, and try to start the big part of the swing
right in
front of the trout you're fishing to. The more fish you take when
you do this in the perfect conditions, like the downstream
intermittant riser, the
more confidence you'll develop in the technique for general fishing
purposes.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Thanks for the technique advice on the wet-fly.
Two questions, what did you mean by; unfortunately out of style?

It used to be a very popular way to fish. I still know some old timers
who use a cast of wet flies (people often fish three at once), fish them
hard the whole season, and have the same three flies tied on at the end
of the season.

People fish them much less now. I say "unfortunately" because I find it
a very pleasurable way to fish. After a hard days fishing with the
"new" methods, you're well upstream, and all but fished out. You can
wade all the way downstream, back to your car, fishing a cast of wets.
You cover alot of water very quickly, and you don't need to concentrate
very hard. You don't need to get just the right drift in tricky
currents. You don't need to make sure your fly passes within a c-hair of
the fish. You don't worry about a dead drift. You don't worry about
missing a strike (there's little ambiguity in the strike on a wet fly).
You just lazily fish, and cover water fast.

And when you said; "fish the wet fly like a wet fly" did you possibly
mean; fish the dry fly like a wet fly?
-tom


I meant you don't fish it like a dead-drift nymph. The interaction
between your line, the current, and the wet fly is central to the style.
You can, of course, dead drift them if the situation calls for it, but
this takes more concentration.


Really enjoy reading your descriptions Scott, you explain things very well.
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

Tom Nakashima wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
m...

I prefer the parachute pattern for four reasons:

(1) It sits lower in the water, as someone else said. The fish seem to
like that.


I thought the Parachute Adams sits higher in the water, due to the
parachute.

The hackle on a parachute tie doesn't extend below the hook shank (or at
least not very far below it). That's why they float lower than a
traditionally hackled fly.


(2) I hate tying the wings onto a traditional Adams.


But that's not the main reason for favoring the Parachute Adams over the
Adams?

If I'm tying them, yes, it is a reason.


(3) It's symmetrical, and so doesn't tend to twist the tippet, as a
traditional Adams does unless it's perfectly tied.


Interesting, never had a problem with twist with the Adams...your casting
technique?
I've notice some casters to have a natural twist of the tippet with any fly.

Any asymmetry in the tie (i.e., the wings) will tend to cause the tippet
to twist -- especially fine tippet.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"William Claspy" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/06 2:31 PM, in article , "Tom
Nakashima" wrote:


"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).



If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish
it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or
something
like that. PT would be another option


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.
First time that's ever happened to me, but learned that you could
possibly
fish a dry-fly as a wet-fly.

I do that all the time, and sometimes even on purpose :-)

In particular, with an EHC or trude pattern*, swung at the end of the
drift
and given a little bit of action just under the menis...surface of the
water, it can be a deadly method!

With the Adams- and one reason I like the parachute style- the fly sits
pretty low already, and when it becomes almost-wet, or completely wet!, I
think it might resemble an emerging bug. Fish seem to like it anyhow.

Bill

*or Wolfgang's beloved Pass Lake

I prefer to fish with a partner for a number reasons (which might itself
make for an interesting discussion sometime) rather than alone. Back in my
years of troutbumdom, when every fish counted and large numbers were
important, I used to let my EHC or PL (more often the former than the latter
in those days) hang downstream in the current whenever my partner was
fishing. There were many days on which I caught as many fish that way as by
actively casting and a few when I did even better.

I find it odd that so many fly fishers give both wet flies and streamers
short shrift these days. Both can be every bit as effective, useless,
demanding, frustrating, and rewarding as fishing with dries or nymphs. Both
broaden the range of techniques available the fisher and the tier, and both
increase the likelihood of finding something that will work when nothing
else does.

Watching a fish chase and attack a streamer or a wet is every bit as
exciting as seeing it come up for a dry.....and the spectacle typically
lasts longer.

Wolfgang

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...

"William Claspy" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/06 2:31 PM, in article , "Tom
Nakashima" wrote:


"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
rw wrote in news:44c65a05$0$24189
:

If I had to use one fly all season (horrible thought!) it would be a
PT
(or maybe a Skip's Nymph).



If I went with a dry, I'd probably go with a Usual, cause I could fish
it
as a nymph in a pinch. Otherwise, I'd probably go w/ a grhe or
something
like that. PT would be another option


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

This may sound strange, but I actually had a rainbow swallow a #16 Adams
when the line & fly when under.
First time that's ever happened to me, but learned that you could
possibly
fish a dry-fly as a wet-fly.

I do that all the time, and sometimes even on purpose :-)

In particular, with an EHC or trude pattern*, swung at the end of the
drift
and given a little bit of action just under the menis...surface of the
water, it can be a deadly method!

With the Adams- and one reason I like the parachute style- the fly sits
pretty low already, and when it becomes almost-wet, or completely wet!, I
think it might resemble an emerging bug. Fish seem to like it anyhow.

Bill

*or Wolfgang's beloved Pass Lake

I prefer to fish with a partner for a number reasons (which might itself
make for an interesting discussion sometime) rather than alone. Back in
my years of troutbumdom, when every fish counted and large numbers were
important, I used to let my EHC or PL (more often the former than the
latter in those days) hang downstream in the current whenever my partner
was fishing. There were many days on which I caught as many fish that way
as by actively casting and a few when I did even better.

I was thinking similarities since I got back from my trip to Alaska, that
quantity of my catch wasn't important.
It was redundant using the same pattern after five hook-ups or so, that I
was looking for other methods
and techniques to use. Since Scott's post, I'm interested in trying the
older style of the wet-fly techniques.


I find it odd that so many fly fishers give both wet flies and streamers
short shrift these days. Both can be every bit as effective, useless,
demanding, frustrating, and rewarding as fishing with dries or nymphs.
Both broaden the range of techniques available the fisher and the tier,
and both increase the likelihood of finding something that will work when
nothing else does.


Watching a fish chase and attack a streamer or a wet is every bit as
exciting as seeing it come up for a dry.....and the spectacle typically
lasts longer.

Wolfgang

I did catch rainbows with a #4 Black Zuddler streamer, but didn't find it as
exciting as the dry fly.
I'm interested in the wet-fly and will do some research on this.
Any wet-fly advice is always welcome.
-tom

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

William Claspy wrote:

On 7/25/06 3:02 PM, in article , "Conan The
Librarian" wrote:

Elitist.

:-)

And your point is? :-)

No point, just trying a cast or two to see if I can get a rise.

:-)

Looks like nothing's feeding.

Maybe we should talk about handtools vs. powertools instead. :-)


Chuck Vance

Tail end of the Pmd hatch
 

On 7/25/06 4:42 PM, in article , "Wolfgang"
wrote:

I find it odd that so many fly fishers give both wet flies and streamers
short shrift these days. Both can be every bit as effective, useless,
demanding, frustrating, and rewarding as fishing with dries or nymphs. Both
broaden the range of techniques available the fisher and the tier, and both
increase the likelihood of finding something that will work when nothing
else does.

Watching a fish chase and attack a streamer or a wet is every bit as
exciting as seeing it come up for a dry.....and the spectacle typically
lasts longer.

I've been doing a fair amount of streamer fishing this year and am quite
enjoying it. Frequently it is as visual as watching a rise to a dry, and as
you say, seeing the chase is quite a spectacle. In the spring, our local TU
chapter had a day out on some nice water and I watched a 20+" rainbow come
out from under a log jam to slam the coachman wet I had on. THAT was some
adrenaline. And as the MA boys will tell you, that same fly was somewhat
effective at their elusive Secret Spot �, although in that case it was a
blind hook up.

Somewhere around mid June I was reading some darned thing or another
(nothing notable enough to make it into my reading journal, probably one of
the rags) that denigrated streamer fishing as basically half a notch removed
from bait. I mean, I guess it sort of is, but couldn't *all* of our flies,
dry, wet or otherwise, be considered imitations of bait? So why denigrate?

Bill