The Denny Rickards emerger discussion

At this year's Sportsman Show, I found Denny Rickard to be a very
fascinating person, willing to give information and not hold back. I were
there listening intently at his booth taking about the emergers and fly
patterns, but I'll just touch on the important parts of our discussion.



The emerger is to imitate an adult caddis coming to the surface. It's to be
fished right below the surface 1 to 3" and fished very slowly with four to
six inch slow pulls on the line. Denny likes to fish the emergers close to
shore, and with a slow sinking line. He also likes the clear 5" or 7" tip
line. The reason with the slow sinking line is because it gives the emerger
pattern to act more natural instead of adding weight to the emerger on a
floating line, or worst yet a beaded nymph or beaded emerger. I did at that
point question Denny about beaded nymphs, and he replied; "Oh, that's for
you guys, I don't use them!" My next question is why don't you use beaded
nymphs? He held up one of the three beaded nymphs that I had in my cup and
asked where do you think this is going to go when in the water? I looked
puzzled, then he replied; "Right to the bottom!" It's not a natural
movement of any fly!" So I dumped back the three beaded nymphs in his
display box.



Denny has a lake just outside his front door to his home, so he takes the
time to understand hatches, and how the trout feed. He also asked me what
trout sees when a fly is on the surface during sunlight? I wasn't sure how
to answer and again looked puzzled.

He then grabbed the lamp behind him and held up a dry fly sort of off to the
side but before the lamp, then it became apparent that the trout sees a
silhouette. I think everyone should try this. In a semi dark room, hold up
a dry fly with a pair of tweezers off to the side of a lamp and observe how
it illuminates. This also explains Dave Whitlocks statement of most tied
flies he's seen are over patterned, and the theories of trout identify fly
patterns by size, action, pattern, and color. When there is no sunlight out,
Denny says trout will then consider color.



When I got home that evening of the show, I went through all my dry flies
with the silhouette effect of the lamp. I was pretty amazed on repeated
patterns. The one fly that stood out the most was the Light Cahill, nice
designed dry fly with a beautiful silhouette.



The emergers come up to the surface at a slight angle, but before while just
underneath the surface they travel in more of a parallel fashion, another
reason for the slow sinking line. The emerger patterns have to be tied
right, with just a very slight weight to them to allow them to sink just
below the surface, but not too heavy to sink any further. No more than 3".
Denny has done a lot of experimenting with his emerger patterns and found
the right combination. Most try to fish the emerger like a nymph, too deep
and also pull too fast, or dead drift the emerger which is also a mistake by
most anglers.



As I was taking to Denny, I noticed many anglers sort of butting in, which I
didn't mind at all, but found it humorous to see anglers try to impress
Denny on their angling skills.

And Denny sort of shrugged it off, not really caring. If I got anything out
of this year's Sportsman show, it would be how to fish the emerger, thanks
to Denny Rickard.

Fwiw,

-tom

Tom Nakashima a écrit :
At this year's Sportsman Show, I found Denny Rickard to be a very
fascinating person, willing to give information and not hold back. I were
there listening intently at his booth taking about the emergers and fly
patterns, but I'll just touch on the important parts of our discussion.

Very interesting, thanks for posting.

--
Hope to read you soon,

Denis
www.uqtr.ca/~lamyd

You'll have to eat the SPAM to E-mail

Tom Nakashima wrote:
At this year's Sportsman Show, I found Denny Rickard to be a very
fascinating person......

........... My next question is why don't you use beaded
nymphs? He held up one of the three beaded nymphs that I had in my cup and
asked where do you think this is going to go when in the water? I looked
puzzled, then he replied; "Right to the bottom!" It's not a natural
movement of any fly!"

This (how much, if any weight on the fly) is an interesting subject.
Too much weight on the fly does indeed create an unnatural drift.
But a small amount (like a small bead) doesn't (in my know-it-all
opinion)
necessarily do the same.

Any fly will have some amount of drag assocaited with it--because the
leader will
interact with the currents. The predominant effect (of the drag) is to
pull
the fly upward, toward the surface. So, from a theoretical, speculative
point of view, you could argue a small amount of weight, which
counteracts
the unnatural tendancy for the fly to rise upwards, results in a more
natural
drift.

But more reliable evidence can be found in the fishing.
Too much weight makes as clinker/sinker that doesn't work well. I feel
I
know that from fishing experience and not from theoretical explanation.
I also feel I know that small semi-lightweight beadheads work very
well.
And it's counter productive to argue with success.

"salmobytes" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tom Nakashima wrote:
At this year's Sportsman Show, I found Denny Rickard to be a very
fascinating person......

.......... My next question is why don't you use beaded
nymphs? He held up one of the three beaded nymphs that I had in my cup
and
asked where do you think this is going to go when in the water? I looked
puzzled, then he replied; "Right to the bottom!" It's not a natural
movement of any fly!"

This (how much, if any weight on the fly) is an interesting subject.
Too much weight on the fly does indeed create an unnatural drift.
But a small amount (like a small bead) doesn't (in my know-it-all
opinion)
necessarily do the same.

Any fly will have some amount of drag assocaited with it--because the
leader will
interact with the currents. The predominant effect (of the drag) is to
pull
the fly upward, toward the surface. So, from a theoretical, speculative
point of view, you could argue a small amount of weight, which
counteracts
the unnatural tendancy for the fly to rise upwards, results in a more
natural
drift.

But more reliable evidence can be found in the fishing.
Too much weight makes as clinker/sinker that doesn't work well. I feel
I
know that from fishing experience and not from theoretical explanation.
I also feel I know that small semi-lightweight beadheads work very
well.
And it's counter productive to argue with success.


I was just relaying what Denny Rickard said in his discussion.
By all means, if the beaded nymph works for you, use it.
fwiw,
-tom

Tom Nakashima wrote:

"salmobytes" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tom Nakashima wrote:

At this year's Sportsman Show, I found Denny Rickard to be a very
fascinating person......

.......... My next question is why don't you use beaded

nymphs? He held up one of the three beaded nymphs that I had in my cup
and
asked where do you think this is going to go when in the water? I looked
puzzled, then he replied; "Right to the bottom!" It's not a natural
movement of any fly!"

This (how much, if any weight on the fly) is an interesting subject.
Too much weight on the fly does indeed create an unnatural drift.
But a small amount (like a small bead) doesn't (in my know-it-all
opinion)
necessarily do the same.

Any fly will have some amount of drag assocaited with it--because the
leader will
interact with the currents. The predominant effect (of the drag) is to
pull
the fly upward, toward the surface. So, from a theoretical, speculative
point of view, you could argue a small amount of weight, which
counteracts
the unnatural tendancy for the fly to rise upwards, results in a more
natural
drift.

But more reliable evidence can be found in the fishing.
Too much weight makes as clinker/sinker that doesn't work well. I feel
I
know that from fishing experience and not from theoretical explanation.
I also feel I know that small semi-lightweight beadheads work very
well.
And it's counter productive to argue with success.



I was just relaying what Denny Rickard said in his discussion.
By all means, if the beaded nymph works for you, use it.
fwiw,
-tom

Denny Rickards is a wellknown stillwater guy, so I assume...possibly
incorrectly, that the discussion was about lake fishing. Might be
discussing apples to oranges here?

brians

"briansfly" wrote in message
news:ZL7rh.673$Hc5.518@trnddc03...
Tom Nakashima wrote:

I was just relaying what Denny Rickard said in his discussion.
By all means, if the beaded nymph works for you, use it.
fwiw,
-tom

Denny Rickards is a wellknown stillwater guy, so I assume...possibly
incorrectly, that the discussion was about lake fishing. Might be
discussing apples to oranges here?

brians


Yes, although Denny is master of the stillwater, he's also proficient on the
rivers and streams.
Outstanding caster as well. Our discussion was on still and moving waters.
fwiw,
-tom

"salmobytes" wrote

I
know that from fishing experience and not from theoretical explanation.
I also feel I know that small semi-lightweight beadheads work very
well.
And it's counter productive to argue with success.


One thing that strikes me reading Tom's post is the fact that Rickards is a
STILLwater expert, and I'm sure was speaking only of stillwaters.

Stillwater fly fishing doesn't tend to get the respect it deserves because
most fishermen never advance much beyond a "toss a whoooly buggger ... pull
it back" level of thought and skill. It can be very challenging, cerebral,
fishing, on the right lake

I fished stillwaters a lot for years, since they provided the best catching
I could find in Arnoldland. On still waters, sinking your fly with the
line is the most effective approach most of the time ( maybe a little weight
in the fly, but damn little just to break the surface, and 90+% of the time
I use unweighted flies and sinking lines of various sink rates )


But, on the other hand, as a follow up on Sandy's excellent "it's counter
productive to argue with success" ... in my experience, beadheads/weight in
the fly are generally a 'good thing' in moving water nymphing ... not
"ker-thud, stuck on the bottom" amounts of weight, but some ...

"Larry L" wrote

On still waters, sinking your fly with the
line is the most effective approach most of the time ( maybe a little
weight in the fly, but damn little just to break the surface, and 90+% of
the time I use unweighted flies and sinking lines of various sink rates )



Oh, yeah ... an exception, to prove the rule

many times ... THE way to hook stillwater trout is "on the drop" ... i.e. as
the fly sinks ... this requires lots of concentration to spot the change in
sink rate that signals a take.

If you find a place where you can clearly watch callibaetis nymphs
'hatching' you will see that they often swim up to near the surface, then
slowly sink back down towards the bottom, often repeating this several times
before finally hitting the film and 'emerging' Damsels also do a 'wiggle
like hell, then rest and slowly sink' approach to protruding objects to find
a place to crawl out ... that sink can be a key to catching on hard fished
stillwaters.

Although this 'sinking' is slow, it does somewhat refute the stated idea
about sinking " It's not a natural movement of any fly!" During the early
part of a callibaetis hatch a lightly weighted fly tossed out on a floating
line, allowed to sink and then stripped back to near the surface .. now
repeat ... will often attract more hits on the sink than the rise ...ah,
IME. IMO, this is probably due in part to fish in lakes learning to
mistrust certain types of motion, the types most anglers impart on a
'stripped' fly.

"Larry L" wrote

I use unweighted flies and sinking lines of various sink rates )




It occurred to me to pass on another, seldom seen, stillwater technique ...
high speed sinking lines and FLOATing flies ... i.e. foam flies

This can be deadly as it allows a very slow retrieve just up off the bottom.

Cast, allow the whole mess to sink, visualize that foam fly floating up from
the bottom, and twitch it seductively, tighten to any hint of increased
resistance or weight on the line. Flies with lots of internal movement
seem to work best since they 'breathe' and pulse with just the current ( yes
in a lake ) Slow is an important idea to grasp in stillwater trout
fishing ... almost everyone you see is fishing their flies faster than what
I find works best, most often, regardless of depth and pattern.

salmobytes wrote:



But more reliable evidence can be found in the fishing.
Too much weight makes as clinker/sinker that doesn't work well. I feel
I
know that from fishing experience and not from theoretical explanation.

if you ever have the opportunity, you should fish with bruiser...he'd
seriously screw up your theory about "too much weight". or mike makela
too. both are excellent fish ciphers with dry flies and wets...but they
know the value of "lead".

jeff