Newbie Question: How many fly sizes & colors to tie for next season?

Larry L wrote:

Now for a more all inclusive discussion than "newbie advice." As I say
trout eat all sorts of stuff, I'm sure you have watched them sample twigs
and such from the drift. Trout likely "eat" for several reasons, hunger,
'anger,' 'territory defense,' and yes I'd guess 'curiosity' ... i.e. his
mouth is his major tool to experiment with new things in the drift.

To ME, it makes more sense to concentrate efforts on trying to induce a
'feeding' response than the others .. most of the time, the exceptions
clearly exist ... and, to ME, that implies an effort to suggest food forms
the fish has seen and eaten recently.

Sure, various Disaster Area Ant patterns will catch 'some' fish, 'sometimes'
lots of them. But, I ask you, Willi, this. Given a hypothetical
situation where you are climbing into a drift boat for a full day during
Salmon Fly time ( a classic big, garish time) and are given a choice ...
take a box of wildly colored foam Disaster Area Ants ... or take a box of
attractors that more closely resemble Salmon Flies ( Stimulators and such )
.... are YOU really going to take the DAAs ? Or, even if the choice is
between very garish, wildly colored ( no orange :-) DAAs and a box that
holds only #18 Royal Ws, #18 PTs and #18 Brassies ... would YOU choose the
DAAs over the smaller, more "common food like" ties? Remember your whole,
long, day of drifting you are stuck with the decision G




I hate fishing from a driftboat and would try and avoid it but if I HAD
to, I'd probably choose some of each. (Unless we were floating Cutthroat
water. Then I'd be sure and stock up on foam flies. I think that Cutts
must like how foam tastes!!) The majority of the flies I tie and fish
are ties I consider "buggy". (I liked your "Disaster Area" Ant pattern
label)

Where I'm coming from in this discussion is that I think that
most beginners should pay more attention to and work harder at better
presentation rather than worrying about having the "right" fly. In
stream and river trout fishing it is VERY unusual when the fish are more
selective than having a fly that is close to the "right" size. Having a
generic Mayfly and Caddis dry and a soft hackle and a nymph in a range
of sizes, IMO is close enough for 99% of the situations you'll
get into IF the fly is presented correctly. What I think a beginner
would be better off doing rather than frequently changing flies is to
concentrate on different ways and better ways of presenting the flies
he's using. (IMO, traditional dead drift tactics are over emphasized and
boring)

There's a young man I've been fishing with quite a bit this year. He's a
pretty accomplished angler and is analytic in his approach like you are.
He studies the air and bushes for insects, nets the surface and deeper
currents, takes stream temps etc. Then he uses this info to chose what
fly he is going to use. If he's not successful, he first choice is to
change flies and try and find that "right" one. I generally will use
whatever, is left on my setup from the last time I was fishing. This
year it would most likely be a caddis dry and a soft hackle dropper -
what I've used this year for 90% of my stream and river fishing. I
generally out fish this young man, not because I have the "right"
fly but because if I am not catching fish, I change how and where I am
presenting the flies instead of changing them.

Willi

Willi wrote:
Larry L wrote:

Now for a more all inclusive discussion than "newbie advice." As I
say
trout eat all sorts of stuff, I'm sure you have watched them sample twigs
and such from the drift. Trout likely "eat" for several reasons,
hunger,
'anger,' 'territory defense,' and yes I'd guess 'curiosity' ... i.e. his
mouth is his major tool to experiment with new things in the drift.

To ME, it makes more sense to concentrate efforts on trying to induce a
'feeding' response than the others .. most of the time, the exceptions
clearly exist ... and, to ME, that implies an effort to suggest food
forms
the fish has seen and eaten recently.

Sure, various Disaster Area Ant patterns will catch 'some' fish,
'sometimes'
lots of them. But, I ask you, Willi, this. Given a hypothetical
situation where you are climbing into a drift boat for a full day during
Salmon Fly time ( a classic big, garish time) and are given a choice ...
take a box of wildly colored foam Disaster Area Ants ... or take a box of
attractors that more closely resemble Salmon Flies ( Stimulators and
such )
.... are YOU really going to take the DAAs ? Or, even if the choice is
between very garish, wildly colored ( no orange :-) DAAs and a box that
holds only #18 Royal Ws, #18 PTs and #18 Brassies ... would YOU choose
the
DAAs over the smaller, more "common food like" ties? Remember your
whole,
long, day of drifting you are stuck with the decision G




I hate fishing from a driftboat and would try and avoid it but if I HAD
to, I'd probably choose some of each. (Unless we were floating Cutthroat
water. Then I'd be sure and stock up on foam flies. I think that Cutts
must like how foam tastes!!) The majority of the flies I tie and fish
are ties I consider "buggy". (I liked your "Disaster Area" Ant pattern
label)

Where I'm coming from in this discussion is that I think that
most beginners should pay more attention to and work harder at better
presentation rather than worrying about having the "right" fly. In
stream and river trout fishing it is VERY unusual when the fish are more
selective than having a fly that is close to the "right" size. Having a
generic Mayfly and Caddis dry and a soft hackle and a nymph in a range
of sizes, IMO is close enough for 99% of the situations you'll
get into IF the fly is presented correctly. What I think a beginner
would be better off doing rather than frequently changing flies is to
concentrate on different ways and better ways of presenting the flies
he's using. (IMO, traditional dead drift tactics are over emphasized and
boring)

There's a young man I've been fishing with quite a bit this year. He's a
pretty accomplished angler and is analytic in his approach like you are.
He studies the air and bushes for insects, nets the surface and deeper
currents, takes stream temps etc. Then he uses this info to chose what
fly he is going to use. If he's not successful, he first choice is to
change flies and try and find that "right" one. I generally will use
whatever, is left on my setup from the last time I was fishing. This
year it would most likely be a caddis dry and a soft hackle dropper -
what I've used this year for 90% of my stream and river fishing. I
generally out fish this young man, not because I have the "right"
fly but because if I am not catching fish, I change how and where I am
presenting the flies instead of changing them.

Willi



Frankly, Willi, I am beginning to accept the suggestion that you are
actually some kind of unearthly being, hundreds of years old, exerting
an irresistable hypnotic force over the will (hmm... will-i) and the
instinct of fish (and perhaps even dogs). i don't think your uncanny,
other-worldly abilities can be taught or can serve as examples...one has
to sacrifice a virgin or sign a blood script with the devil or something
of that nature to do what you do. it's when you levitate to change the
how and where of presentation that i really get spooked. g

jeff

"Willi" wrote

.. This
year it would most likely be a caddis dry and a soft hackle dropper -
what I've used this year for 90% of my stream and river fishing. I
generally out fish this young man, not because I have the "right"
fly but because if I am not catching fish, I change how and where I am
presenting the flies instead of changing them.



Several things come to mind .... in no particular order

---
I doubt that I am as pattern oriented as my posts have made you believe ....
if I'm fishing to rising fish ( I'll drive 1000 to find em, went to the
local river today and couldn't work up enough interest to fish without
them ) I will assume my presentation is wrong, rather than my fly until I
have put several drifts over the fish that looked so good I really expected
a rise

---

Exception to above might be if the fish rises in a manner ( rise form ) that
indicates my dry fly should be replaced with a damp one ... I'm a visible
fish addict not a dry fly addict

-----

I, too, believe that presentation far outweighs pattern in importance ...
simply because every fish demands a good presentation, only a few demand the
right fly ( same thing you said relative to selective being rare )

---

I fish for fun and honestly believe that most days I "could" increase my
catch by changing tactics/presentation. Catching is not the most fun part
of my day, most days. I don't mean to imply I believe I could fish "with"
you or other very skilled anglers, just that I very often consciously decide
to keep fishing a method I enjoy when I'm certain other methods would
produce better.

I once met a guy that recited "his numbers" for the last few days and they
were very impressive. I said, "I'm sorry about that." when he finished.
He asked, "Did YOU do better?" unable to believe I was kissing his feet.
"No, not even close. I'm just sorry that you haven't got better reasons to
fish than numbers."

-----

I enjoy the BS about identifying the bugs, seining the water and "matching
the hatch" FOR ITSELF, not just for it's hoped for increase in fish landed.
When a given VISIBLE fish eludes me I will cast without changing flies until
I feel I've shown him good presentations ... then I'll start changing flies,
trying to approach the change analytically not randomly. I end up
catching him more often than not ( although there is no way to say it was
pattern, I may have just finally gotten a good float )

----

the reverse is true, for me, about some tactics. Changing weight on the
leader to meet the requirements of a new slot being nymph fished is the
definition of tedious. If I rig a certain way and am "fishing the water"
there is no way I can conjure up enough enthusiasm to re-rig for new
conditions or to fish with concentration for more than a few minutes

----

Moving to a new area or new fish is generally the "right tactic" when the
current one proves difficult, to catch numbers. But, I almost never move
on if I can see him and he's a decent size for the water. I'm a "one on
one" angler and I don't give a damn if the fish right over there would eat
what/how I'm fishing .... I want THIS one G

----

One main reason I usually fish alone is that my measurements of "good day"
never seem to match those of other anglers. A couple hours of the fishing
I really like and a handful of fish caught is a wonderful day to me. I
have no desire to fish "all day" and when the numbers caught get into the
high teens or a big fish or two has been landed I feel I've "limited out"
for the day.

----

Days happen that were exceptions, but normally I have to SEE my fish to
enjoy trying to catch him. The fact that I therefore know I'm getting
refusals tips the scales towards "pattern" in my thoughts.

I have watched nymphers at say the San Juan stand in one spot and cast over
and over and over and over into the same slot. OBVIOUSLY they are getting
refusals but they don't seem to think of it that way. I often wonder if
they would keep flogging a riser that way.

There is something very different in the mindset that comes after weeks of
fishing to nothing but visible fish that I never experienced back when I
mainly fished small freestones in the Sierra. Mind you I make no claim it
is superior, just different. Even with arthritis that demands pain pills
every day, I'll walk a couple miles looking for fish I can see without
making a cast till I find him, and be content .... I'd be bored to tears
casting to "could be there" water for two miles.

----

Anyway I'm getting too far afield. Just suffice it to say that I'm aware
of most of the things I do wrong ( if numbers are the measure ), don't think
anybody else "should" have my attitudes, and still manage to enjoy my
fishing far more than back when I ALWAYS started with an Adams and if they
didn't eat it I'd switch places to fish.

----

HeHe Flashback !!

My first fly rod trout ate a #12 Adams just above Chittenden Bridge in the
Yellowstone River For years that was the only fly I had any real faith in
and I'd flail away with one forever assuming that any trout anywhere would
eat it and it had to be "drag" that was my problem.

A few years ago I went to Slough Creek and decided to tie some #12 Adams
just for that day. Just for the heck of it I wanted to catch a Yellowstone
Cutt like that first one fly rod fish with that same first fly.

I had a banner day.

Later that week I chatted with John Jurachek and told him how much fun it
had been to go back to the "old pattern" and celebrate 35+ years fishing in
Yellowstone. He asked, " Do you know why that Adams worked so well?"
I said, "Oh yeah, the Gray Drakes were still around." John, "Yep, that's
it It won't work that well much longer this season on Slough Creek"

I like my fishing a whole lot better "thinking" I know why that first fish
in the Yellowstone ate that Adams ... I didn't have a clue then, but now I
know it was Gray Drake time and the guy at the fly shop in Jackson really
did know what was a good pattern to toss when he picked the adams for me.

----

One of the best things about fly fishing is it offers so much variation.
You love your style, I love mine. I bet you lean towards "mine" some days.
One of the first things you posted a few years, that I remember, was a
comment about "olives" really being more gray than olive ... in a paragraph
about how "color don't matter,. presentation do" .. the irony was noticed,
the powers of observation admired.

Some days I love to just swing a soft hackle, Nemes style, and never
consider bugs. I still love small freestones and always have a half dozen
small attractors with me, but my arthritis pain steals most of the pleasure
from the hike so I only do such places a couple times a season.


___

"Larry L" wrote

He asked, "Did YOU do better?" unable to believe I was kissing his feet.


wasN'T kissing his feet G

there are about ten other mistakes in my post but I wanted to clear this one
up :-)

"Willi" wrote in message
...

Where I'm coming from in this discussion is that I think that
most beginners should pay more attention to and work harder at better
presentation rather than worrying about having the "right" fly. In
stream and river trout fishing it is VERY unusual when the fish are more
selective than having a fly that is close to the "right" size. Having a
generic Mayfly and Caddis dry and a soft hackle and a nymph in a range
of sizes, IMO is close enough for 99% of the situations you'll
get into IF the fly is presented correctly. What I think a beginner
would be better off doing rather than frequently changing flies is to
concentrate on different ways and better ways of presenting the flies
he's using. (IMO, traditional dead drift tactics are over emphasized and
boring) Willi

I have to agree about the presentation, but I think most beginners will
blame it on the fly if they're not catching anything. I'm sure a lot of us
here have been victims of this in our early stages of fly-fishing. It isn't
until after one becomes more experienced, familiar to read waters, working
on presentation, observing and emulating our mentors, that we start to
developed our skills as an angler.

When I hit the casting ponds, the majority of the anglers work on long
distance casting, I guess they feel the longer they can cast the better
fly-fisherman they are. There is only a few of us who work on our rollcast
and presentation techniques.
-tom

"Larry L" wrote in message
...

"Willi" wrote

. This
year it would most likely be a caddis dry and a soft hackle dropper -
what I've used this year for 90% of my stream and river fishing. I
generally out fish this young man, not because I have the "right"
fly but because if I am not catching fish, I change how and where I am
presenting the flies instead of changing them.



Several things come to mind .... in no particular order

---
I doubt that I am as pattern oriented as my posts have made you believe
.... if I'm fishing to rising fish ( I'll drive 1000 to find em, went to
the local river today and couldn't work up enough interest to fish without
them ) I will assume my presentation is wrong, rather than my fly until I
have put several drifts over the fish that looked so good I really
expected a rise

---

Exception to above might be if the fish rises in a manner ( rise form )
that indicates my dry fly should be replaced with a damp one ... I'm a
visible fish addict not a dry fly addict

-----

I, too, believe that presentation far outweighs pattern in importance ...
simply because every fish demands a good presentation, only a few demand
the right fly ( same thing you said relative to selective being rare )

---

I fish for fun and honestly believe that most days I "could" increase my
catch by changing tactics/presentation. Catching is not the most fun part
of my day, most days. I don't mean to imply I believe I could fish
"with" you or other very skilled anglers, just that I very often
consciously decide to keep fishing a method I enjoy when I'm certain other
methods would produce better.

I once met a guy that recited "his numbers" for the last few days and they
were very impressive. I said, "I'm sorry about that." when he finished.
He asked, "Did YOU do better?" unable to believe I was kissing his feet.
"No, not even close. I'm just sorry that you haven't got better reasons
to fish than numbers."

-----

I enjoy the BS about identifying the bugs, seining the water and "matching
the hatch" FOR ITSELF, not just for it's hoped for increase in fish
landed. When a given VISIBLE fish eludes me I will cast without changing
flies until I feel I've shown him good presentations ... then I'll start
changing flies, trying to approach the change analytically not randomly.
I end up catching him more often than not ( although there is no way to
say it was pattern, I may have just finally gotten a good float )

----

the reverse is true, for me, about some tactics. Changing weight on the
leader to meet the requirements of a new slot being nymph fished is the
definition of tedious. If I rig a certain way and am "fishing the water"
there is no way I can conjure up enough enthusiasm to re-rig for new
conditions or to fish with concentration for more than a few minutes

----

Moving to a new area or new fish is generally the "right tactic" when the
current one proves difficult, to catch numbers. But, I almost never
move on if I can see him and he's a decent size for the water. I'm a
"one on one" angler and I don't give a damn if the fish right over there
would eat what/how I'm fishing .... I want THIS one G

----

One main reason I usually fish alone is that my measurements of "good day"
never seem to match those of other anglers. A couple hours of the
fishing I really like and a handful of fish caught is a wonderful day to
me. I have no desire to fish "all day" and when the numbers caught get
into the high teens or a big fish or two has been landed I feel I've
"limited out" for the day.

----

Days happen that were exceptions, but normally I have to SEE my fish to
enjoy trying to catch him. The fact that I therefore know I'm getting
refusals tips the scales towards "pattern" in my thoughts.

I have watched nymphers at say the San Juan stand in one spot and cast
over and over and over and over into the same slot. OBVIOUSLY they are
getting refusals but they don't seem to think of it that way. I often
wonder if they would keep flogging a riser that way.

There is something very different in the mindset that comes after weeks of
fishing to nothing but visible fish that I never experienced back when I
mainly fished small freestones in the Sierra. Mind you I make no claim
it is superior, just different. Even with arthritis that demands pain
pills every day, I'll walk a couple miles looking for fish I can see
without making a cast till I find him, and be content .... I'd be bored to
tears casting to "could be there" water for two miles.

----

Anyway I'm getting too far afield. Just suffice it to say that I'm
aware of most of the things I do wrong ( if numbers are the measure ),
don't think anybody else "should" have my attitudes, and still manage to
enjoy my fishing far more than back when I ALWAYS started with an Adams
and if they didn't eat it I'd switch places to fish.

----

HeHe Flashback !!

My first fly rod trout ate a #12 Adams just above Chittenden Bridge in the
Yellowstone River For years that was the only fly I had any real faith
in and I'd flail away with one forever assuming that any trout anywhere
would eat it and it had to be "drag" that was my problem.

A few years ago I went to Slough Creek and decided to tie some #12 Adams
just for that day. Just for the heck of it I wanted to catch a
Yellowstone Cutt like that first one fly rod fish with that same first
fly.

I had a banner day.

Later that week I chatted with John Jurachek and told him how much fun it
had been to go back to the "old pattern" and celebrate 35+ years fishing
in Yellowstone. He asked, " Do you know why that Adams worked so well?"
I said, "Oh yeah, the Gray Drakes were still around." John, "Yep, that's
it It won't work that well much longer this season on Slough Creek"

I like my fishing a whole lot better "thinking" I know why that first fish
in the Yellowstone ate that Adams ... I didn't have a clue then, but now I
know it was Gray Drake time and the guy at the fly shop in Jackson really
did know what was a good pattern to toss when he picked the adams for me.

----

One of the best things about fly fishing is it offers so much variation.
You love your style, I love mine. I bet you lean towards "mine" some
days. One of the first things you posted a few years, that I remember,
was a comment about "olives" really being more gray than olive ... in a
paragraph about how "color don't matter,. presentation do" .. the irony
was noticed, the powers of observation admired.

Some days I love to just swing a soft hackle, Nemes style, and never
consider bugs. I still love small freestones and always have a half
dozen small attractors with me, but my arthritis pain steals most of the
pleasure from the hike so I only do such places a couple times a season.

I stand in perpetual awe of people who know so much about why they fish the
way they do........or why they fish at all, for that matter.

Wolfgang
who, day by day, finds himself more and more inclined to simply accept (if
not understand) what mr. miller so aptly describes as "the mystery."

"Wolfgang" wrote

who, day by day, finds himself more and more inclined to simply accept (if
not understand) what mr. miller so aptly describes as "the mystery."


human beings seem to have unlimited abilities to make simple things complex

this is certainly true of fly fishing "technique" ... look at the huge
volume of printed material on this "hobby"

The physical/tecnique parts of the sport are easy to get carried away and
clatter the keys for hours about

--------
But other aspects are nearly impossible to do anything but hint at

-------

for me, fly fishing has appeals at the "deepest" levels I operate and "the
mystery" does aptly suggest those

I have often used the word "spiritual" to hint at the inner most reasons I
hunt ( fishing is hunting ) but always felt the word comes with too much
social baggage even if it is otherwise accurate "the mystery" is nice

Wolfgang wrote:

I stand in perpetual awe of people who know so much about why they fish the
way they do........or why they fish at all, for that matter.

Wolfgang
who, day by day, finds himself more and more inclined to simply accept (if
not understand) what mr. miller so aptly describes as "the mystery."



helll...i was simply regurgitating in homage the words and philosophy of
ol' h. middleton. ...but, i think you've got it nailed. well...sorta.


jeff

So no, Nebraska doesn't look like Nirvana from here, it just
looks like Nebraska, you know Kansas but with better football. ;-)

Tom Osborne's back so there's gonna be trouble,
Hey yah, hey yah. Tom Osborne's back!
Frank Reid

Larry L wrote:

Some interesting musings.

The things that capture my fishing attention seem to change over time.
Lately I've been most interested in new places and new species.


This Summer I futility attempted to catch a Grass Carp. There's a small
shallow pond about a mile from my place that has about a dozen Grass
Carp ranging from 10 to 30?+ pounds. Huge, handsome fish. Although some
people have reported some success with traditional flies, mine have been
totally ignored. They're plant eaters and I think it's tough to imitate
plants. I probably tried for them about a dozen times. I'm casting to
actively feeding fish but mostly they move to avoid my fly. A fly
falling too close to any one of the fish, sends it on a tear which in
turn blows up all the other carp. Fish that size freaking in water less
than two feet deep is pretty wild. Obviously that puts an end to the
fishing. Most sessions last about ten minutes.

Willi