why?

On Apr 24, 5:37*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
MajorOz wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
MajorOz wrote:
I hesitate to bring this up, figgering that there will be lots of
silly responses, but, I swear, they are serious questions that have
been haunting me for some time. ...
If you're fishing the Arkansas tailwaters beneath Bull Shoals and
Norfork (and that's what it sounds like to me), fuhgedaboudit. You
ain't never gonna have real trout fishing there because there ain't
any real trout there. Tailwater fishing is, by definition, phony
baloney trout fishing. I spent almost six years thinking there must
be a solution before I gave up. You may as well go to Montauk or
Bennett Springs and flail the water with Purina trout chow "wooly
buggers".

The only halfway decent, semi-approaching, real trout fishing in
Missouri/Arkansas is on the Missouri Blue Ribbon streams. Several
of us on roff have fished the Eleven Point between Greers and
Turner Mill. You should be able to Google up the TRs.

Thank you. *Haven't tried the Eleven Point, but mean to, soon. * And
you are correct. *NorthFork, below Norfolk Dam is where most of the
frustration takes place -- and Tanneycomo. ...

When I fished below Norfork it was always in the fall. I noticed
that the best guides were out of the Orvis shop in Springfield, Mo.
To a man they always had their clients fishing sculpins. And they
were the most productive folks on the stream, so far as I could
tell.

I've fished seven of the nine Missouri Blue Ribbon streams and
they're better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick but my
advice is, Go North. The driftless area of Wisconsin isn't that
far away and it's well worth the drive for native, but small,
brookies. You do know that trout are not indigenous to Missouri
and that wherever you fish you're fishing for stockers ? Not
that there's anything wrong with that ...

--
Ken Fortenberry

Sure, a drive to the Driftless Area of Wisconsin is worthwhile, but I
take small issue with referring to all the trout in Missouri as
stockers. Many are indeed wild though of course none are native.
Trout were introduced to Missouri in the 1800's. Many of the streams
I mentioned in the earlier post can and do carry very healthy wild
trout populations. You can and likely will find fulfillment on some of
these waters.

alaskaguy wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I've fished seven of the nine Missouri Blue Ribbon streams and
they're better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick but my
advice is, Go North. The driftless area of Wisconsin isn't that
far away and it's well worth the drive for native, but small,
brookies. You do know that trout are not indigenous to Missouri
and that wherever you fish you're fishing for stockers ? Not
that there's anything wrong with that ...

Sure, a drive to the Driftless Area of Wisconsin is worthwhile, but I
take small issue with referring to all the trout in Missouri as
stockers. Many are indeed wild though of course none are native.
Trout were introduced to Missouri in the 1800's. Many of the streams
I mentioned in the earlier post can and do carry very healthy wild
trout populations. You can and likely will find fulfillment on some of
these waters.

A dwindling few of the Missouri trout are wild. When I fished the
Eleven Point I was under the impression that it had never been
stocked after the first dumping from the train trestle in the 1880's.
I was mistaken. Missouri started "supplemental stocking" on the
Eleven Point and most of the other Blue Ribbon streams several years
ago. There are a few, very few, wild trout left in Missouri. But hey,
different strokes for different folks. I grew up in E. St. Louis and
caught my first trout in Missouri. I was the one who got hooked and
I've fished most of the trout streams in the state at one time or
another. I just prefer to fish elsewhere these days. YMMV.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Apr 24, 6:22*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
alaskaguy wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I've fished seven of the nine Missouri Blue Ribbon streams and
they're better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick but my
advice is, Go North. The driftless area of Wisconsin isn't that
far away and it's well worth the drive for native, but small,
brookies. You do know that trout are not indigenous to Missouri
and that wherever you fish you're fishing for stockers ? Not
that there's anything wrong with that ...

Sure, a drive to the Driftless Area of Wisconsin is worthwhile, but I
take small issue with referring to all the trout in Missouri as
stockers. *Many are indeed wild though of course none are native.
Trout were introduced to Missouri in the 1800's. *Many of the streams
I mentioned in the earlier post can and do carry very healthy wild
trout populations. You can and likely will find fulfillment on some of
these waters.

A dwindling few of the Missouri trout are wild. When I fished the
Eleven Point I was under the impression that it had never been
stocked after the first dumping from the train trestle in the 1880's.
I was mistaken. Missouri started "supplemental stocking" on the
Eleven Point and most of the other Blue Ribbon streams several years
ago. There are a few, very few, wild trout left in Missouri. But hey,
different strokes for different folks. I grew up in E. St. Louis and
caught my first trout in Missouri. I was the one who got hooked and
I've fished *most of the trout streams in the state at one time or
another. I just prefer to fish elsewhere these days. YMMV.

--
Ken Fortenberry

The North Fork of the White has not been stocked with rainbows since
1964. It is true that many other streams do receive stocking. I
don't know...it doesn't bother me really. Of course there's other
places I'd rather fish, but there's something to be said for looking
at the positives of the streams where you can fish consistently.

Most folks would still consider streams like the West Branch of the
Ausable quality fishing and I dare say a phenomenal percent of the
trout are "stockers." Very few streams anymore can sustain the level
of pressure they receive without stocking. Even streams like the
North Tongue River in the Bighorns receives stocking. It's just a
fact of life in most North American streams. Trappers Lake in the
Flattops of Western Colorado was stocked with 45,000 Colorado River
cutthroats per year between 2003 and 2007. This has been one of my
favorite spots and my view is no different based on this knowledge.

On 24-Apr-2009, alaskaguy wrote:

Most folks would still consider streams like the West Branch of the
Ausable quality fishing and I dare say a phenomenal percent of the
trout are "stockers." Very few streams anymore can sustain the level
of pressure they receive without stocking. Even streams like the
North Tongue River in the Bighorns receives stocking. It's just a
fact of life in most North American streams. Trappers Lake in the
Flattops of Western Colorado was stocked with 45,000 Colorado River
cutthroats per year between 2003 and 2007. This has been one of my
favorite spots and my view is no different based on this knowledge.

Man Thanks to something - the winds of chance, Allah , Eliahu
, Jesus even Jim Jones,perhaps thanks to Muhammed Ali but I can still get
to some places that are not.

Fred

"sandypittendrigh" wrote in message
...


Good post. Good questions.
Here in Montana tailwater fishing is different than every where else.
The fish seem to want itty bitty bugs longer (bigger older fish still
want to eat bugs)
and they get hammered, so you have to proceed slowly, with stealth.

But those same fish will still hit spinning lures and big stearmers,
especially on cloudy days. Stuff that stinks always works. Although
I must say I think bait fishing can be tough on bright sunny days too.
At least that's what I gather from bait fishing gossip. Haven't
actually
fished with bait in a long time.

So maybe these have to be seen as different behavior patterns.
Chasing a spoon is different response that eating invertibrate drift.
So it cannot be compared. In the invertibrate drift context, a #22
zebra midge (in a tailwater) is more spot on than a #14 fuzzball.

I read in a academic fisheries paper, published by a post doc PHD
at the Florida Marine Institute, that big bonefish graduate from small
crustacea to eating mostly Toadfish (like sal****er sculpins) over a
certain
size threshold. Large shrimp flies don't work as well as smaller ones
sometimes.
But guys who toss 4 and 5" jig head twister tails sometimes catch a
half
a dozen bonefish an hour. So.....even bonefish prefer small and big,
but don't like medium.


Was helping out last Saturday at the local parks and recs outdoor adventure
and fishing day. Each kid got to fish a netted off area for trout. Most
caught the one allowed. Power bait. But by the end of the session, was
hard to get a fish on for a kid.
Guy started throwing a small spoon. Copper worked better than silver, but
the fish jumped all over the spoons. As long as it was in the vicinity the
fish hit it. Maybe we need bigger flys with lots of silver flash when
fishing for those picky fish instead of trying to tie on a #24 caddis. At
least I could see the fly to tie it on.

On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:00:03 -0700 (PDT), MajorOz
wrote:

I hesitate to bring this up, figgering that there will be lots of
silly responses, but, I swear, they are serious questions that have
been haunting me for some time.

I have spent most of my life in the Rockies, Cascades, and places
there'bouts. I have caught trout of all kinds, sizes, and temperments
in an amazing variety of places. I have never, and don't ever expect
to, fish on "outfitter" waters, as I have my own personal anathema
toward the concept.

I have caught trout on every kind of fly imaginable, but the great
majority were caught on:
1. Caddis, usually elk hair in sizes from 8 to 14.
2. Lead wrapped at first, and bead head recently, fuzzy globs
(nymphs, I guess) from size 4 (believe it ! ) up to 14 or so.
3. Black gnat, grey dun, and Royal Wulff dries, from 12 to 16.
4. (later on) Wooley buggers and sculpins frim 8 to 12.

In my dotage, I fish mostly tail waters, as I no longer live in the
west. There are humungous (former world record brown, current state
record brookies, etc) fish there, but seem to feed only on nearly
invisible.......somethings. Even on the spring fed headwaters, the
same is generally true.

Mysis shrimp? If so, good luck "matching the, um, hatch." I wouldn't even
bother, but YMMV...

The youngsters, equipped with five grand worth of LLBean stuff, bobber
fish with #22 zebra's almost exclusively, and seem to catch all the
fish. I stumble across one dummy now and then, but when the wind is
up and I am forced to switch to UL spin tackle, I catch a number of
fish on my small, home made spoons.
And the local hillbillies are dragging them out one after the other on
power bait.

I an not jealous (not much, anyway) of what others do, as I have "done
it, pretty much, all". But I am "jealous" of what I, myself, used to
do. I think my leader choices, presentation, etc. are as good as
ever, but they do not like any of the stuff I have used for 60 or so
years. Zebras are itttttttttt !

If they can suck up power bait or get faked out by my small spoons,
why won't they like a yummy looking wet caddis? This isn't a case of
"just last week" or temporary choosiness; it has been happening for at
least eight years.

cheers

oz, confused

Since it is, apparently, your local waters, you have lots of time to experiment,
and you just wanna see what'll work (obviously, you know how to catch fish
there), I'd suggest trying a selection of larger, flashy flies and seeing what
of that group works, if any. I'd further advise notes and pictures. Then, once
you have a "baseline" fly, work down - smaller and plainer, but in the same
general style/color - until the hits stop. You're now in the "range." Start
tweaking it as you wish.

TC,
R

On Apr 25, 6:18*am, wrote:
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:00:03 -0700 (PDT), MajorOz
wrote:



I hesitate to bring this up, figgering that there will be lots of
silly responses, but, I swear, they are serious questions that have
been haunting me for some time.

I have spent most of my life in the Rockies, Cascades, and places
there'bouts. *I have caught trout of all kinds, sizes, and temperments
in an amazing variety of places. *I have never, and don't ever expect
to, fish on "outfitter" waters, as I have my own personal anathema
toward the concept.

I have caught trout on every kind of fly imaginable, but the great
majority were caught on:
1. *Caddis, usually elk hair in sizes from 8 to 14.
2. *Lead wrapped at first, and bead head recently, fuzzy globs
(nymphs, I guess) from size 4 (believe it ! ) up to 14 or so.
3. *Black gnat, grey dun, and Royal Wulff dries, from 12 to 16.
4. *(later on) Wooley buggers and sculpins frim 8 to 12.

In my dotage, I fish mostly tail waters, as I no longer live in the
west. *There are humungous (former world record brown, current state
record brookies, etc) fish there, but seem to feed only on nearly
invisible.......somethings. *Even on the spring fed headwaters, the
same is generally true.

Mysis shrimp? *If so, good luck "matching the, um, hatch." *I wouldn't even
bother, but YMMV...



The youngsters, equipped with five grand worth of LLBean stuff, bobber
fish with #22 zebra's almost exclusively, and seem to catch all the
fish. *I stumble across one dummy now and then, but when the wind is
up and I am forced to switch to UL spin tackle, I catch a number of
fish on my small, home made spoons.
And the local hillbillies are dragging them out one after the other on
power bait.

I an not jealous (not much, anyway) of what others do, as I have "done
it, pretty much, all". *But I am "jealous" of what I, myself, used to
do. *I think my leader choices, presentation, etc. are as good as
ever, but they do not like any of the stuff I have used for 60 or so
years. *Zebras are itttttttttt !

If they can suck up power bait or get faked out by my small spoons,
why won't they like a yummy looking wet caddis? *This isn't a case of
"just last week" or temporary choosiness; it has been happening for at
least eight years.

cheers

oz, confused

Since it is, apparently, your local waters, you have lots of time to experiment,
and you just wanna see what'll work (obviously, you know how to catch fish
there), I'd suggest trying a selection of larger, flashy flies and seeing what
of that group works, if any. *I'd further advise notes and pictures. *Then, once
you have a "baseline" fly, work down - smaller and plainer, but in the same
general style/color - until the hits stop. *You're now in the "range." *Start
tweaking it as you wish.

TC,
R

What works on the smaller streams is size 16-18 Prince Nymphs,
Pheasant Tails, Hare’s Ear Nymphs, San Juan Worms, and a few others.
On the dry side Elk Hair Caddis, Parachute Adams, Royal Wulffs, as
well as some terrestrials during the summertime.

alaskaguy wrote:
What works on the smaller streams is size 16-18 Prince Nymphs,
Pheasant Tails, Hare’s Ear Nymphs, San Juan Worms, and a few others.
On the dry side Elk Hair Caddis, Parachute Adams, Royal Wulffs, as
well as some terrestrials during the summertime.

You can't talk about effective flies on Missouri trout streams without
mentioning Ed Story's Crackleback Dry Woolly. I have never had much
luck any place other than Missouri with the Crackleback but for some
reason it's just killer in Missouri.

And speaking of Ed Story, a hale and hearty farewell old timer, you'll
be missed by your fellows of the fly and your contributions to our
sport will be felt for generations to come. RIP.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Apr 25, 8:37*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
alaskaguy wrote:
What works on the smaller streams is size 16-18 Prince Nymphs,
Pheasant Tails, Hare’s Ear Nymphs, San Juan Worms, and a few others.
On the dry side Elk Hair Caddis, Parachute Adams, Royal Wulffs, as
well as some terrestrials during the summertime.

You can't talk about effective flies on Missouri trout streams without
mentioning Ed Story's Crackleback Dry Woolly. I have never had much
luck any place other than Missouri with the Crackleback but for some
reason it's just killer in Missouri.

And speaking of Ed Story, a hale and hearty farewell old timer, you'll
be missed by your fellows of the fly and your contributions to our
sport will be felt for generations to come. RIP.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Do you suggest a beaded or dry? I'd like to try it. Hate to admit it,
but I don't tie my own...found them online 12-16 size...are these
sizes ok?

alaskaguy wrote:
Ken wrote:
You can't talk about effective flies on Missouri trout streams without
mentioning Ed Story's Crackleback Dry Woolly.

Do you suggest a beaded or dry? I'd like to try it. Hate to admit it,
but I don't tie my own...found them online 12-16 size...are these
sizes ok?

I didn't know anybody sold a beaded version. I've never used
beaded or size 12. I like oranges and yellows in 14 and 16.

--
Ken Fortenberry