Nymphing - indicator-to-nymph MAX distance

On Thu, 1 Jun 2005 wrote:

Do you worry that too much weight can somehow mess with the drift of
your nymph?

I use an interative approach where I lengthen the leader a little bit, add
a little more weight, and repeat the process until I start ticking bottom
or snagging the occasional bit of vegetation.

the upside of being down deep always trump the downside of possibly
having too much weight?

Catching fish has a huge upside in the level of enjoyment and development
of confidence to the point where eventually you can fine tune your
technique and back of on the amount of weight.

Mu

"Mu Young Lee" wrote in message
cc.itd.umich.edu...
On Thu, 1 Jun 2005 wrote:

Do you worry that too much weight can somehow mess with the drift of
your nymph?

I use an interative approach where I lengthen the leader a little bit, add
a little more weight, and repeat the process until I start ticking bottom
or snagging the occasional bit of vegetation.

the upside of being down deep always trump the downside of possibly
having too much weight?

Catching fish has a huge upside in the level of enjoyment and development
of confidence to the point where eventually you can fine tune your
technique and back of on the amount of weight.

Mu

ya know, i just can't resist the opportunity to soapbox on some of this
"nymphing technique" as it relates to fishing with a fly rod.

at some point (and for me, it's after one lead ball), this leaves the
world of "fysshing with a flye", or whatever, and enters the world of "catch
the *******s anyway you can".

if one wants, or needs, to start adding chunks of lead to a line, very
early on a lightweight spinning rod becomes, quite obviously, a much more
efficient tool; and more stylish, to boot.

yfitons
wayno

On 1 Jun 2005 21:51:55 -0700, wrote:

Actually, Dave (or anyone), I do have a couple more question:

Do you worry that too much weight can somehow mess with the drift of
your nymph?

OK, obviously there's some amount of weight that is too much. But I'm
just wondering if I should always try to err on the side of extra
weight. As it is, I can't think of a time that I"ve ever put on more
than two 4's, or maybe one BB - and perhaps that's my problem. And
yes, I'm sure in general I don't do enough to tick bottom. But does
the upside of being down deep always trump the downside of possibly
having too much weight? (Sorry - that sentence came out as is, and
it's just too bad to change it.)

If it makes a difference - most of the situations when I'm
under-confident in my nymphing occur when I'm casting a ways, say about
20'. If I'm high-sticking, then I'm generally pretty confident. (And
part of what started all of this is that I noticed that I have a
markedly better success rate nymphing when I'm close enough and the
water is clear enough that I can actually see the take subsurface - a
much much higher success ratio - made me think I was doing something
wrong in other situations, just looking at my indicator.)

Tim, there are many ways to nymph. I favor the upstream method using
split shot to get the lure down to the bottom. If I don't get a snag
once in awhile I'm not deep enough. After awhile you'll have a
formula for how much weight in streams that you fish alot. You have
to "tune" your rig in a few ways - kind of nymph, distance to the
split shot (if you are using any), amount of split shot, and the
setting for your strike indicator (if you are using one). Nymphing is
more difficult than a dry fly or a streamer because you are working
with an extra dimension, depth. (FYFIA d;o) ) Believe me, you will
know when you have too much weight. I always seem to err on the
other side, not enough weight.

There is a spot on my favorite river where the current washes over an
old logging dam into a very deep pool. It is a wonderful spot to use
a dry or a streamer, but you have to adjust your way of thinking about
nymphing. To use a nymph, I simply cast about 10 - 20 feet with a
weight nymph, watch it while it sinks, and then use a L. Lift on it.
If I find the right pattern I can count on some very big brookies or
landlocked salmon.

Another method I've used with mixed results is the across and down and
raising the fly by raising the tip of your rod and moving the fly to
different parts of a riffle/run. I've caught fish like this, but
don't care for the method. High sticking without an indicator and
upstream without an indicator are my favorite/preferred methods. I too
love to see the "wink" when the fish turns a little sideways to take
the nymph. That's one of the bennies of fishing close to where you
are standing.

Like I've said, Tim, there are many ways to nymph. To learn more, I
recommend a book by Charles Brooks with illustrations by Dave Whitlock
called Nymph Fishing for Larger Trout. Also, read anything you can
get from Gary Borger on the subject. Peter Charles and I attended a
seminar given by him at a fly show in Toronto a few years ago. Very
impressive and helpful.

Dave

wrote in message
oups.com...

OK, obviously there's some amount of weight that is too much. But I'm
just wondering if I should always try to err on the side of extra
weight.

Learn the tuck cast first, and how to make a good nymph leader (the thinner
it is for long sections, the better it will sink quickly and not drag.) You
might also want to read up on Frank Sawyer's *original* pheasant tail nymph
design and how it affected sink rate.

wrote in message
oups.com...

What am I not understanding here? I feel like I'm comfortable nymphing
with a distance of about 4' between the indicator and fly, and really
no more. But of course that doesn't get me down very deep at all.

Bruiser is the man for deep drifting nymphs with an indicator. He's got it
down but I've never really gotten it. When it gets that deep, I like to be
more in control so I try to get more over the nymph, have shorter effective
drifts, and don't use a strike indicator. I use a tuck cast to drive the
nymph down to compensate for having shorter drifts. Or at least just leave
it on and move it way up out of the way. Bruiser uses a semi-permanent
indicator, which is part of what I don't get about it :-)

jeffc wrote:

Bruiser uses a semi-permanent
indicator, which is part of what I don't get about it :-)

He's a Fish Pimp guy now. :-)

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

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 23:24:19 -0600, rw wrote:

jeffc wrote:

Bruiser uses a semi-permanent
indicator, which is part of what I don't get about it :-)

He's a Fish Pimp guy now. :-)

They're anything but permanent, that's for sure. At the SJ in Jan the water was
full of free floating ones. g
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

"Charlie Choc" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 23:24:19 -0600, rw
wrote:

jeffc wrote:

Bruiser uses a semi-permanent
indicator, which is part of what I don't get about it :-)

He's a Fish Pimp guy now. :-)

They're anything but permanent, that's for sure. At the SJ in Jan the
water was
full of free floating ones. g
Charlie...

Heh . . .heh . . .last time I was fishing the San Juan . . .I should have
been paid for all of them I picked up. I lost one, of cork, not accurately
attached, but was fishing a reverse current so it went upstream and then
came right back to me. My fishing partner couldn't believe it when I told
him it would do so.

When I used to teach some of this stuff, I normally taught without
indicators, because there is more control through the water column with each
cast, depending on where the fish are keying on food. And I use weight to
get to the fish . . .or sometimes no weight at all when fishing nymphs.

And now the scary stuff. When I want to have fun I sight fish to rising
fish, with a dry and maybe a dropper. When I want to catch big fish, I go
subsurface (uhh . . .well no . . . not like a Reid), but to get the fly to
the fish. . .but still I like sight fishing . . .whatever depth, see the
fish, go for that fish.

Indicators in my opinion, can get you to the fish, sometimes pretty
effectively. Out here there seems to be a lot of wind, after 11:00 AM or
so depending on the altitude I'm fishing.
So the place, and conditions, all come into play.

I seem to fish more dries now . But I have fished indicators up to 12 feet
or so okay in still water. Others have done well up to 15 feet. . .so they
told me.

I have caught some nice trout with a 12 foot leader in some deep pools in
this area of Colorado, or Utah, in rivers with nymph flies, without
indicator.
Ya better practice a bit. (high sticking and low sticking)
Mending and weight and rig, and line)
DaveMohnsen
Denver
(uhh . . .anymore I kind of suggest to beginners to use a 7 and 1/2 foot
leader with an 18-24 inch tippet attached to the original leader, for trout
here. Not what I use, but a start. My standard rod for here is a 9 foot
rod, with a long leader, and tippet.
I seem to carry mostly a rod 4,5,6, for trout, a bit more for pike.) Gotta a
3, but haven't put it together yet.

Kinda of a neat thread in my humble mind.
Thanks folks.
BestWishes,
DaveMohnsen
Denver

wrote:
Still struggling with nymphing --


There's LOTS of ways of nymphing but USUALLY when you're fishing with an
indicator and weight you want to get your nymph dead drifting along the
bottom. That means that the distance between your indicator has to be
greater than the water depth (unless you're using an indicator that
gets submerged which can be a good tactic). There's a balance that you
try and strike among a variety of things - water depth, current speed,
amount of weight, distance between your fly and the indicator, thickness
of your leader, etc. So that means that there are a variety of ways to
get your nymph drifting along the bottom. For example if you want your
nymph drifting deeper, you can add more weight or lengthen the
distance between the indicator and fly or go with a lighter tippet or
make a longer cast or..... You got a good range of responses from a
range of people. All the advice you've gotten is good, even though it
may seem contradictory. There is more than one way to gut a rat.

The way I do it is a bit different from what the other people have
brought up. I don't like to fling a bunch of weight, so I try and set up
my rig so that I can get my flies to the bottom with as little weight as
possible. When indicator nymphing I use LONG tippets often up to 6 feet,
sometimes more. This thinner material sinks MUCH easier than the thick
sections at the butt of a leader, allows a more natural drift, makes for
better contact with the drifting nymph and also makes it easier to
detect strikes. I also believe that only on part(s) of any drift will
your fly be dead drifting along the bottom. I try and gauge the length
of my cast so the fly is most likely to be dead drifting when it reaches
the area that I think is most likely to hold a fish.

Willi

Willi,
I concur.
One thing... "read the water" when casting upstream. Calculate how fast the
nymph will sink in the given flow condition.
Guy

There's LOTS of ways of nymphing but USUALLY when you're fishing with an
indicator and weight you want to get your nymph dead drifting along the
bottom. That means that the distance between your indicator has to be
greater than the water depth (unless you're using an indicator that
gets submerged which can be a good tactic). There's a balance that you
try and strike among a variety of things - water depth, current speed,
amount of weight, distance between your fly and the indicator, thickness
of your leader, etc. So that means that there are a variety of ways to
get your nymph drifting along the bottom. For example if you want your
nymph drifting deeper, you can add more weight or lengthen the
distance between the indicator and fly or go with a lighter tippet or
make a longer cast or..... You got a good range of responses from a
range of people. All the advice you've gotten is good, even though it
may seem contradictory. There is more than one way to gut a rat.

The way I do it is a bit different from what the other people have
brought up. I don't like to fling a bunch of weight, so I try and set up
my rig so that I can get my flies to the bottom with as little weight as
possible. When indicator nymphing I use LONG tippets often up to 6 feet,
sometimes more. This thinner material sinks MUCH easier than the thick
sections at the butt of a leader, allows a more natural drift, makes for
better contact with the drifting nymph and also makes it easier to
detect strikes. I also believe that only on part(s) of any drift will
your fly be dead drifting along the bottom. I try and gauge the length
of my cast so the fly is most likely to be dead drifting when it reaches
the area that I think is most likely to hold a fish.

Willi