feathers and tying flys with them

Larry wrote:

I trained dogs for a very nice guy that has a couple big Caterpillar Tractor
dealerships in the Fresno area of the Valley ... i.e. big buck dealerships


He'd leave his duck dog with me all year except for hunting season and fly
up to leave him off or pick him up. The second or third time I met him at
the local, tiny, airport I was surprised when he walked up to the truck and
I said, "Oh I didn't see your plane come in, just a big blue one." He
replied, "Oh, I'm in different one of my planes today." ( he had a personal
pilot and all his dogs had to be taught to lie under his feet in the
airplanes )

One of the first times I fished Silver Creek was a morning Trio "hatch."
I'd never fished a trico spinner fall before, but I was prepared and I
lucked out. The spinner fall was immense, and by blind luck I'd placed
myself right upstream of a huge pod of fish. Easily my best day ever on
Silver Creek, so far.

Anyway, I ran into these two guys fishing downstream from me -- total
novices fishing Royal Wulffs, clipping the water on their backcasts, 3x
tippet, and having no luck at all. They thought I was a flyfishing
god. Little did they know. :-)

They were pilots for Edgar Bronfman Jr., the Seagram's heir and
socialite in Ketchum (among other places). He'd just flown in and they
had a day off, so they were checking out the fabled Silver Creek. I
quizzed them about his jet (he had at least three that they knew of --
Gulfstreams), how much they cost (about $60M each), how much they cost
to operate (about $6000/hour), how many crew (3), and so on.

These people don't live in the same world we do. Something has happened
to this country in the past couple of decades. The distribution of
wealth has become dangerously skewed.

There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.

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

"riverman" wrote in message ...

"Richard Herr Harder" wrote in message
...

WTF are you thinking? What are the top 10 flies for trout? I bet the
prince nymph is one. Its main components are brown goose biots and
white goose biots.

Hmm....top ten trout flies. Hard to enumerate, since there are several
versions of upwing drys that might qualify separately. Nontheless, my
thoughts, close to being in order, for the top 10 fish-catchers worldwide
a

Wolly bugger
GRHE
EHC
PT
Wolly worm
Adams
Parachute
Muddler minnow
Copper John
Some type of ant

Prince nymph is down around #15 or 20, in my book.

--riverman




Regardless of top ten, I have seen goose biots in a bunch of recipes. Alot
of the master tiers say that the hook is like a canvas to an artist. With a
little experimenting and fiddling around I bet you could come up with some
original patterns out of most any feathers that would grab a fish of some
sort.

The old Down-easters here in Maine used to catch Mackerel on (about)size one
hooks with a bit of red flannel wrapped around. (of course Mackerel aren't
known to be finicky)

But speaking of top ten....
If you had to stock a fly shop with the most common pattern and size for you
customers in the northeast... would you pick that list? and if so.. what
sizes do you prefer or think would be most common?

I am by no means a fly fishing pro. but have made it quite an addiction over
the past 4 or 5 years. and even a second income over the past few months.
I find myself struggling to keep the right flies in the shop. I haven't sold
enough directly from the shop to make a good guess at what most folks want.
My internet orders come from all over so the most common web orders don't
tell me what the top ten for Maine would be..

I have stocked up on some buggers, adams, hendrickson, hares ear nymph,
muddlers. Thats about the only matches I have to your list.

I'm still guessing when I head to the river to fish myself. I look around
and try to match whats out there with what I have in my pocket. I try to
note the weather and season when I see a hatch.

I have read a bunch of posts here and would appreciate some inputs on what
you folks expect to see when you head to the local fly shop.
Not just flies but tying materials too.
I am learning.. the hard and expensive way, that what I think is good and
what I want to buy, isn't what my customers are necessarily looking for.


_______________________________
www.fly-fishing-flies.com
Flies from $5.60 per DOZEN and more!
_______________________________

"rw" wrote

.. I
quizzed them about his jet (he had at least three that they knew of --
Gulfstreams), how much they cost (about $60M each), how much they cost to
operate (about $6000/hour), how many crew (3), and so on.

These people don't live in the same world we do. Something has happened to
this country in the past couple of decades. The distribution of wealth has
become dangerously skewed.

There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.

like everything else, this situation is as it has always been in a
seriously capitalistic society: relative. that is, compared to millions of
folks in this country, your own economic condition, as you stood chatting in
silver creek with those pilots, is just as far fetched to them as that of
the pilot's boss's is to you.
yfitons
wayno(and as mine is to, say, a retired pirate living in the urban
northeast)

Wayne Harrison wrote:

There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.


like everything else, this situation is as it has always been in a
seriously capitalistic society: relative. that is, compared to millions of
folks in this country, your own economic condition, as you stood chatting in
silver creek with those pilots, is just as far fetched to them as that of
the pilot's boss's is to you.

You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.

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

"rw" wrote in message
.net...
Wayne Harrison wrote:

There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.


like everything else, this situation is as it has always been in a
seriously capitalistic society: relative. that is, compared to millions
of folks in this country, your own economic condition, as you stood
chatting in silver creek with those pilots, is just as far fetched to
them as that of the pilot's boss's is to you.

You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.


Thus demonstrating that once again you've missed the point. The problem is
disparity.

Wolfgang

rw typed:
Wayne Harrison wrote:

There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.


like everything else, this situation is as it has always been in
a seriously capitalistic society: relative. that is, compared to
millions of folks in this country, your own economic condition, as
you stood chatting in silver creek with those pilots, is just as far
fetched to them as that of the pilot's boss's is to you.

You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.

As your contribution to society, you're leaving nothing to your kids, right?
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 08:52:20 -0400, "Tim J."
wrote:

As your contribution to society, you're leaving nothing to your kids, right?
--

Fly rods. I'm leavin' 'em fly rods. Lotsnlots of fly rods. And a
fast car or two.....

Tim J. wrote:
rw typed:

Wayne Harrison wrote:


There will always be rich and poor, but I'm afraid we're becoming an
hereditary aristocracy.


like everything else, this situation is as it has always been in
a seriously capitalistic society: relative. that is, compared to
millions of folks in this country, your own economic condition, as
you stood chatting in silver creek with those pilots, is just as far
fetched to them as that of the pilot's boss's is to you.

You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.


As your contribution to society, you're leaving nothing to your kids, right?

I'm leaving them something, but not millions, let alone billions.

"The essence of the American experiment is our collective rejection of
European hereditary aristocracy and grotesque inequalities of wealth.
When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the United States in the
mid-nineteenth century, he noted that equality of condition permeated
the American spirit: 'The American experiment presupposes a rejection of
inherited privilege.' In the words of novelist John Dos Passos,
'rejection of Europe is what America is all about.'

"The nation's founders and populace viewed excessive concentrations of
wealth as incompatible with the ideals of the new nation. Revolutionary
era visitors to Europe, including Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Ben
Franklin, were aghast at the wide disparities of wealth and poverty they
observed. They surmised that these great European inequalities were the
result of an aristocratic system of land transfers, hereditary political
power, and monopoly."

from:
Wealth And Our Commonwealth
by William H. Gates and Chuck Collins
Why America Should Tax Accumulated Fortunes
http://www.thinkingpeace.com/Lib/lib017.html



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

"rw" wrote


You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.



I agree with you rw

Circumstances have lead to me meeting a large number of very wealthy people,
both people that worked hard and worked smart to make that money and people
that have never done a thing useful for society in their pampered lives.
As individuals, I've come to highly respect most of the first and despise
most of the latter.

It is my belief that limits should exist on how much can be passed on ... I
think 'death taxes' are good taxes. Certainly the limit should be high
enough so that a rich man can leave each child enough to live off of for
life .... more than most of us can ever hope to have .... but not many many
millions, or billions.

To answer Tim J's question ... if I were very rich, I'd leave my son enough
that he could live on it for life, or if he had his own spark use it to grow
his own true fortune ... but the vast majority of 'my' money would go to
causes I believe in. One major reason I wouldn't leave my child pampered
way beyond his own efforts ... is, because I love him

"Larry" wrote in message
...

"rw" wrote


You missed the point. The problem (as I see it, anyway) is *inherited*
wealth.



I agree with you rw

Circumstances have lead to me meeting a large number of very wealthy
people,
both people that worked hard and worked smart to make that money and
people
that have never done a thing useful for society in their pampered lives.
As individuals, I've come to highly respect most of the first and despise
most of the latter.

It is my belief that limits should exist on how much can be passed on ...
I
think 'death taxes' are good taxes. Certainly the limit should be high
enough so that a rich man can leave each child enough to live off of for
life .... more than most of us can ever hope to have .... but not many
many
millions, or billions.

To answer Tim J's question ... if I were very rich, I'd leave my son
enough
that he could live on it for life, or if he had his own spark use it to
grow
his own true fortune ... but the vast majority of 'my' money would go to
causes I believe in. One major reason I wouldn't leave my child
pampered
way beyond his own efforts ... is, because I love him


I agree with you. Having money makes it much easier to make more money: the
startup businessman who is putting his nest egg on the line doesn't stand a
chance against the guy who has millions to lose until he gets it right.
Inheritance gives an incredible advantage to the wealthy to get wealthier,
generation after generation, while making it harder for the lower and middle
class person to make wealth. I read a statistic the other day that said
something to the tone of 30 years ago, the discrepancy between the
wealthiest 5% and the lowest 5% i the US was that the top 5% had 10 times as
much money. Now its more like 200 times.

Of course, those aren't the real numbers, but it was staggering how much
more wealth had been amassed in the top few percentage.

--riverman