or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Fly fishing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fly fishing - Page 13

post #181 of 503
Thread Starter 

It wasn't the Davidson. Pigeon, maybe?

 

lefty

post #182 of 503

Plenty of steelhead and pacific salmon in upstate NY, the Lake Ontario region, some stocked and some natural production.......google salmon river.....I've fished there for the last 20 years........some Atlantic salmon in the summer, some not a lot, but enough to keep a fly fisherman's interest..........
 

post #183 of 503
Thread Starter 

I thought they really couldn't keep a natural population going?

 

lefty

post #184 of 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpm13 View Post

Plenty of steelhead and pacific salmon in upstate NY, the Lake Ontario region, some stocked and some natural production.......google salmon river.....I've fished there for the last 20 years........some Atlantic salmon in the summer, some not a lot, but enough to keep a fly fisherman's interest..........
 

 

rpm13 welcome to SF, first post and it is on Salmon fishing nicely done! I for one don't have to google salmon river, who can ever forget the Pulaski fly? Just need a piece of white T-shirt on it and fit right in with the shoulder to shoulder crowds starting in September.

 

 

1000

 

 

Sorry couldn't resist. Although snagging has been outlawed on the Salmon for awhile now it is still common. Actually it is too common every where IMO. All of the Great Lakes have silver, king and steelhead in them now. Lake Superior is the largest and deepest of the Great Lakes so you would think it has the largest fish. But because it is so deep and cold it is a fairly sterile fishery. Lake Michigan however is very fertile in comparison and a much better fishery. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty View Post

It wasn't the Davidson. Pigeon, maybe?

 

lefty

 

Maybe the Pigeon, there are something like 4,000 miles of trout streams in Western NC. Some are much better than others. I checked and sadly there still only 3 C&R streams in NC. The Davidson is one of them and the better of the 3 IMO. During the summer there are a lot of options and many miles to fish. There was mining in much of the area to the North of Asheville (still is) and when they were forced to clean up some of the streams with fish kills they caused many of them decided to stock muskie instead. You don't normally think muskie in the South, but they are there and were native at one time in many of the streams and lakes. I much prefer fishing to the West for trout however. There are at least 2 decent streams 15 minutes from Asheville to the West.

post #185 of 503
Thread Starter 

That's a nasty looking hook. Lots of videos on youtube of guys standing in rivers snagging salmon.

 

What's everyone's opinion on barbed vs. barbless? There seems to be some evidence that barbed is easier on the fish, though I'm not sure I buy the "stiletto" effect.

 

lefty

post #186 of 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty View Post

That's a nasty looking hook. Lots of videos on youtube of guys standing in rivers snagging salmon.

What's everyone's opinion on barbed vs. barbless? There seems to be some evidence that barbed is easier on the fish, though I'm not sure I buy the "stiletto" effect.

lefty
I've not looked in to the evidence myself but tend to crush most of the barbs on my flys, I find it a lot easier to de-hook and as I C&R most of the time I really do try and get them back in the water asap, and crushed barbs helps that. I landed a nice little 25cm Rainbow last night that I hadn't crushed the barb on and it was a lot harder to get the hook out. That being said when fishing smaller/twiggy water for small fish I find they also throw the hooks a lot easier than bigger less energetic fish do with crushed barbs.
post #187 of 503
Thread Starter 

I just do it as habit. Crimp then file. I fished a lot of barbless C&R where the wardens would walk around with cotton balls. They test your hook and if anything caught ... thanks for coming out, here's you massive fine.

 

Quote:
Barbed Hook Restrictions in Catch-and-Release Trout Fisheries: A Social Issue

D. J. SCHILL and R. L. SCARPELLA

Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 1414 East Locust Lane, Nampa, Idaho 83686, USA


Abstract.—We summarized results of past studies that directly compared hooking mortality of resident (nonanadromous) salmonids caught and released with barbed or barbless hooks. Barbed hooks produced lower hooking mortality in two of four comparisons with flies and in three of five comparisons with lures. Only 1 of 11 comparisons resulted in statistically significant differences in hooking mortality. In that instance, barbless baited hooks caused significantly less mortality than barbed hooks, but experimented design concerns limited the utility of this finding. Mean hooking mortality rates from past lure studies were slightly higher for barbed hooks than barbless ones, but the opposite was true for flies. For flies and lures combined, mean hooking mortality was 4.5% for barbed hooks and 4.2% for barbless hooks. Combination of test statistics from individual studies by gear type via meta-analysis yielded nonsignificant results for barbed versus barbless flies, lures, or flies and lures combined. We conclude that the use of barbed or barbless flies or lures plays no role in subsequent mortality of trout caught and released by anglers. Because natural mortality rates for wild trout in streams commonly range from 30% to 65% annually, a 0.3% mean difference in hooking mortality for the two hook types is irrelevant at the population level, even when fish are subjected to repeated capture. Based on existing mortality studies, there is no biological basis for barbed hook restrictions in artificial fly and lure fisheries for resident trout. Restricting barbed hooks appears to be a social issue. Managers proposing new special regulations to the angling public should consider the social costs of implementing barbed hook restrictions that produce no demonstrable biological gain.


This research confirms the earlier work (1987) of Robert Behnke, the leading trout researcher in the USA. 

Behnke, 1987. Catch and Release Fishing, A decade of experience. Proceedings from USA National Sport Fishing Symposium.
Summary of Catch and Release based research over previous 10 years for National Sports Fishing Symposium, USA. “consistent agreement among hooking mortality studies that demonstrate no significant difference in mortality of fish caught and released on single, treble, barbed or barbless hooks.”

Professor Behnke wrote an editorial on pg. 56 in the Fall 2007 issue of TU's Trout magazine titled "Trading Stubbornness for Science". Trout Unlimited is dedicated to the preservation of cold water fisheries. To their credit, they did due diligence and refused to perpetuate the lie that barbless hooks improves the fishery.

To quote Dr. Behnke, ".....statistical analysis of many hooking studies performed over many years agreed that the type of hook was insignificant in determining mortality. Several state agencies, without an understanding of this scientific data instituted barbless-only restrictions on special regulations waters. When angling violations records were examined in Idaho and Oregon, the barbless violations were the most common. Almost all of these violations were accidental; a fly is broken off and in a moment of excitement, a new fly, not fitting the narrow legal description of barbless, is tied on and the angler commits a violation."

"In view of the fact that there is no scientific or biological justification for the barbless hook regulations, a change in the law in Idaho and Oregon was proposed. Public meeting were held. The hard core, no-kill, barbless-only fanatics generated lots of heat, but no light, in a passionate defense of an irrational opinion."

"I have characterized such irrational behavior by some anglers as a trivial pursuit and the arrogance of ignorance......"

If any requirement of C&R fishing is to adversely impact fish population, it must, either in whole or in part along with other practices, be sufficient to adversely impact the fish populations above the natural mortality level. It is only then that the trout population will be below the river's carrying capacity.

The are reasons to be gentle on trout that will be released, but let us not forget that what is important is that quality trout are present at the carrying capacity of the river. Sometimes this means harvesting fish, other times releasing fish, and that barbless vs barbed hooks has no effect on fish populations.

There are reasons to go barbless because they cause less scarring of fish, less scarring of fishermen and so on. However to say that barbless make a difference in fish populations or is necessary or even desirable for successful C&R is false.

Lets not perpetuate the myth. If you want to use barbless, great. If you want to use barbed, there is no reason to feel guilty.

Finally, the Wisconsin DNR did it's own research and found that barbless makes no difference in a fishery even when used with bait or lures. The DNR removed all barbless requirements in our special regulations fisheries. When presented with the research, I voted as a member of the Wisconsin State Council of TU to support that change.

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/es/sc...outHooking.pdf

I would also add that an occasional photo does not make a difference either. If you do it fast, gently, and resuscitate before release, you are not harming the fish population.

Other than harvesting fish, in my view the greatest harm is done by anglers that overplay fish.
 

 

lefty

post #188 of 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty View Post

I just do it as habit. Crimp then file. I fished a lot of barbless C&R where the wardens would walk around with cotton balls. They test your hook and if anything caught ... thanks for coming out, here's you massive fine.

 

 

Quote:
Good Read (Click to show)

Barbed Hook Restrictions in Catch-and-Release Trout Fisheries: A Social Issue

D. J. SCHILL and R. L. SCARPELLA

Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 1414 East Locust Lane, Nampa, Idaho 83686, USA


Abstract.—We summarized results of past studies that directly compared hooking mortality of resident (nonanadromous) salmonids caught and released with barbed or barbless hooks. Barbed hooks produced lower hooking mortality in two of four comparisons with flies and in three of five comparisons with lures. Only 1 of 11 comparisons resulted in statistically significant differences in hooking mortality. In that instance, barbless baited hooks caused significantly less mortality than barbed hooks, but experimented design concerns limited the utility of this finding. Mean hooking mortality rates from past lure studies were slightly higher for barbed hooks than barbless ones, but the opposite was true for flies. For flies and lures combined, mean hooking mortality was 4.5% for barbed hooks and 4.2% for barbless hooks. Combination of test statistics from individual studies by gear type via meta-analysis yielded nonsignificant results for barbed versus barbless flies, lures, or flies and lures combined. We conclude that the use of barbed or barbless flies or lures plays no role in subsequent mortality of trout caught and released by anglers. Because natural mortality rates for wild trout in streams commonly range from 30% to 65% annually, a 0.3% mean difference in hooking mortality for the two hook types is irrelevant at the population level, even when fish are subjected to repeated capture. Based on existing mortality studies, there is no biological basis for barbed hook restrictions in artificial fly and lure fisheries for resident trout. Restricting barbed hooks appears to be a social issue. Managers proposing new special regulations to the angling public should consider the social costs of implementing barbed hook restrictions that produce no demonstrable biological gain.


This research confirms the earlier work (1987) of Robert Behnke, the leading trout researcher in the USA. 

Behnke, 1987. Catch and Release Fishing, A decade of experience. Proceedings from USA National Sport Fishing Symposium.
Summary of Catch and Release based research over previous 10 years for National Sports Fishing Symposium, USA. “consistent agreement among hooking mortality studies that demonstrate no significant difference in mortality of fish caught and released on single, treble, barbed or barbless hooks.”

Professor Behnke wrote an editorial on pg. 56 in the Fall 2007 issue of TU's Trout magazine titled "Trading Stubbornness for Science". Trout Unlimited is dedicated to the preservation of cold water fisheries. To their credit, they did due diligence and refused to perpetuate the lie that barbless hooks improves the fishery.

To quote Dr. Behnke, ".....statistical analysis of many hooking studies performed over many years agreed that the type of hook was insignificant in determining mortality. Several state agencies, without an understanding of this scientific data instituted barbless-only restrictions on special regulations waters. When angling violations records were examined in Idaho and Oregon, the barbless violations were the most common. Almost all of these violations were accidental; a fly is broken off and in a moment of excitement, a new fly, not fitting the narrow legal description of barbless, is tied on and the angler commits a violation."

"In view of the fact that there is no scientific or biological justification for the barbless hook regulations, a change in the law in Idaho and Oregon was proposed. Public meeting were held. The hard core, no-kill, barbless-only fanatics generated lots of heat, but no light, in a passionate defense of an irrational opinion."

"I have characterized such irrational behavior by some anglers as a trivial pursuit and the arrogance of ignorance......"

If any requirement of C&R fishing is to adversely impact fish population, it must, either in whole or in part along with other practices, be sufficient to adversely impact the fish populations above the natural mortality level. It is only then that the trout population will be below the river's carrying capacity.

The are reasons to be gentle on trout that will be released, but let us not forget that what is important is that quality trout are present at the carrying capacity of the river. Sometimes this means harvesting fish, other times releasing fish, and that barbless vs barbed hooks has no effect on fish populations.

There are reasons to go barbless because they cause less scarring of fish, less scarring of fishermen and so on.

 

However to say that barbless make a difference in fish populations or is necessary or even desirable for successful C&R is false.

Lets not perpetuate the myth. If you want to use barbless, great. If you want to use barbed, there is no reason to feel guilty.

Finally, the Wisconsin DNR did it's own research and found that barbless makes no difference in a fishery even when used with bait or lures. The DNR removed all barbless requirements in our special regulations fisheries. When presented with the research, I voted as a member of the Wisconsin State Council of TU to support that change.

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/es/sc...outHooking.pdf

I would also add that an occasional photo does not make a difference either. If you do it fast, gently, and resuscitate before release, you are not harming the fish population.

Other than harvesting fish, in my view the greatest harm is done by anglers that overplay fish.
 

I have respect for CO's but that cotton ball test would test my patience, and ability to remain silent. I could see a young buck warden that was overzealous but damn...

 

Have you ever noticed that when you go to crush the barb on the hook the odds of the point breaking off greatly increase depending on several factors? If your on a stream late in the day a long ways from the vehicle, in the middle of a hatch and have been catching fish on almost every cast, on only a certain size and pattern that they have keyed in on, and all your flies have been torn apart to just a couple of hanging threads, and you pull the last matching fly out that you have on you out of the fly box... It will need crimped and you stand a better than 50% chance of breaking it off.

 

Sometimes up to an hour after I've released a fish in a pool or pond I will see one float belly up to the top. Despite doing everything "right", it happens. I tend to agree with the article although I use barbless more times than not for easy release. Even long distance releases smile.gif, although we all try to keep tight lines. But have seen many kills in the middle of summer especially freestone streams with low oxygen and using midges on 22/24 hooks and a frog hair diameter tippet. You can't horse them in and it exhausts them badly bringing them in. 

 

I'm close to Wi. and work with a lot of people from there. I don't fish the driftless area of Wi. because I have enough trout to fish where I live. Many of those from Wi. call the Wi. DNR Do Nothing Right boys. But to me this article is one more example of the many wildlife practices that they do in Wi. which is right. Thanks for the information.

post #189 of 503
Thread Starter 

Yeah. Fighting a fish for too long in the heat of summer on a freestone is pretty much going to kill it.

 

And yes, I've broken more hooks at inopportune moments that I'd care to remember. Also watched nets float away. Pulled the last 6" of tippet off when I was sure I put a new spool in my bag. Left reels at home. Rods in the bush. Etc ... etc ... etc. It's a miracle I catch a fish once in a while.

 

Here's a very interesting article on stocking. In 1974, Montana stopped stocking on streams that could sustain a wild population. The wild fish bloomed.

 

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2004/DickVincent.htm

 

lefty

post #190 of 503

I remember the PULASKI "FLY", could not believe my eyes, guy in the sport shop said that this was the only way to catch the salmon, tried it once, said to myself I'd rather go fish less......every once in a while you find one especially after high cfs........Luckily one of the guys in my TU club fished there a lot and I learned much from him. Love passing on my knowledge of the sport. I usually go 3 to 4 times a year, mostly for steelhead now.

post #191 of 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty View Post

Here's a very interesting article on stocking. In 1974, Montana stopped stocking on streams that could sustain a wild population. The wild fish bloomed.

 

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2004/DickVincent.htm

 

lefty

 

That is a great article and I wish more States would be willing to do the same. It does go against the conventional grain of thought.... I also strongly agree with the statement at the end of the article too which says habit improvement is one of the most important things that needs to be done.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rpm13 View Post

I remember the PULASKI "FLY", could not believe my eyes, guy in the sport shop said that this was the only way to catch the salmon, tried it once, said to myself I'd rather go fish less......every once in a while you find one especially after high cfs........Luckily one of the guys in my TU club fished there a lot and I learned much from him. Love passing on my knowledge of the sport. I usually go 3 to 4 times a year, mostly for steelhead now.

 

I had a feeling you felt that way smile.gif Same thing happened to me when I tried it with a friend many years ago. Plus all the "fisherman" on the water, I'd prefer to fish all day and not see anyone else. People can say what they want about TU but one of the main things they do is stream improvement, among other things. IIRC it was TU that finally put on the pressure that got the snagging outlawed.

post #192 of 503
Thread Starter 

Not fishing, but nonetheless cool...

 

 

 

This is fishing - wait for the end.

 

 

Just a pretty shot.

 

 

 

lefty

post #193 of 503
Have any of you been on a guided trip? I have been fly fishing for a couple years now. However, I feel like I really lack some basic skills. My cast is great, but I think I could use a good guide to kind of coach me through some stuff for the day. After a guided trip, I would at least know that Im doing things correctly.
post #194 of 503
Thread Starter 

I will pick a guide for a day if I'm in a new area and want to get the "lay of the land" as quickly as possible. I've used some great guys and a few not so - once I had to fire a guy on the spot - and for the most part I usually pick up a thing or two. If you're tell them you're there to clean up your cast or line management and a fish or two is bonus you should be in great shape. Most guys overestimate their skills and have a shitty time.

 

Where are you located?

 

lefty

post #195 of 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty View Post

I will pick a guide for a day if I'm in a new area and want to get the "lay of the land" as quickly as possible. I've used some great guys and a few not so - once I had to fire a guy on the spot - and for the most part I usually pick up a thing or two. If you're tell them you're there to clean up your cast or line management and a fish or two is bonus you should be in great shape. Most guys overestimate their skills and have a shitty time.

Where are you located?

lefty

Good to know. When trout fishing, which is not that often, I freak out about using the right/ wrong fly, and how Im fishing it.

How did you get "good" at choosing the right fly? I know the whole "match the hatch" bit, but there is just so much to learn!

I'm located in Southeastern Wisconsin.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Fly fishing