Mike.
I have met folks that do just that also. It's dry fly or nothing and then their season is over when the bugs stop hatching. In fact I spoke to a fellow who lives on the Henry's Fork and when the Green Drakes are done and the grass grows he is finished for the year. To me that is a waste of enjoyment and the search for the Trout.
Using one fly
Moderators: William Anderson, letumgo
Re: Using one fly
"I like beer, do you like beer, I like beer a lot."
Re: Using one fly
I must admit that I was once, not too long ago, one of the
"dry fly only" dudes who would sit by the river for hours at a time waiting for something to hatch. What a waste! Now that I've taken to carrying nymphs, flymphs, and various soft hackle patterns in my vest as well, my outings are both much more active and productive. Thanks to this site, my fishing world has expanded multifold.
"dry fly only" dudes who would sit by the river for hours at a time waiting for something to hatch. What a waste! Now that I've taken to carrying nymphs, flymphs, and various soft hackle patterns in my vest as well, my outings are both much more active and productive. Thanks to this site, my fishing world has expanded multifold.
Some of the same morons who throw their trash around in National parks also vote. That alone would explain the state of American politics. ~ John Gierach, "Still Life with Brook Trout"
-
CM_Stewart
- Posts: 257
- Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: New York City
- Contact:
Re: Using one fly
I think three relevant pieces of information got lost in the tenkara one fly discussions. The first and most important is that tenkara fishing in Japan is primarily in small, high gradient freestone streams that do not have prolific insect hatches. In order to survive there, I suspect the fish evolved to strike anything that even might be food - not unlike our headwaters brookies. How many times have you heard people say of brookies "They were all small, but they hit anything we threw at them"? The second is that the fly pattern Dr. Ishigaki settled upon was not necessarily "the best" fly, it was "as good as" anything else he had used, and had the added benefits of being extremely easy to tie and used easily accessible and inexpensive materials. The third is that he ties that pattern with different colors of thread and hackle. If that is really "one fly" then many of the celebrated North Country flies taken together are just "one fly."
If you fish for heavily pressured browns in a stream with lots of insect life, I am confident you will do better with flies that match the naturals. I have caught fish on Dr. Ishigaki's pattern, but on that day dorotheas were hatching, and a wet Tups variation outfished Dr. Ishigaki's pattern 12 to 2.
On balance, I think Mike is exactly right. One fly, one type of fly, one type of equipment are all limitations that will also limit catches. I suspect almost everyone on the forum limits themselves to just flies, or at least, just artificials. I limit myself to a tenkara rod, but not to traditional tenkara flies. Hans' CDC & Elk and Sawyer's Killer Bug are just too productive.
If you fish for heavily pressured browns in a stream with lots of insect life, I am confident you will do better with flies that match the naturals. I have caught fish on Dr. Ishigaki's pattern, but on that day dorotheas were hatching, and a wet Tups variation outfished Dr. Ishigaki's pattern 12 to 2.
On balance, I think Mike is exactly right. One fly, one type of fly, one type of equipment are all limitations that will also limit catches. I suspect almost everyone on the forum limits themselves to just flies, or at least, just artificials. I limit myself to a tenkara rod, but not to traditional tenkara flies. Hans' CDC & Elk and Sawyer's Killer Bug are just too productive.
Re: Using one fly
Interesting.
Many FF simply stick with what for them is the comfort zone, may be stripping wooly buggers or whatever else.
Fact of the matter is if that is choice then so be, it for to become a way better angler you have to learn new ways and spend a great deal of time to perfect those techniques which should be related to the prevailing conditions and the best possible options to catch those fish as you can be assured one or more methods will far out way others used at that time, and that includes choice of flies and means of presentations.
Above all it is a fundamental understanding of the quarry you pursue, its habits withing the particular water system it lives in, as they all differ.
I have to say l admire the FF who preserves with only the dry fly, or by choice one fly of a kind, by no means do l determine this man as a purist, as that can also apply to the wet fly angler.
It is a personal choice and one that only the individual can appreciate when success is achieved. Others may think differently, but for myself to restrict myself to purely one option is not a option, all be it l have a very strong leaning toward wet fly fishing and have done so since the late 50s when l was introduced to it.
For there are very few days when such flies will not catch fish be it for rivers, streams, creeks and stillwaters. If such days do exist the odds are all other methods will be a issue if the fish are not inclined to eat.
And that one l can testify too after some 200 plus days average a year guiding, if the fish are dour then that's how it is, but it is very rare, mainly due to water temperature or DO issues.
DW
Many FF simply stick with what for them is the comfort zone, may be stripping wooly buggers or whatever else.
Fact of the matter is if that is choice then so be, it for to become a way better angler you have to learn new ways and spend a great deal of time to perfect those techniques which should be related to the prevailing conditions and the best possible options to catch those fish as you can be assured one or more methods will far out way others used at that time, and that includes choice of flies and means of presentations.
Above all it is a fundamental understanding of the quarry you pursue, its habits withing the particular water system it lives in, as they all differ.
I have to say l admire the FF who preserves with only the dry fly, or by choice one fly of a kind, by no means do l determine this man as a purist, as that can also apply to the wet fly angler.
It is a personal choice and one that only the individual can appreciate when success is achieved. Others may think differently, but for myself to restrict myself to purely one option is not a option, all be it l have a very strong leaning toward wet fly fishing and have done so since the late 50s when l was introduced to it.
For there are very few days when such flies will not catch fish be it for rivers, streams, creeks and stillwaters. If such days do exist the odds are all other methods will be a issue if the fish are not inclined to eat.
And that one l can testify too after some 200 plus days average a year guiding, if the fish are dour then that's how it is, but it is very rare, mainly due to water temperature or DO issues.
DW
-
pszy22
Re: Using one fly
Folks,
Again I apologize for dredging up old topics. I can't help myself, I just find them interesting.
I must confess, I usually only fish one (or two) patterns most of the time. The majority of the time I fish a very generic, wingless fly that can be made to float, or with a slight tug can easily break the surface. I tie all my dry fly(s) using a grade 2 or 3, since I don't want them to float too well. I do somewhat vary size and color.
I like reading your forum, because I find myself using alot of the techniques you guys discuss to fish my "dry" fly. I'm guessing it looks very much like a flymph when it's under water. I like using a generic fly, because I find I can get most fish to strike (most of the time) if I find the right presentation.
I will say that my home river is just the opposite of what Chris described a few posts up. It's has a very rich and diverse population of fishy food items. There are usually bugs on the water, someplace, and just about always multiple hatches going on. I think the end result is the same as fishing a fairly sterile stream, fish get conditioned to eat first, and ask questions later. On rare occasions my river will have a blanket hatch, and when that happens, no question, you are better off to match the hatch with as good an imitation as possible.
So when fishing a wingless dry/damp/wet/flymph fly doesn't work, I use a bead head. Oddly enough, it's a pattern that was shown to me by Carl Richards, author of Selective Trout and Fly Fishing Strategy. Carl used to spend a fair amount of time on my home river, and I was fortunate to bump into him a few times. It is a generic pattern that he fished very often, he found it worked just as well, sometimes better than an exact imitation. I figure any generic fly endorsed from Mr. Selective Trout, had to be a winner. The fly is called a Chicago Leech. It's a very sparsely tied fly, that looks a little like a leech, minnow, stonefly nymph, etc. It can be swung, fished dead drift, stripped like a streamer, etc.
So I guess over time, my fly selection philosophy has developed into using something that looks a little bit like alot of things. Hopefully at least the semi blind fish mistake it for something that looks good enough to quickly suck down and then spit out.
I think that's what keeps fishing interesting, there are alot of points of view, it's fun to discuss. Hope some of this made a bit of sense.
Again I apologize for dredging up old topics. I can't help myself, I just find them interesting.
I must confess, I usually only fish one (or two) patterns most of the time. The majority of the time I fish a very generic, wingless fly that can be made to float, or with a slight tug can easily break the surface. I tie all my dry fly(s) using a grade 2 or 3, since I don't want them to float too well. I do somewhat vary size and color.
I like reading your forum, because I find myself using alot of the techniques you guys discuss to fish my "dry" fly. I'm guessing it looks very much like a flymph when it's under water. I like using a generic fly, because I find I can get most fish to strike (most of the time) if I find the right presentation.
I will say that my home river is just the opposite of what Chris described a few posts up. It's has a very rich and diverse population of fishy food items. There are usually bugs on the water, someplace, and just about always multiple hatches going on. I think the end result is the same as fishing a fairly sterile stream, fish get conditioned to eat first, and ask questions later. On rare occasions my river will have a blanket hatch, and when that happens, no question, you are better off to match the hatch with as good an imitation as possible.
So when fishing a wingless dry/damp/wet/flymph fly doesn't work, I use a bead head. Oddly enough, it's a pattern that was shown to me by Carl Richards, author of Selective Trout and Fly Fishing Strategy. Carl used to spend a fair amount of time on my home river, and I was fortunate to bump into him a few times. It is a generic pattern that he fished very often, he found it worked just as well, sometimes better than an exact imitation. I figure any generic fly endorsed from Mr. Selective Trout, had to be a winner. The fly is called a Chicago Leech. It's a very sparsely tied fly, that looks a little like a leech, minnow, stonefly nymph, etc. It can be swung, fished dead drift, stripped like a streamer, etc.
So I guess over time, my fly selection philosophy has developed into using something that looks a little bit like alot of things. Hopefully at least the semi blind fish mistake it for something that looks good enough to quickly suck down and then spit out.
I think that's what keeps fishing interesting, there are alot of points of view, it's fun to discuss. Hope some of this made a bit of sense.
Re: Using one fly
You make a lot of sense to me Mike.
I shall have to have a look over this Tenkara discussion.
But the comments on one or two flies interests me as well,
for many years I have been an ardent advocate of W. H. Lawrie's ideas
on fishing with a 'Hatching Dun' (emerger) and a nymph (weightless usually). I have quite a extensive section on my website -
http://donaldnicolson.webplus.net/page15.html
But even better I would recommend his first two book, which shows how
he developed the technique just before WW2.
"Border River Angling". - 1939
and
"The Book of the Rough Stream Nymph". - 1947
Next season I shall try the technique with a Tenkara rod.
I shall have to have a look over this Tenkara discussion.
But the comments on one or two flies interests me as well,
for many years I have been an ardent advocate of W. H. Lawrie's ideas
on fishing with a 'Hatching Dun' (emerger) and a nymph (weightless usually). I have quite a extensive section on my website -
http://donaldnicolson.webplus.net/page15.html
But even better I would recommend his first two book, which shows how
he developed the technique just before WW2.
"Border River Angling". - 1939
and
"The Book of the Rough Stream Nymph". - 1947
Next season I shall try the technique with a Tenkara rod.
Re: Using one fly
Whilst we all challenge ourselves in the ways of a trout and their food I have conciously taken a different route mainly because a year or so ago I realised I cannot get sufficient time on the water to get to where I wan't to be. I have taken a calculated gamble that if I were to discern what are the common traits amongst the more successful anglers then I would go a long way to becoming a better angler and then I would be better prepared to learn a lot more quickly during my allocated water time. This was not to be as long a process as I had envisaged , some advice from Mike set the ball in motion.
From simply oberving some good and not so good anglers you can learn a lot from both. Quite often simply looking at someone your own standard fishing a stream you immediately identify some aspects of their fishing that you know are detrimental to success - boing, the penny drops on some of the things you do yourself and are for the most part are blissfully unaware you are doing it.
What stands out immediately among the better anglers are the following and in the order that I tentatively rate their importance, and some touch on what mike has said above.
1. Attention to detail,...... every detail - in fact everthing else stems from this
2. Strong observation techniques - an uncanny ability to see , digest , assimilate and act upon seemingly minor waterside events. Much of this is down to experience and I would guess a direct result of the attention to detail.
3. A recognition that whilst trout behaviour and hatches follow well defined patterns the huge number of variables involved means that for success to be consistent you must at all times be alert - using 1 and 2 above.
4. A single minded ability to focus in the job at hand.
There is a place I've been a small number of times these past few seasons, a place i find difficult to explain or share lest I am deemed a suitable candidate for a straight jacket. This place is not physical, it is a mental place , maybe that parallel universe, where I felt as much part of the stream as the very water that carressed my waders. I find it very hard to describe this place except in the similarity to when we go fishing we leave the normal world behind us and all that exists is the river environment, in this place the non important elements of the river seem to not exist.
Whilst in this place you seem to have tunnel vision to that area of water directly in front of you, it becomes the centre of your universe, if a midge farted you would be aware of this major event. What is really strange is whilst focussed on this small area of the stream you have still got an acute awareness of the rest of the river and any data being generated from it is assimilated but does not impede on the focus. I often wonder is this a glimpse into the ability of the females of our species to mulitask, whilst still maintaining the males ability to focus in a very singular way. On one occasion , a friend had come behind me and sat watching half way up a high bank no more than 10 yards away, he claimed he was there a full five minutes yet I was completely unaware of his presence until he shouted well done when I hooked a good fish that I had twice brought up but failed to hook. Whatever this place is I can assure you that no trout is safe from capture.
I have watched an excellent angler at work a few times this season and am convinced that during much of his fishing he is in or very close to this place. As an observer you will be gobsmacked at the levels of focus and observation that you are witnessing .
I have not yet unlocked the door to be able to visit this place with regularity but I have a sneaking suspicion that Mikes discussion above on being able to automatically do certain things is probably the answer. If you can fish automatically then your mind is free to focus on the minutae - when you can marry the two sucessfully you will be a trout hooking machine.
PM me if you need an address to send out an ambulance and a straight jacket.
Ps , I've tried some illegal substances , they don't get u there so don't bother trying that one
From simply oberving some good and not so good anglers you can learn a lot from both. Quite often simply looking at someone your own standard fishing a stream you immediately identify some aspects of their fishing that you know are detrimental to success - boing, the penny drops on some of the things you do yourself and are for the most part are blissfully unaware you are doing it.
What stands out immediately among the better anglers are the following and in the order that I tentatively rate their importance, and some touch on what mike has said above.
1. Attention to detail,...... every detail - in fact everthing else stems from this
2. Strong observation techniques - an uncanny ability to see , digest , assimilate and act upon seemingly minor waterside events. Much of this is down to experience and I would guess a direct result of the attention to detail.
3. A recognition that whilst trout behaviour and hatches follow well defined patterns the huge number of variables involved means that for success to be consistent you must at all times be alert - using 1 and 2 above.
4. A single minded ability to focus in the job at hand.
There is a place I've been a small number of times these past few seasons, a place i find difficult to explain or share lest I am deemed a suitable candidate for a straight jacket. This place is not physical, it is a mental place , maybe that parallel universe, where I felt as much part of the stream as the very water that carressed my waders. I find it very hard to describe this place except in the similarity to when we go fishing we leave the normal world behind us and all that exists is the river environment, in this place the non important elements of the river seem to not exist.
Whilst in this place you seem to have tunnel vision to that area of water directly in front of you, it becomes the centre of your universe, if a midge farted you would be aware of this major event. What is really strange is whilst focussed on this small area of the stream you have still got an acute awareness of the rest of the river and any data being generated from it is assimilated but does not impede on the focus. I often wonder is this a glimpse into the ability of the females of our species to mulitask, whilst still maintaining the males ability to focus in a very singular way. On one occasion , a friend had come behind me and sat watching half way up a high bank no more than 10 yards away, he claimed he was there a full five minutes yet I was completely unaware of his presence until he shouted well done when I hooked a good fish that I had twice brought up but failed to hook. Whatever this place is I can assure you that no trout is safe from capture.
I have watched an excellent angler at work a few times this season and am convinced that during much of his fishing he is in or very close to this place. As an observer you will be gobsmacked at the levels of focus and observation that you are witnessing .
I have not yet unlocked the door to be able to visit this place with regularity but I have a sneaking suspicion that Mikes discussion above on being able to automatically do certain things is probably the answer. If you can fish automatically then your mind is free to focus on the minutae - when you can marry the two sucessfully you will be a trout hooking machine.
PM me if you need an address to send out an ambulance and a straight jacket.
Ps , I've tried some illegal substances , they don't get u there so don't bother trying that one
Re: Using one fly
Hi all;
Very interesting discussion!
I for one have just started to transistion from one to multiple flies. This is mainly due to my casting ability, it's just now approaching a level where I can handle more than one fly on my line. That and my understanding of fishing a cast of flies is much greater than when I started fly fishing. Much to do with things learned from this site.
I think the other issue you are referring to is being "In the Zone." This can be accomplished in many aspects of our lives. For me, I first experienced this when playing football, I just knew where to be and what my opponent was going to do before it happened. In my youth, I always fished with ultralight spinning gear and many a day I would be in the zone and could easily outfish those around me. I've definetly reached that at work, many times I "see" the problem much faster than others. At times, I approach this level when flyfishing but, realize I have need to gain a lot more knowledge and experience before I will attainn the "zonal level" consistently.
Some people never attain this "zonal" level in thier lives, I can't tell you why but suspect it takes a certain way of looking at things that some have or learn and others never do.
Wayneb
Very interesting discussion!
I for one have just started to transistion from one to multiple flies. This is mainly due to my casting ability, it's just now approaching a level where I can handle more than one fly on my line. That and my understanding of fishing a cast of flies is much greater than when I started fly fishing. Much to do with things learned from this site.
I think the other issue you are referring to is being "In the Zone." This can be accomplished in many aspects of our lives. For me, I first experienced this when playing football, I just knew where to be and what my opponent was going to do before it happened. In my youth, I always fished with ultralight spinning gear and many a day I would be in the zone and could easily outfish those around me. I've definetly reached that at work, many times I "see" the problem much faster than others. At times, I approach this level when flyfishing but, realize I have need to gain a lot more knowledge and experience before I will attainn the "zonal level" consistently.
Some people never attain this "zonal" level in thier lives, I can't tell you why but suspect it takes a certain way of looking at things that some have or learn and others never do.
Wayneb
Re: Using one fly
A very fullfilling place when you are lucky to get there, very frustrating when its a rare event. 
The first time this happened to me was on an extremely hard fished 120 yard stretch, quite wide and 3 good kicks of a football from a housing estate. Always amazes me when i slide down the bank to the waters edge that the house, dogs , children, cars all simply melt away and I am left standing in an environment where I feel at ease with the world. This stretch has fish its entire lenght,mostly to the sides. You could say that these fish are well conditioned to the presence of anglers and I believe are not so much spooked as much as they have learned to fade away when they sense our presence and will commence feeding when we have only moved a short distance past them. Little more than two and a half foot deep in places it is full of wonderful glides and eddies, strands of weed, slow in parts, fast racy water in spots, it is a fantastic learning ground and at times a right leveller.
That particular evening I decided to concentrate on the right hand side as I looked upstream. My usual approach was to wade up the middle , drifting from side to side covering the better lies. My target area was no more than ten foot wide and 40 yards long less than one tenth the width of the river. I really made a concious effort to cut myself off from the distraction of the rest of the river and the rising of trout all round me. Shortly after starting I slipped into that place and fished in a manner that I never previously achieved. when i casted it was with purpose, when i changed fly it was with purpose, when i paused I paused with purpose. The sense of fulfillment was indeed overpowering, I know I caught some trout , at least I think I did, it really did not seem to matter much.
The bow waves confused me, another angler had come up the centre of the river and as he passed he sent wave upon wave into my little world. An old codger with as much stealth as a herd of stampeding elephants. He remarked that he thought I was parked up for the night I would have normally smiled and inwardly seethed but no I simply lit a ciggie and glanced at my watch. Hmmm, I had been fishing for an hour and a half and had moved only 20 yards up the run, no wonder he thought I was parked, I would have sworn under oath that I was fishing for ten minutes.
The first time this happened to me was on an extremely hard fished 120 yard stretch, quite wide and 3 good kicks of a football from a housing estate. Always amazes me when i slide down the bank to the waters edge that the house, dogs , children, cars all simply melt away and I am left standing in an environment where I feel at ease with the world. This stretch has fish its entire lenght,mostly to the sides. You could say that these fish are well conditioned to the presence of anglers and I believe are not so much spooked as much as they have learned to fade away when they sense our presence and will commence feeding when we have only moved a short distance past them. Little more than two and a half foot deep in places it is full of wonderful glides and eddies, strands of weed, slow in parts, fast racy water in spots, it is a fantastic learning ground and at times a right leveller.
That particular evening I decided to concentrate on the right hand side as I looked upstream. My usual approach was to wade up the middle , drifting from side to side covering the better lies. My target area was no more than ten foot wide and 40 yards long less than one tenth the width of the river. I really made a concious effort to cut myself off from the distraction of the rest of the river and the rising of trout all round me. Shortly after starting I slipped into that place and fished in a manner that I never previously achieved. when i casted it was with purpose, when i changed fly it was with purpose, when i paused I paused with purpose. The sense of fulfillment was indeed overpowering, I know I caught some trout , at least I think I did, it really did not seem to matter much.
The bow waves confused me, another angler had come up the centre of the river and as he passed he sent wave upon wave into my little world. An old codger with as much stealth as a herd of stampeding elephants. He remarked that he thought I was parked up for the night
I would have normally smiled and inwardly seethed but no I simply lit a ciggie and glanced at my watch. Hmmm, I had been fishing for an hour and a half and had moved only 20 yards up the run, no wonder he thought I was parked, I would have sworn under oath that I was fishing for ten minutes. -
CM_Stewart
- Posts: 257
- Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: New York City
- Contact:
Re: Using one fly
The "one fly" comment, given that it referenced tenkara, was not really about how many flies are on your line, but about how many patterns are in your box. Many of the more accomplished tenkara anglers in Japan apparently fish only one pattern - all the time (often of their own creation - a signature fly). Given that they fish high gradient mountain streams where the native fish cannot afford to be picky eaters if they wish to survive, limiting themselves to one pattern may not be that much of a limitation.wayneb wrote:I for one have just started to transistion from one to multiple flies. This is mainly due to my casting ability, it's just now approaching a level where I can handle more than one fly on my line.
A second factor that gets little mention is that the flies they use are generic wets that are not intended to mimic any particular fly but that look a bit like a lot of flies. (How many fish are caught on an Adams - and what fly specifically does an Adams represent?)
A third factor, touched on here, and at length in Mike's other writings, is the importance of manipulating the fly - and manipulating it differently depending on what the angler intends. One fly, fished differently, effectively becomes different flies.
I, for one, have not adopted the "one fly" approach (I would want two).