Recent comments
Good thread. Good streamers. I didn't read all 5 pages. Did someone mention long streamers with the hook up front might result in too many short strikes? At least in the smaller fish, fresh water context?
Perhaps that's how the good tube fly photos showed up.
I have another take. I make a lot of fresh water streamers much like the originals in this thread, tied on a snelled hook. I use a barrel swivel up front connected to a trailing stinger made with a sharp scud hook. Knot mono to the swivel. Flatten the rear wire loop of the barrel swivel. Snell on a scud hook. Poke the rear of the swivel onto a horizontal beading needle. Tie a streamer onto the flattened loop and the mono knot. Similar to a tube fly I guess. But I like it better. No photo right now. I'll add one soon. A short shank hook on trailing mono hooks more reliably than a long shanked hook. A lot more reliably. And better than a long streamer with a short hook at the head of the fly.
- Log in to post comments
Outstanding set of flies Bob!!!
- Log in to post comments
Bellissimas Bob good luck..!
- Log in to post comments
Nice color combos there Bob. Should be a real winner !
- Log in to post comments
szn2,
I read scientific papers and books too, and sure fish have nerves and feel that the hook stings them - but the term pain is something that we as humans connect with extreme discomfort and even trauma and not least the fact that we know that we are hurting, and there doesn't seem to be much evidence that fish have the same experience from the hooking or handling. Sure they are better off without! Few anglers would doubt that, but it's a calculated risk. If we want to catch the fish, we will bring some discomfort and stress on them.
This study is pretty recent and concludes that fish simply cannot feel conscious pain the way that humans - or even mammals - can. They don't have the physiology and nervous system to do so.
My primary argument regarding the PETA statements had nothing to do with these facts (or opinions), but was a protest against the shrill rhetoric and downright insane allegations from PETA. I'm very open to discussing animal welfare and ethical treatment of animals and fish - those that will end up in my pan and those that I will release - but I will not discuss it with people who obviously live in a different world than mine (and most other people for that matter) and use arguments which are simply wrong and ridiculously exaggerated at the same time.
Martin
- Log in to post comments
I shoot fishing professionally as a staff photog for a major fishing media company. My signature shot is jumping fish. I can tell you that the most Important factors in getting a quality fish jump shot are : 1) focus. 2) shutter speed. you can point your camera where the fish is most likely to jump. So you better be shooting 1/1600 or faster. Then you need to nail your focus. 3) have a long enough lens where you do not have to crop too heavily. Shoot on bright days. You will get better pics. Don't rely on luck. Practice focusing on birds. They are easier to shoot than jumping fish, but they will help you hone your shooting skills.
- Log in to post comments
Im sorry to inform you and your readers that what was on the PETA article is mostly correct. It sounds to me like you are the one quoting misinformation that you just want to hear.
Fish DO actually feel pain, and yes, they often DO get injured when caught and released(I wish it weren't true also but wishing doesn't make it so). I KNOW that this is true because I have read actual scientific studies that were written by scientists who studied fish who were caught and released. I suggest that you and your readers do the same.
- Log in to post comments
You can only give comment when you have fishing with. I am fishing for times with this pattern and in differend waters.
Its a very good fishing pattern!
- Log in to post comments
Does anyone know how to tye upqua's Dave Hochner's "Flats Boss". Thank in advance.
[b:e5aa10d986]White brolly larva[/b:e5aa10d986].
[img:e5aa10d986]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-u7JqqQJeG3A/U4-IkUwvOiI/AAAAAAAAFj0/…]
All the best.
Miro
- Log in to post comments
g,day,i take you take comments in Australian,well I used the said fly with good fish taken up to two and half kilo,s in our impoundments,when asked what fly I was using ? I said a welsh fly,the diawl bach,he gave very odd looks,untill I showed the fly,very impressed the way it took fish,also I use the fly the rivers here,up and across with great results.just agood fly.
- Log in to post comments
[b:4a8c409673]das Schrimpâ¦[/b:4a8c409673]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2575_zps2…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2576_zps8…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2577_zpsd…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2579_zps9…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2578_zps1…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2580_zpsd…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2581_zpsd…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2585_zps1…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2582_zpsd…]
[URL=http://s198.photobucket.com/user/Phracas/media/Phracas026/F70A2584_zpsd…]
- Log in to post comments
Hi boys.
[b:6ec255c9a5]Long Leg Olive Body (LLOB)
[/b:6ec255c9a5]
Materials:
Hook: #12 May fly
Tread: 14/0 olive or beige
Tail: Goose biots olive (2 pices)
Body: SLF Sinthetic Dubbing (medium olive)
Subwing: Antron Yarn Beige or Cinnamon
Wing: Swiss Straw
Thorax: Polycelon foam olive
Long legs: Peacock (2 pices)
Short legs: Ostrich
[img:6ec255c9a5]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-LzRxekt34uQ/U5_2HZEcICI/AAAAAAAAFp4/…]
[img:6ec255c9a5]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-BNR1ju1acPk/U5_2F-XaeTI/AAAAAAAAFpw/…]
[img:6ec255c9a5]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-LjS1d8AeZ_Q/U5_2KXmrDkI/AAAAAAAAFqI/…]
All the best.
- Log in to post comments
If Radencich does it, you can count on the finest being among the there is.
- Log in to post comments
Some CDC emergers:
Ultra chenille tail, Black CDC wing - variant 1:
[img:cbb85f3f0d]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-bSSQl7mR4q8/UuQ4Sj3uZjI/AAAAAAAADiM/…]
Ultra chenille tail, Black CDC wing - variant 2:
[img:cbb85f3f0d]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-D7nE8HRkoj4/UuQ4Uut-tqI/AAAAAAAADiU/…]
Black loop CDC wing:
[img:cbb85f3f0d]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-nQawTy420Uo/UuQ4V_EaW5I/AAAAAAAADic/…]
Clipped wing technique:
[img:cbb85f3f0d]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Y3ej7sZSujk/Uxpu2un7vRI/AAAAAAAAEK4/…]
Double goose biots larva:
[img:cbb85f3f0d]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-rHJkZyvw_RE/UxpvHJGtXiI/AAAAAAAAEOo/…]
All the best.
Miro
- Log in to post comments
Paul,
I tend to agree and then disagree with you at the same time. Sure you can't measure the diameter of threads, which are not round, but in the cases where I have actually measured the threads, I have done so repeatedly on several threads using the methodology described, and even though you might think that such measures would yield very different results when repeated over a length of thread, the numbers actually varied very little for the threads I worked with. Sure the measuring itself can maybe affect the result, but my impression is that the result is actually a valid measurement for a thickness - attempting to avoid using the term diameter here. It indicates a circle round thread, which only very few threads are. A more fair measure could be dimensions - measured on the smallest and largest thickness when imagining the thread cross section as a rectangle. Unfortunately it's beyond my skills and my tools to do such a measurement.
Regarding the use of Denier, you are right inasmuch as it's a true, physical measurement, but there are simply too many aspects and factors to take onto consideration for it to be useful for the average fly-tyer in assessing the properties of a certain thread - not to mention comparing thread from different manufacturers made of different materials using different methods. It's still insufficient to be able to select a thread for the far majority of fly tyers. One 70 Denier thread can be as different from another 70 Denier thread as one 8/0 thread can be from an 8/0 thread from another manufacturer. As long as neither materials nor fusing or spinning methods are specified, the Denier number is as confusing to most as the aught system.
I have your tying thread booklet and can warmly recommend it. GFF readers can order it through your web site. The aim of my article was not to recommend certain threads for certain uses, but to raise a discussion about the very confusing standards used to label threads mainly sparked by my own frustration and confusion.
Martin
- Log in to post comments
Martin, I disagree with some of your methods and conclusions. First, you cannot measure the diameter of thread (except for the very specific case of a round monofilament thread). That's because thread isn't round, and so has no "diameter." Moreover, as you partially recognised, in many instances the act of measuring affects the measurement. In statistical terms your measurements are reliable but not valid. In other words, you are consistently and systematically measuring the wrong, or a meaningless, value.
Denier, or decitex (a similar measurement in general commercial use), is the only way to reasonable assess thread "sizes" AND only when comparing threads of like material and construction. On the other hand, breaking strength can be reliably measured and so is a legitimate basis for thread comparisons. Of course one understands that even saying something is constructed of polyester filaments doesn't guarantee identical properties as the filaments are subject to scores of manufacturing tolerances. If you had total information about a thread's properties (such as specific gravity among others), one could calculate a cross-sectional area and hence an "effective diameter," for whatever that would be worth. For example, given the identical "effective diameter," a 1-ply thread would tie differently from a 2-ply one, a twisted one differently from a flat one, a waxed one differently from unwaxed; etc..
The "ought" system has been completely adulterated and so, at least on a global scale, is now completely meaningless. At one time responsible respoolers kept the numbers at least relative. But, because there was no standard, not even a definition, some respooling brands simply invented numbers to make their thread appear more attractive. In some cases they even gave the same thread different numbers to make it appear that they sold a range of sizes.
Is there any hope for standardization of fly-tying thread designations? No. It's a small market and the wild-west of "ought" designations suits some players. If you want to see a struggle to get some consistency in a "similar" angling product, one need only look at the case of monofilament line in the European market (relative to fly-tying thread a mega-market). Even in monos, there is variation in "roundness" (some are oval) and so pure diameter measurements aren't always possible.
What is true is that one should select thread based on the use (my booklet, How to Choose and Use Fly-tying Thread, can help here) and whether or not you trust the brand to provide accurate information. So while I disagree with what you say "will work" - besides, attempting to put that much information on a spool label is completely impractical - I applaud your attempt to try and clarify some of the issues.
Paul Marriner
Outdoor Writing & Photography. Owner: Gale's End Press. Member: Outdoor Writers of Canada. Author of: (new) Mahone Bay Mornings, Modern Atlantic Salmon Flies, 2nd Edition; A Compendium of Canadian Fly Patterns (co-author); Stillwater Fly Fishing: Tools & Tactics; How to Choose & Use Fly-tying Thread; Atlantic Salmon: A Fly Fishing Reference (OP); Modern Atlantic Salmon Flies (OP); Miramichi River Journal (OP); Ausable River Journal, and Atlantic Salmon (OP).
- Log in to post comments
It needs improvement. A version for thick weeds. Other flies have a clump of rabbit hair that works like a weed guard...
- Log in to post comments
Thanks for checking the flies. I'm glad you like them.
Eunan
- Log in to post comments
I just watched Fish On. Real men are the men in Reel Recovery. God ,our Creator, made us perfect and then man fell. The greatest challenge is knowing God did not give these men cancer. It is a disease that was produced in the fall. But Jesus is a Fisher of men and I pray as these men continue to see the awesomeness of God and that they will each have a Divine encounter with God who gives eternal life through His son Jesus. God bless these brave hearted men. Fish on. Many thanks to Reese.
- Log in to post comments
