Why fly fish? - Why not?

Unusual Catches

Sat, 19 May 2012 17:35:00 -0700

It’s a little known fact there’s a category of international flyfishing gamefish records for “non-typical” catches. In concept, it’s similar to the Boon and Crocket non-typical whitetail antler classification. Few fishers bother to consult this interesting chapter, but, it might be worth your time to do so. It’s always impressive when you can say you’re in the record book.

Even I have a few catches up for consideration. An angry bat fell to my size 16 Sulfur Emerger in central PA. While this is not too uncommon, I caught him on the front cast, not the back. Although bats have sonar we can’t hear, this one also had some angry vocalizations (and huge teeth) causing me to break him off. Technically, I consider him landed and have submitted him for a decision even though his leathery wings never touched the ground. It was a looooong distance release.

I once hooked, and landed, a 45-pound beaver in Jacksonville, VT. I was fishing a remote beaver pond, using a size 10 Peacock and Grouse and I felt a take. I was fast to the occupant of the pond. Once he realized I was the source of the irritation, he charged the bank and I was lucky to escape with my life, if not the fly. I consider him landed but the decision is still under judges’ consideration.

A dragonfly once fell to my Griffith’s Gnat as I was sight-fishing to a Brown in Roscoe, NY. I really can’t tell if I hooked him or if he intentionally took the fly. Either way, I landed him fair and square. I should have kept him due to his injury but I was fishing the Catch and Release section of the Beaverkill.

Jack, my English setter, loved to retrieve trout so it was inevitable I’d one day add him to my list of “non-typicals.” One summer day he was sitting beside me, minding his own business, with only his head sticking above the water. The current took the weighted Prince nymph around his tail. He wasn’t hurt but put up a good fight nonetheless.

While fishing a tributary of the Connecticut River for shad, the off-color spring runoff hid an abandoned 1952 Chevy two-door. It gave quite an accounting of itself and I was unable to bring it to the net. Being a convertible with the top down, extra points should be awarded.

Once, while guiding, a client’s 12-year old son hooked me on two consecutive casts; the second one sticking me in the neck, behind my ear. I handed the forceps to the father and asked for help. He was squeamish and declined. The kid was waving the rod around so time was of the essence. I reached back, tore the fly out and, oh yes, started bleeding. Dad saw this, turned a lovely shade of green, moved away from me and puked down the inside of his son’s waders. God works in mysterious ways.

I don’t have much experience in salt water. Nonetheless, one trip off New London, CT, resulted in an unusual hookup. I snagged a Yankee-class submarine. It seems we were in the restricted water the Navy uses for submarines approaching the shipyard. I know I could have fought it to a standstill but the Navy had no sense of fair play. They demanded I cease and desist. I did get a picture so even though I don’t have an official weight, I’m still asking for consideration.

I’m pretty sure if none of my submissions are accepted, I’m still in the running for the Rodney Dangerfield Memorial Most Rejected Applications Award.

Tony Lolli is a broken down fly fishing guide, freelance writer, sheriff’s deputy and ne’er-do-well from northeastern Vermont. His book, Go-To Flies: 101 Patterns the Pros Use When All Else Fails, is available through bookstores and Amazon.com.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Imitation or Attractor?

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:50:00 -0700

No topic - not religion, politics, or even American Idol competitors - causes more shouting matches among my friends than the debate over the superiority of imitation versus attractor patterns for trout.

It’s not like this is an either-or situation. Both work, and often, either will work equally well. I think my friends just like to argue. It’s the gun play that worries me.

Consider the earliest fly fishers, the Egyptians (or Macedonians, depending on whose account of history you prefer). Their lure was simply a piece of red cloth on a hook. Clearly, this argues for the attractor school theory. I’ll bet it was not long before some started arguing for the superiority of green cloth over red. I’ll also bet it didn’t make a difference as far as the fish were concerned.

Run ahead many years and you’ll see that the earliest flies used materials shaped into forms that looked like a natural food source. These were attempts at an imitative pattern but still were more suggestive than imitative. They were more a crossover between imitative and attractor. The same holds true for most patterns we use today. Not even a wily Brown trout thinks a Black Ghost looks exactly like a forage fish. But, close enough is close enough.

Out on the fringes, you’ll find patterns looking exactly like naturals, right down to eyeballs, antennae and genitals. While I admire the technical expertise involved, they’re not for me. I have better things to do, like recycling the newspapers and tin cans.

I’ve watched tiers who specialize in exact replications. Their creations look like they’ll crawl, fly or swim off the tying table. In addition to normal tools, they employ calipers, micrometers, millimeter rulers and assorted other gauges. Some of these tyers advocate counting the tail fibers to match the naturals. Fish can’t count. But, if it makes the tyers happy, let the good times roll!

At the opposite end of the spectrum are the more traditional tyers. They fall into two camps, those who tie attractors and those who tie amorphous things that “suggest” the essence of something alive. An attractor looks like nothing in nature while a minimalist looks like something (anything) alive.

Attractors rely on the fish’s sense of curiosity to fool them. I don’t know how else to explain why some attractors work so well. Other attractors work because of the fish’s sense of humor. Show them something they’ve never seen before and they’ll take it. Maybe they just want to taste it to decide if it’s edible. I don’t know. All I know is that novelty sometimes wins the day when educated trout are involved.

Walter Manch, a long-time Catskill guide, insisted the only important part of a dry fly was the body. He argued only the body color and size mattered. His were tied with nothing but a fur body and a white poly wing to support the fly in the surface film. Nothing else was necessary to fool the crafty Beaverkill browns; no tails, no throats, no hackle, no trailing shucks, no ribs, no testis, nothing.

So, which is best, imitations or attractors? I don’t know and I don’t care. All I know is either type will work equally well so use whatever trips your trigger. Life is too short to worry about such questions. Remember, fly fishing is NOT a life or death proposition.

When the boys next start arguing which kind of pattern is superior, I’ll just sit back, stay out of it and watch the fun. However, one thing I learned early in life is never bring a knife to a gun fight.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Creative Roadkill

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 07:20:00 -0700

Roll Your Own

What fly tier doesn’t love to find roadkill, be it squirrels, woodchucks or deer? It’s out there, laying around, waiting to be picked up – and at no cost. What a country – free materials!

Knowing where to cruise is important. Thoughtful road crews have made the search easier. Consider all the warning signs along our roadways: deer crossing; moose crossing; cattle crossing, etc. This signage makes us more efficient in our collecting. Mapping out these signs in your community can reduce your investment of time and increase your Cruising to Pickup Ratio (CPR).

Skill training will boost your CPR. Reducing the critter carcass to possession before anyone else sees it is important. Vigilance pays off. Driving past a downed duck, slamming on the brakes and shifting into reverse is effective but just not stylish. Doing so reveals you to be an amateur. Better, is the 3-point “Y” turn. In rural areas, like where I live, some of these narrow lanes require a 15 or 24-point turn. For the unwary, this may necessitate a 2-hour investment, factoring in the wait for the tow truck. So, other methods are needed.

Best, is to slow down, lean out an open driver’s side door and grasp the expired ermine. However, this requires the use of a seatbelt lest you become an added roadside attraction. Safety first. If you live where there’s very little traffic, thus very little roadkill, don’t despair - all is not lost.

There is a black art, spoken of only in whispers, in the back rooms of fly shops. It’s known as “rolling your own” roadkill.

In my own experience, things can go wrong quickly. I remember the time my friend accepted my challenge to roll a woodchuck. Unfortunately, the ‘chuck was entering a mature cornfield at the time. To this day, I still get the heebie-geebies just walking down the produce aisle when sweet corn is in season. Even canned corn makes me break out in a cold sweat. It takes a special person (with a warped sense of values) to engage in rolling your own. Almost all the fly fishermen I know are, by definition, qualified.

A little practice goes a long way. There’s a fine line between converting a valuable specimen into tying materials and just another grease spot along the highway. A glancing blow is to be desired versus a full rollover. You can achieve this by practicing with a child’s stuffed animals. Set them up along a straight stretch of road and go at it. Use your hood ornament as a sighting device and strike with a glancing blow so as to knock the target into the roadside ditch.

A word of caution is in order when rolling man-eating species. Through evolution, they’ve evolved into sneaky critters that will reduce you to lunch if your aim is off by inches.

Another category to be avoided is marine mammals. Few vehicles will survive the watery crash, much less get you out in time before drowning. A word to the wise is sufficient.

Similarly, most of the African plains animals are to be avoided. The downsized vehicles most commonly driven these days are no match for hippo, rhino or elephant. Oh, you can try it if you like to live on the edge, but, like using a 2-weight for salmon, this often leads to disappointment, or worse (like the necessity for fresh underwear).

I think it sufficient to say you should take a pass on mountain goats and bighorn sheep, for obvious reasons.

So, there you have it, a primer for collecting your own roadkill. Now you have all the information you need to start collecting slow squirrels, wounded woodchucks, limping lizards and careless cranes along the highways and byways of this wonderful country. Now get out there and cruise like a pro.

P.S. This column is an attempt at alleged humor. The ASPCA, Friends of Animals and the like, need not respond. I’ll stay out of your way if you’ll stay out of mine.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

The Long & Short of It

Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:53:00 -0700

Short Rods

I remember a cover photo on Fly Fisherman magazine from a billion years ago. Lefty Kreh was shown breaking a bundle of short rods over his knee. His opinion was longer rods are more versatile than shorter rods. Further, he believed fly fishermen were handicapping themselves with shorter rods. Having more than 45 years of fly fishing experience and many years as a guide, I have to agree. Even Archimedes agrees – to a point. I say this up front so you can turn the page if you adamantly disagree. If you’re on the fence, read on. We can argue the fine points later.

For most fishing conditions, longer rods give more line control and this translates into greater accuracy in all situations. This means more hook-ups by the end of the day. I’m not even convinced a short rod, 6-feet and under, is ever an advantage.

Longer rods are more forgiving of timing mistakes. I think this is obvious because longer rods use a slower pace to deliver the same distance as a cast with a shorter rod. If you’re casting at a faster pace, there’s less time for corrections. Here are some examples:

Loop control. Sometimes a slower cast is necessary so you can make final adjustments before the fly lands and get the fly exactly where it needs to be. Having the extra reach gives more time for adjustments. This can be the difference between catching, or not catching, educated fish.

Mending. Longer reach means more line off the water and greater possible reach. This means more effective mending because a larger mend can be delivered rather than several shorter ones.

Other line manipulations. You can throw a hook-cast in either direction simply by twisting your wrist on the forward cast. The longer rod throws a larger hook because the rod tip travels a longer distance.

Dapping. This is an ancient technique from the “olden” days. Back then there was no forward cast. Instead, the fly was simply allowed to hang straight down from the rod tip. The longer the rod, the greater the reach. Same hold true these days.

Distance. Longer casts are easier because the tip is traveling a longer distance with a long rod over the same time than with a short rod. Both rods may be loading properly but the longer rod can achieve greater velocity because the distance the tip travels is greater. Remember Archimedes from ancient Greek History? The longer rod is a longer lever.

It sounds counter intuitive but I think a longer rod will keep your back cast out of the trees more readily than a short rod. Why? – You have more control over both the forward and back cast with a longer rod. Trying to snake a back cast into a hole in the foliage is easier to accomplish due to the increased control you have with a longer rod.

How about the old claim that it’s easier to make your way through dense streamside cover with a shorter rod? I’ve been tangled up in the bushes with 9-footers as well as 6-footers. Again, I don’t see a distinct advantage with a short rod because I’m in the habit of taking the rod apart when I have to crawl around in the pucker brush. The few seconds this takes is well worth avoiding the frustration that comes with getting tangled in the brush, regardless of the rod’s length.

There was a time you had to go with a short rod to get something especially light and capable for handling a light line. Not so anymore. These days, even 9-footers are light in the hand and capable of delivering light lines.

Sometimes the traditional ways are best. It’s like the old bumper sticker says – “Fly fishermen have longer rods.” Live up to those expectations.

Tony Lolli is a broken down fly fishing guide, freelance writer, sheriff’s deputy and ne’er-do-well from northeastern Vermont. His book, Go-To Flies: 101 Patterns the Pros Use When All Else Fails, is available through bookstores and Amazon.com.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Fake or Fur?

Sat, 13 Aug 2011 18:09:00 -0700

Natural or Synthetic?

Some unresolved arguments, not unlike a visit from a relative, seem to last for years: tastes great/less filling; boxers/briefs; Army/Navy; potāto/potǎto.

As unlikely as it seems, even we fly fishers have our disagreements; left-hand reeling/right-hand reeling; sink tip/full sinking lines; hippers/waders; graphite/bamboo.

A more mundane, contemporary argument involves fly tying materials - natural versus synthetic. There was a time we had no choice because synthetics had yet to be invented so everyone used materials, au natural. We can blame the British Empire for the demand for natural materials because their salmon and trout fly patterns called for exotic materials that became difficult to obtain. Not a problem for the English because, as they used to say, “The sun never sets on the British supply of fly tying materials.”

American fly tiers took their lock-step lead from the British and used natural materials. But, they began substituting more available indigenous species. Soon, it became the unwritten law that you must use the same materials called for by the pattern’s originator. This movement created a sub-cottage industry we’ve come to know as the fly pattern book. These days, every jerk with a computer has written a book. (See my bio at the end of this column.)

Requiring the originator’s materials put quite a strain on certain supplies such as the off-pink fur for Hendrickson dry fly bodies – the urine stained fur from a vixen (female red fox). While I won’t go into details, I know of more than one guy who “experimented”, out behind the barn, with unstained vixen fur in a manner that might have gotten them arrested in less liberal times.

Anyhow, somewhere along the way, following WWII, someone thought they’d try some of the new synthetic materials and the movement caught on. However, the entrenched fly dressers rose up in reaction and picketed fly shops across the US. “It’s okay to use tinsel but natural fibers are the only way to go,” they insisted. The upstarts replied with “Up your nose with a (synthetic) rubber hose.” The war was on and there was no turning back. It was a dark time that pitted father against son and many families were torn apart. Some went so far as to avoid attending holiday gatherings like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Opening Day.

Those hidebound traditionalists continue on, happy as clams, looking for natural materials. The materials alone, in some traditional full dressed salmon patterns cost enough to make a payment on my ’92 Ford pickup. I once watched a guy at a fly show pay more than $70 for a matched pair of swan feathers. Hell, I’d run one over and give him the entire critter for less than that!

The list of useful synthetic materials continues to grow. Every week there’s some new addition that we just have to try. I think we’re keeping the petrochemical industry in business with our need for new fix every other day.

I know a couple of guys who disguise themselves in wigs and dresses and cruise craft shops in search of potential new materials. My bearded lumberjack friend, Ed, continues to get away with this because he claims to be a transvestite. At least, that’s what he told the police.

But what about the fish; do they care what you’re using for materials? After all, neither natural or synthetics are edible so what difference does it make to them? Absolutely none, in my experience. Hey, remember that we’re trying to fool them, not feed them.

Once in a while it’s almost too easy to fool them. Sometimes the fish show themselves for the gluttons they really are and gobble up cigarette filters or hot-orange foam strike indicators. On the other hand, there are other times their preferences change and they require something natural - like a small twig or pebble. Fish aren’t the brightest species on earth. Don’t believe me? Next time you net one, notice the wide-eyed look of disbelief on his face.

Permalink | Leave a comment »