Opening Day on the Madison

Yesterday was opening day on the Madison below Earthquake Lake. I planned on leaving the shop around noon to fish the afternoon but got hung up special dying some capes and grouse wings. I finally got out the door at 1pm and headed to $3 Bridge. There were plenty of locals there comparing notes over lunch. I geared up and walked downstream. At 2:30pm as I sat on the bank watching a huge emergence of Baetis without a rise. The water was in perfect nymph fishing condtion and since no fish were coming up I knotted on a $3 Dip and trailed it with a Baetis Nymph. It did not take long to catch my first trout of the new season, a fat rainbow. I followed it up with a few more rainbows and browns before breaking off a good brown which swam quickly away as I attempted to unhook it and snapped 4x.

Knotting on an new nymphing setup I could not help notice the shear number of Baetis duns floating along unmolested. I was witnessing the strongest Baetis emergence I'd seen on the river in years.....and it was being wasted as nothing rose to them!

I fished for another hour before calling it a day. I'd taken several fine trout, most on nymphs, and so did several other anglers I visited with. Some had fair success with streamers but nymphing seemed to bring the best results for those I talked with. The $3 Dip in brown and krystal worked fine as did some of our Baetis Nymphs and a couple streamers we have been fishing this spring.

This morning on the way into work I saw several rises on Hebgen Lake. If it would warm up into the 60's we will see some awesome midge fishing on this lake as well as Cliff and Wade. The forecast calls for this to happen later this week.

This week we will be working with the "Wounded Warrior" program in the Madison Valley. Stay tuned here for information on this event. Tylor and Jen helped the US Forest Service and Madison River Foundation last Thursday with the annual "Bear Creek Days" held each year to get youngsters into the outdoors and into fly fishing. They taught Tenkara fly fishing as well as traditional fly casting to 40-50 kids who were all excited to learn more about our sport.

The Yellowstone National Park general fishing season opens May 28th, this coming Saturday. If the current weather pattern holds we will be fishing pale morning duns and caddis on the Firehole River so stay tuned here!

View Full Post

Whither the Double-Taper?

While scanning the internet the other day (it is runoff season) I happened across an article titled “Why Fish Double-Taper Fly Lines?” A website reader had wondered what these lines were for, noting that he didn’t know anyone that fished one. The article’s author then opined that he himself had never fished a double-taper, either. Seeking an answer, the question was passed along to some other folks.

To my mind, however, Why fish a double-taper? isn’t the telling question. Rather, what we should all be asking is, Why fish a weight-forward? Indeed, considering the relative merits of each taper, it’s long struck me as odd that the weight-forward has so effectively supplanted the double-taper as the de facto line choice for most anglers today (I refer only to floating lines).

After all, double-tapers were the standard in this sport for ages. Weight-forwards are comparative newcomers, specialty lines that arose in the quest for distance. But somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty to thirty years ago this paradigm changed, and weight-forwards took over the world. They shouldn’t have.

From a practical point of view, the only advantage a weight-forward line has over a double-taper is the ability to cast long distances—say, over 85 feet. But even this advantage carries a caveat. To wit, you must use a line-size heavy enough so that a double-haul cast can exploit the difference in weight between the line’s head and running line (the heavier head essentially drags along the lightweight running line, adding distance to the cast). To me, this means using 6-weight lines or heavier. Anything lighter and there simply isn’t enough weight difference between the head and running line to gain substantial extra distance, double haul or not. (Weight-forward fives are borderline in this regard; two, three, and four-weights...hmm...why are they even made?)

While a weight-forward line may have a theoretical distance advantage over a double-taper, the fact that the extra distance is attained by shooting the running line can be somewhat limiting. Actually, in certain kinds of fishing it can be a real problem. For instance, when gulper fishing (surface fishing to cruising trout in lakes) long casts are often integral to success. Such casts increase the number of chances possible at a given fish, either before the fish swims out of range or before it spooks by coming too close. But to attain distance I don’t want to have shoot line. Inaccuracy results from that. And if I do make a bad cast or a fish passes up my fly, I don’t want to have to strip in a bunch of line (to get to the head) before I can make another cast. Too much time wasted. No, I want be able to pick up my line at any moment, make one backcast, and lay it right back down. Especially at distance. A double-taper allows me to do that.

Another limiting issue for weight-forwards is that they do not mend well when fished at distances longer than their head lengths (the thin running line cannot effectively maneuver the heavier head). Although typically this is of more consequence to steelhead and salmon fishermen, it still comes into play in many types of trout fishing. Double-tapers, in contrast, mend exceptionally well.

A double-taper line also permits you to reverse your line when one end wears out. In effect, you get two lines in one. In this day and age, with some fly lines costing upwards of $100.00, I think that’s a nice benefit. It’s especially nice when you realize that you don’t give up any performance to get it.

It’s been noted as a disadvantage of double-tapers that they take up more room on a reel. Which means that for a given reel you’ll have less backing than if you used a weight-forward line. This is true. But having less backing isn’t the same as having no backing, and any adequately sized reel will provide room for enough. (I think most of us know how infrequently backing is needed for trout fishing.)

There are other considerations between the two tapers that could stand further discussion, but here’s the bottom line. I can imagine just one kind of fishing situation—fresh or saltwater—where I would opt to use a weight-forward line instead of a double-taper (and it would be a long belly weight-forward, which doesn’t really count since the benefits of such a line are more akin to those of a double-taper than a true weight-forward).

The situation entails the following: Long casts—at least 85 feet. The need for a heavy line—7-weight at a minimum. Single casts at sighted fish or multiple casts if fishing blind—the point being that in either case the amount of time between casts isn’t important (so there’s no penalty for the extra time it takes to strip in the line before making another cast). Finally, it’s a situation where no line manipulation is necessary after completing the cast.

Is there real world fishing like this? Sure. Think, perhaps, of chasing tarpon. Or certain permit fishing. Maybe trout fishing with streamers in a big river or reservoir. There are other kinds too, and if you engage in any of them by all means stick with a weight-forward line. But if you find yourself in more conventional waters—especially in pursuit of trout—you might consider the double-taper. We shouldn’t allow ourselves to forget that there are good reasons these lines were made in the first place—reasons I dare say hold up to this day.

    

View Full Post

Time and Again:  Two Meadow Views

It’s no secret that today there are significantly fewer elk in Yellowstone Park than there were in the mid-1990’s. Wolf reintroduction is one of the major reasons for this decline, since elk are a favorite prey species of wolves. Fewer elk numbers overall and a change in the foraging habits of surviving elk are thought now to be significantly responsible for a major resurgence in riparian willow growth seen recently in many areas of Yellowstone.

Here are two photographs of the same scene taken nine years apart that reveal a marked difference in willow height (and, I think, abundance). The first picture was taken in 2000, the second in 2009. This is an area that was utilized heavily by elk prior to wolf reintroduction, less so now.

It would disrespect the scientific method to not acknowledge the possibility (probability?) that other factors are at work here also. Climate change, fire history, and beaver presence/absence come easily to mind as other possible influences on willow growth and abundance.

Ferreting out absolute cause and effect in nature is never an easy thing to do, but in this case it sure appears as though the presence of wolves has played an integral part in the renewed growth of willows. Just another reminder, I suppose, of how interconnected the web of life really is.

          

View Full Post

Brown Trout

View Full Post

Mayfly on Grass

View Full Post

Page 10 of 28 pages