That’s if you’re playing their game. Throw 'em an ant and you’re likely to catch fish. I’ve done it time and again. I like to fish the trico hatch, and prefer to catch fish on a trico imitation, but after four or five changes of flies, if I haven’t found one that works, I’ll go with the ant or even an EHC. I don’t think I’ve ever been skunked when there are tricos about.
I agree with Buddy that fish are basically stupid. However, stupid works both ways – they can be tricked, but they can also be too stupid to recognize something as food.
I’m a great believer in not using a pattern that’s more specific than it needs to be. Probably 90% of the fish I catch in any one year are on about 6 (generic) patterns; it’s the other 10% that make the sport interesting – and why I carry hundreds of different flies, even if I don’t use them most of the time.
I agree with Buddy that fish are basically stupid. However, stupid works both ways – they can be tricked, but they can also be too stupid to recognize something as food.
That’s if you’re playing their game. Throw 'em an ant and you’re likely to catch fish. I’ve done it time and again. I like to fish the trico hatch, and prefer to catch fish on a trico imitation, but after four or five changes of flies, if I haven’t found one that works, I’ll go with the ant or even an EHC. I don’t think I’ve ever been skunked when there are tricos about.
Another great point. I suppose I should have said that if you’re fishing a trico one size too large it makes for a fishless day. Several times over this past summer, my answer to a micro-caddis hatch was a #12 olive wulff.
You put it well…things get more particular when you ‘play their game’.
I agree with Buddy on this to a point. I think some fish are more easily fooled than others and in that situation any fly will work if presented properly. I also agree that this changes when fish are targeting specific flies. This past Saturday I was able to get out for a few hours to fish the lower Henry’s Fork. The weather was nice so i knew the chance of success was high. I started out with a rubberleg stonefly nymph followed by a #18 brassie with no bead. I fished these under an indicator. For the nesxt half hour I ran that setup through a great looking hole. Nothing. Not even a bump. I tried swing the flies, changing the depth, strarting higher/lower in the hole. Still, nothing. I finally decided to change flies. I switched out the brassie with no bead for a brassie with a bead and started catching fish. I continued to catch rainbows for the next three hours. So if the fish noticed as small a change as adding a bead I think they are smarter than we give them credit for.
Just my guess:wink:
I think we are virtually on the same page in almost all respects, now that we got some of the language out of the way.
I am a big fan of tying nymphs and wet flies “in the round.” I’ve mentioned that in several other threads and won’t dwell on it here since it could be a thread in and of itself. My favorite streamer is also tied “in the round”. The problem I would have with tying dry flies in the round is two fold. I do think that in a lot of situations the fish are in position to see the wing and it is a trigger. Also, having a wing of some kind can help float the fly and helps me see the fly. Take away the floatation and visibility issues, and I would probably do some dries, at least, “in the round.”
Certainly in some places at some times, there are “selective” fishies. But I sometimes wonder if that is, most often, the angler’s excuse for simply not catching them, whatever the reason. Same thing for the socalled “Ph.D.” fish. The idea excuses those who don’t or can’t catch them, and boosts the ego of those who do.
John
P.S. My signature is not really about the fish being “right”. It’s a reminder that it is up to me to refine my timing, tackle, and technique and apply my experience to the situation at hand. The best of all fly fishing experiences for me, is fishing new water and catching some of the local trouts.
