BRH

I guess if you consider teaching youth group kids and their family members to fly fish as guiding ... then yes, I guess you'd consider me to be a guide. I don't see it that way but everybody is entitled to their own opinion.

It is usually prudent not to make assumptions about someone you don't know and know nothing about.

This Sunday I will have another pair of beginners in my boat. One is eleven, the other thirteen. Their casting isn't that great yet, we've been working on it, but I think they can handle the rod well enough now to deal with Bow River trout. In terms of people I've introduced to fly fishing ... I think that's number 47 and 48 this year ... although I've kind of lost track, it could be more. mvdaog ... from your critical and judgemental comments I must be lagging way behind you in the number of people you've introduced to fly fishing this year. I guess I'll have to pick up my socks.

Me rubbing people the wrong way is nothing new. I'm a black and white kind of guy. Most people are shades of gray (or some other colour) and don't know how to deal with me. It is usually a good rule of thumb to not make assumptions about someone you don't know and have no idea about. The beauty of a forum like this and the anonymity it affords allows all contributors to only divulge as much or little as they individually choose.

So if we all believe we should be sharing info with the next guy ... what's the secret on how to use them? Give us a bunch of examples. I'm sure there are lots of folks who frequent this forum that would be interested in the secret of how to use them.

Since we have all these "sharing" people on this forum, it might be interesting to "share" how we decide what fly we tie on. Since fly selection accounts for at least some part of the reason for fishing success and whenever asked about fishing success the inquiring angler always asks what fly you're using, then fly selection has to be consider to be an important ingredient to fishing success. Now I appreciate that the significance of fly selection will carry more weight to some than to others. Some might suggest that fly selection contributes about 10% to your fishing success. Others might rate fly selection higher. Regardless, I'm pretty sure everyone would conceded that fly selection is an important aspect of one's ability to catch fish. For those who consistently enjoy a fair amount of fishing success, there must be a reason they are consistently into fish. And since the table fare of a trout changes from day to day, week to week, month to month, and sometimes even hour to hour, how is it that these consistently active anglers can roll with these table fare changes and continue to get into fish? For the successful fly caster, there has to be more to fly selection than just trial and error. So that's the question. How do you decide what fly or flies to use? And what prompts you to change the fly or flies you're using?

hawstoppah ... yes, I would say our definitions of presentation differ a bit. In my books, presentation is how the bug(s) are set on the water and what happens to the bug(s) once they're in or on the water. Presentation isn't where you're fishing or what bugs you're fishing, only what the fish sees as he's looking at your bug(s). You can replicate or test presentation in a water trough. You can't test water type or bug type in a water trough. I typically use a powerpoint presentation as an example of this. The PP presentation has its own identity, usually a file name. The key players (actors) in the presentation are your flies. How the flies are threaded together, organized to create a story flow, their script and their choreography is the presentation. Where the presentation is hosted, the location the presentation will be shown is the facility (water type). As the audience (trout) and location (water type) changes so too does the key players (flies), their configuration, their script, and their choreography and therefore the presentation changes. Thank you all for "sharing" your thoughts. Where were all of you "sharing" people when I started fly fishing? Oh wait ... that was before there was even a fly shop in Calgary.

Thanks to all of you for responding. fishfreak, Hawgstoppah and robert ... I would put presentation at about 40% not 90%. One of my fishing buddies is evidence of the lower rating. You can give him the right flies, tell and show him how to fish them and he still doesn't catch fish. It's kind of like the guy to stands on the bank and repeatedly false casts ... it doesn't matter how beautiful the line in the air looks ... the fish are in the water. If you're not fishing where the fish are feeding, I don't care how beautiful or accurate your presentation is, you're not going to catch fish. And if telling the inquiring anglers what fly you're using isn't going to make any difference because 90% of fishing success is a result of presentation, then what does it matter what you tell them as far as the fly goes? If you tell them the fly but they don't present it properly then they aren't going to catch fish anyway so what difference does it make if you're honest about the fly you're using? Essentially you're not helping them at all. At the end of the day the inquiring angler, after having no success even after you told him the correct fly, is going to say, "we sure got a bumb stear from that guy." Personally, I'd rather not be the guy another angler considered to be one as having given a bumb stear. I think I'd prefer to be considered pompous or selfish or greedy. kungfool ... I hear ya! You never know how the information you provide is going to be used or the end result of providing the info. These are people you don't know and what they do with the info you give is entirely up to them. One bad apple can ruin it for a multitude of other responsible anglers. The prospect of an individual killing even one fish because of information I've rendered is reason enough to not give that info to anyone.

Thanks for your response Pete. The harm in telling someone what you're using and how to use it is purely a selfish perception. There is the chance that one day I will encounter the individual I've helped fishing a run and I won't be able to catch a fish in that run because he's caught them as a result of what I previously shared with him. A case in point. As we floated down the river yesterday we noticed 2 fellows fishing a run downstream we wanted to get out and fish. As we approached the run the 2 guys were packing up to leave. We asked if they were finished fishing there and they said they were so we could go ahead and fish it if we wanted. They said there's no fish in it anyway. We netted well over a dozen trout out of that run, only two under 20 inches. Had these two gents been people we had helped previously, we may have caught some trout but nothing like what we did. I don't feel it's a competition but I do like to catch fish and I'm reluctant to share information that may impact the number of trout I'm likely to catch. Had we openly shared our fishing tactics with them this time, there is a chance that it might come back to bite us somewhere down the road. At least, that's my thinking. Little doubt they'll be back to fish that run after watching us catch trout after trout. But I'm pretty confident that when they return and leave, I could still stop there and catch a trout or two or maybe more. Would that be because I didn't tell them how to fish it? I'm pretty sure it is. Is this selfish? Yes, but I'm out there to catch fish, that's the whole purpose of being there. I salute you for helping the two gents on the Highwood and I would have likely done the same. However, I think that is a bit of a different scenario, pointing out flies in their box that might work, than being pointedly asked what you're using and how you're using it.

We had a really good day fishing the river yesterday and, at points, caught a number of trout in front of other fishers walking and wading. On four separate occasions we were asked what we were using and how we were using it. How honest should we be? I have three schools of thought regarding this. First, we've spent years learning the river and the success we enjoy is a product of that experience. We have developed tactics that, quite simply, produce fishing success. We're also fishing from a drift boat. All these things give us an advantage over the average fly fisher on the Bow. But the success we enjoy is a result of time and energies spent to learn and fish the river. I'm not sure I agree with giving all that experience away to somebody I don't know, somebody whose fishing success I could care less about. Second, I realize that any fly fisher has to have a certain amount of fishing success to enjoy the sport and stick with it, and helping other fishers attain success is good for the sport of fly fishing. As one who knows the river and how to catch the trout that inhabit her waters, sharing information on how to attain fishing success would certainly be good for the sport of fly fishing. Third, the more fishermen who enjoy success fly fishing the Bow the better it is for the Bow itself. If more fly fishers catch fish on the Bow then there will be more fly fishers fishing the Bow and in that there is political leverage to protect this resource and fishery. The addendum to this is that enjoying fishing success on the Bow River for us is the norm, not the exception and that it isn't always a walk and wader asking the question ... we've been asked by folks in other boats as well. I realize that the measure of fishing success is relative and what might be good to one person might be mediocre to another. For some a six fish day would be a good day of fishing. For others, including myself, a six fish day would be a dreadfully slow day of fishing. I'm not sure how to provide my perspective on what we consider to be a good day of fishing without undermining the intent of this post. At the same time, the circumstances prompting one fisher to ask another what they're using may be important. If it is then I'll provide an example. So which school of thought is the correct one? How honest should we be when asked what we're using? Should we tell the person asking exactly what we're using or should it be up to him to go through the same learning curve we had to go through? In the interest of the good of the sport and the river, should we be telling him what we're using or should we jealously guard our fishing tactics? What should you tell a fisher who asks what you're using and does it make a difference who's asking?

You're probably right on the 100 year flood but then the water was flowing mud (not fishable) so there wouldn't be much point in floating it anyway. Nice credentials ... but you didn't answer the man's question.

I don't think there is any point at which taking a drift boat on the Bow would be dangerous if you're familiar with the river. I don't gauge whether or not to do a float on flow but rather on the colour of the water. If it is fishable, that's good enough by me.

I can't speak for guides and what their expectation is or isn't. All I can say is that some guides supply flies as part of the trip cost, others charge extra for the flies the client uses. It varies from guide to guide as does the price per fly for those who charge for the flies. If you don't like the idea of having to pay extra for the flies you're going to use, best do your research and book with a guide who includes the flies in his trip cost.

Some do, some don't. It depends on the guide/outfitter. Those that provide flies will tell you so on their website. Those that don't generally don't say anything about the flies.

Assuming you're talking about fishing guides, I'm all for it ... with a few stipulations. 1. Criteria for establishing competency are relevant to the waters. Troll fishing Pike in lakes in the remote north should require differing competency criteria than fly fishing the Oldman, just as fishing the North Saskatchewan is different than fly fishing the Bow. 2. Two levels of fishing guide/outfitter licenses, one for guide/outfitters, another for guides. 3. Enforcement on all levels of fishing activities become effective and meaningful. 4. Regulations reflect management of fisheries not management of anglers. 5. Some means of evaluating performance. 6. Licensing restricted to Alberta residents only. I'm not sure Montana has it exactly right ... battle fishing on the Missouri. Not sure BC has it right either ... elimination of competative free enterprise. I'm not concerned about the "guide" with 2 years fishing experience, a boat, a mini-van, and a website ... client's aren't stupid, they see which boats are catching the fish. If you're only objective is to reduce guides and rod days on the water then you're barking up the wrong tree. Political will is the only medium through which regulatory changes like this will take place and political pressure and lobbying will be the voice that's heard. Reduced guiding and/or rod days is not in the political picture.

"$21,000 - $26,500 for all expenses" to "$25,000 worth of equipment", that's quite a leap. Your logic holds no merit and is entirely inconsequential.

Actually the problem for the original poster and anyone else who thinks the price of a walk and wade guided trip for one person is excessive is ... I have a choice ... take one guy on a walk and wade for $300 or $350 or whatever ... or ... one or two guys on a float for $500. Essentially, for those guides who have a full schedule, it's $300 for a day of work or $500. I don't care if the trip is for one or two guys, a float or a walk and wade ... the price is $500. I'm not going to book a one person walk and wader for anything less because I have a full slate of bookings and don't have to sell my services for less to fill empty days ... I don't have any. If you want to book my services for a day of fishing at my going rate, great! If you don't want to book my services for a day of fishing at my going rate, that's fine too because I'll be booked with someone else. There's no waiting around hoping someone will book a trip with me. Most of the time it's a juggling act fitting everyone in.

Max ... I love what I do as well, but ... it jerks my chain when someone from the outside, having no idea what's involved in preparing and conducting a guided trip, suggests our prices are excessive!!! Hope you're busy all October with your Walk and Wade Special. Just think ... you'll be making less than $3 and hour for all your expertise and experience. Seems like such a waste of your professional service.

Where do you think I exagerated?

$500 is too expensive? Let's break this down ... Right off the top you can figure about $50 for transportation as your guide is going to be travelling at least 100 km just getting you to your fishing spot and back (going rate I believe is $0.51/km). Then you can whack off another $30 for the flies you're going to lose assuming you only lose or ruin 15 flies during your day of fishing. Not to mention the few thousand dollars worth of flies he will have in his fly boxes so he can match the hatch or the fish menu of the day and the extras just in case you lose or ruin more than 15. Then you can whack off another $50 for the lunch your guide is going to supply ... yes $50 ... the guide has to eat too ... and he'll likely be supplying drinks and snacks throughout the day. Then you have to prorate the thousands of dollars worth of fly rods, fly lines, leaders, tippets, strike indicators, drift boats, and other pieces of equipment the guide has to have at his disposal so that if the cheapo client arrives with a 3 wt rod to fish the Bow River, the guide has equipment appropriate for the river that the client can use. Let's conservatively say $100 for that. Then we have to consider the multitude of trips the guide spent on the river without a client learning the runs, buckets and holes, the river and trout, the effective methods of fishing and the flies of choice for any given week or month on the river ... only to be compensated when someone books him to take them on a trip. What's that worth? Let's be really conservative and say $100. How am I doing so far Max? Then you have to consider the cost of operating a business, bookkeeping, the Tax Man, keeping a website up, covering the cost of credit card payments, advertising, promotional activities, sponsorships. Let's again be conservative and peg that at $50. So now your guide is going to be taking you for a fishing trip on the world famous Bow River for somewhere in the neighborhood of $220, spend 2 hours preparing for you, 10 hours on the river with you and 2 hours cleaning up after he's dropped you off at the hotel. The expert you're proposing to hire will make something less than $16 per hour and you think that's expensive?????? Give your head a shake buddy. Good thing you didn't contact me for a trip. Incidentally, a tip to the guide is not included in the price of the trip. Standard tip rates are 10 to 20% of the trip cost. Having access to this website by the guide you have contacted, don't be surprised if he anticipates the lack of a tip because you already think he's too expensive.

Hawg and Max are two of about 84 guides who guide regularly on the Bow River. How many times have you watched the activities going on in the drift boats that float by you on the river? How many times have you seen them stop with every change in water depth to adjust the length of their leader? How many times have you seen/heard them tell their clients to take their flies out of the water because the water was too skinny? Seldom if ever. Do they catch fish? Of course they do. They catch lots of fish, some boats more than others. So how is it that those guys in the boats can catch fish in 2 feet of water in one stretch and then catch fish in 8 feet of water in the next stretch without adjusting their leader length? Are the guides magical with special powers? Do their clients catch fish only by accident? How many times have you seen a drift boat pull over at the bottom of a run and both fishers hop out and head back up to fish the run and stop to have their guide adjust their leader length? Precious few times would be my guess. Do they catch fish? Of course they do. How can they possibly be doing this with without adjusting their leader length? These guides are not magicians, they are simply very accomplished fly fishermen who know the river and trout intimately, have the ability to teach fly casting in minutes and have an uncanny ability to impart to their clients the techniques that must be employed to catch fish on the river. Do they have secrets? You bet, everyone of them has their own way of doing things. None of them are unconditionally right nor are any of them wrong. The difference may be slight or significant. Do each of their methods produce fish? You bet. Their job depends on it. Guides on the river see a wide spectrum of abilities in the fishers they pilot down the river. They see everything from the fisher who is holding a fly rod in their hands for the first time to the exceedingly accomplished fly fisher and everything in between. As the drift boat floats down the river the depth of water changes constantly. The idea of drifting the river is to fish not contantly be adjusting leader length thereby floating by fishable water. So how on earth do these guides manage to get their fishers into fish ... both the complete novice as well as the experienced caster without adjusting their leader length? Is the guide loading up the novice with a "beefed up" indicator and heavliy weighed flies? Not likely. Most first time fly fishers have enough trouble with a light weight unit let alone a beefed up unit. Is the accomplished fly fisher so familiar with the river that he just knows what to do to catch fish? Not from my experience. There are many, many different methods, setups, approaches to fishing the Bow. None of them are absolute. Choose whatever method you want ... it's entirely up to you. But there are other methods, very successful methods. The guides floating by in the drift boats have their clients using them every day.

Hawg ... Most common assumption to whom? That certainly wouldn't be my first assumption. I beg to differ. Just because I'm using 12 feet of leader doesn't mean I'm losing touch. The craft of staying in touch is dependent on your technique. To make this generalized statement to a neophyte is misleading. Again I beg to differ. Feeding fish in the river could be in water as shallow as a foot to anything down to eight feet deep or more depending on what they're eating. Again, to the neophyte you are making misleading statements. Fish taking emergers on the surface sit in a very shallow water column. Fish taking stone larvae may be sitting in a very deep water column. If all you're doing is targeting riffle water in the 4 to 6 foot range, you're fishing for a small fraction of the fish in the river.

rickr ... I tend to disagree with you. Leader length is, in my opinion, given far to much attention and highly overrated. Whether a fly fisher uses 7 feet of leader or 10 feet of leader is a matter of personal preference based mainly on his own individual fishing experience and technique. A fly fisher using 7 feet of leader isn't going to catch more fish than another person using 10 feet of leader solely on the length of leader being used. Certainly you have to use enough leader to get the flies into the water column where the fish are but beyond that, leader length is only a means of getting the flies where you want them. Nymph presentation, type, size, and shape and fishing technique are far, far more important than the length of leader used. Many people talk about changing leader length when they move to skinnier water or slower water. Peronsally, I hate continually changing leader length. I far prefer to just set it at the start of the day and adjust my fishing techinque to match the water I'm fishing. Does that mean I catch fewer fish than someone who adjusts their leader length? Maybe ... but if there is such a person, he's not catching more than me because he's adjusting his leader length.

Chaisson ... consider this. When a fish is in his lie he is facing upstream, into the current. As a morsel of food floats by his position he moves out from his lie and takes the nymph and returns to his lie. If he is feeding heavily, he may not have a specific lie but just return to the stream bottom to wait for the next nymph to float by. His movement is generally very lazy as he moves to take the nymph. For the most part he doesn't lose stream position in the take. He may move laterally and to a different water column to take the nymph but most often he won't lose ground to the current. (This is just a general rule of thumb. I have seen fish watch the nymph float by then turn and take it on a downstream run.) Now consider your fishing technique. If as you say in your post (quoted above), you have your strike indicator drifting upstream of your flies, when a fish takes your nymph all he's going to do is create slack in your leader. Let's look at this in detail. Your flies are floating along in a dead drift and your indicator is floating along in a dead drift upstream of your flies. The fish sees your nymph and moves laterally to take it. Since your flies are already pretty well right on the bottom, as he takes your nymph the fish either just rests there or moves back to his lie. So now the fish has the fly in his mouth (for about 2 or 3 seconds) and your strike indicator still hasn't moved because all that has happened is that the fish has stopped the dead drift movement of the flies but the strike indicator is still upstream of the fish continuing its dead drift float. So as the strike indicator floats down with the current in a dead drift with the flies stopped in the fish's mouth, all that's occurring is that slack is being created in the leader between the indicator and flies. As he creates that slack you will see absolutely no indication on your indicator of the strike. I may not have explained this very well but is it very easy to simulate on the river. Consider also that there are a wide variety of current and turbulence variations between what you see your indicator doing and what the flies on bottom of the stream bed are doing. If, as you say, your indicator is upstream of your flies, it is conceivable that there is a considerable amount of slack in your leader between the flies and your strike indicator. In this case, when the fish takes your nymph, the flies stop their dead drift. As the indicator passes the fish's position the slack between your strike indicator and the flies starts being taken up. Eventually, all the slack will be taken up and the leader between your fly (in the fish's mouth) will become tight as the stike indicator floats far enough by the fish's position in the current doing its dead drift thing. When the indicator has floated far enough downstream of the fish, because the fish stopped the flies from drifting, the indicator will show the strike. The trouble with this entire scenario is that the fish isn't likely to hang on to your nymph for that long ... you missed the strike. Your indicator and flies will continue on their merry dead drift as though nothing had happened. In contrast to what you say you're doing, indicator upstream of the flies, next time out try reversing that technique. Always ensure the flies are upstream of the indicator. Still do your dead drift thing if you want to but do your best to keep the flies upstream of the indicator. As your weight fly (SJW) taps along the bottom, it will keep the leader between it and the indicator taught. When a fish takes one of your nymphs and essentially stops it from its dead drift, you will immediately see the strike on your indicator. This is the theory although the variety of currents and turbulences on the stream bottom don't always follow theory.

Floated the city today and although you may be right about the river being about to blow out, visibility throughout the city was 6 to 7 feet until the monsoon hit. Level is up a bit from the last three days but only marginally. My guess is that once today's rain storm flushes through, we'll still have a few days of fishing before blow out. When it does come, I won't be surprised to see it extend into July.