Smitty

Well, I for one am looking at the Alberta Party. http://www.albertaparty.ca/ What about you? Smitty

Well, I sure beat that last topic to death. Chalk it up to Spring Break for teachers. How about this? In the interest of more sharing, how about some of you "lurkers" come out of the closet and say hi? Introduce yourself, what you like to catch, how long you've been fishing...etc. Note: this thread is for newbies or long-time lurkers. In order to reply, you must have less than 10 posts. Naturally, I can't enforce this, so we'll just see if this plays out. Come-on people! Treat it like a radio talk show and you're a long time listener but have never called in. Isn't it about time? Surely we can do more than the usual 3 dozen or so regulars... Any takers? I have a goal of 24 replies from people with less than 10 posts... Anyone? Smitty

Well, I know I've come full circle and so I apologize for my repititiveness and/or circular argument. But,... I honestly don't know where you are coming from Junior. I guess if the price I pay to keep certain, fragile spots a secret, is to become an elitist, then, so be it. But your stance is almost gun-to-the-head like. Perhaps an exaggeration, but where is the mandate to "must" share information? Is that a condition of becoming an FFC member? Obviously no is the answer. Again, everything you've said is irrelevant to the original point of why I started this thread. Many members - besides myself, in fact more often than me, because the community is based in Calgary - many members take other people out fishing. Many members have mentored other people, in terms of hand-on, direct instructional help. That dad with kids could find plenty of help - PLENTY, I tell ya! lol of people willing to point a family in the right direction. Plus the local fly-shops, plus the AB Fishing Guide, plus numerous books (I count 4 that specifically cover Alberta), dvd's, and video's. Where's the lack of help here? Where's the lack of info? The truth is, with a little bit of effort, isn't there really a glut of information overload? And what's all that got to do with any member of the FFC not mentioning a 3rd stage, delicate tributary that can't handle either the crowds and/or people of ill-intent? Even if the premise is wrong, isn't it better to err on the side of caution and hold back some spots, just in case? Look, I acknowledge I have a selfish motive; like many here, small stream fishing in solitude or with close buddy family member is a real treat. But I don't think its elitist just because you are willing to share when you fished, how you caught fish, what the conditions are like, but you hold back on a favorite spot. Or, that you don't mention to an internet audience of 4000+ every single spot you fished. Let me tell ya, that's way more sharing than it used to be when I was growing up, pre-internet. Anyhoo, your entitled to see things the way you see them, but I'm pretty ok with what I share and what I don't. I guess I find your definition of elitism...weird. Smitty

Excellent reply. Bang on. And Junior, I'm happy to take kids from school fishing; and I also don't mind divulging spots as I mentor them either. Mentorship has nothing to do with the points I made. You might be right about this forum not contributing to poaching. But I'd rather not take that chance, again, given what I know what's happened (ok, I am not scientifically certain, but the cause and effect seems obvious to me) to perch spots due to internet postings here in northern AB. Smitty

I disagree completely Gaffer. While Lornce is indeed spot on with his point, and I agree with it, I still have come full circle (use to be more of a sharer) and see it from Harps point of view. Lornce's point doesn't address the separate issue that out of an audience numbering in 1000's, they are lurkers and leeches - I'm not talking about people who just want info for personal use - but the small subset of lurkers and leeches who will use the info for more malevolent purposes (i.e. poaching). I think we've established pretty solidly that the internet is a completely different beast when it comes to sharing info from the perspective of both anonymity and size of the audience. You're not just sharing the info with a core group of "good guys" and "regular posters". It just takes a few idiots to impact a fragile stream. For a more northern Alberta example, just look at when a perch honey-hole comes out (ie other forum). Doesn't take long to remove a sizable portion of 9" to 13"+ perch once the word gets out. Its irrelevant if people boast or stretch the truth, and all the esoteric philosophy doesn't help once the word is out. For a better flyfishing example, say you were on the coast or on the Island; think people would be as forgiving if someone outed your favorite steelhead honey-hole, especially given the numerous, troubled steelhead returns of late? Anyways, good discussion (once you're past some of the nonsense a page back). I use to be the guy, that, as a teen in the 80's, read about the great fishing on the Crow, and how sad it was they were going to build a dam, and how rivers need friends (It was a Bob Scammell article in Western Sportsman). I completely bought into that philosophy; share-share-share; after all rivers need friends. Rivers do need friends, but clearly the past 10 years of posting on the internet has taught me to be pretty judicious on what type of friends I want for which type of stream. Changed my mind I guess. Last thing; I noticed that recently, on an episode of the New Fly Fisher, one of the best episodes I've seen featuring Phil R., Tom R., and Dave J, hunting brown trout in the "Red Deer" region pointedly did not mention the watershed where the browns were caught. Darn good thing. Love the guessing/exploration/discovery... Smitty

Stunning photos Max. What camera did you use?

Lol. Check your pm...sometime, in the near,...future. Tell you what, make a commitment to make a trip out here in the summer, I'll show them to you personally. How's that? Smitty

Yeah. I get that sense too. Perhaps the issue is pre-mature in coming in terms of people caring enough or wanting to do something or whether its even serious enough to go another step. There was fair amount of the silly shack nasty stuff you have to wade through on this thread to get how people really feel. I brought it up because a lot of this is culture. I believe it was one of Dave Jensen's posts where hot-spotting is really really frowned upon in New Zealand. I know - different ecosystem, different approach, etc. But there was also the spat awhile ago here on FFC on a certain flowing water near Nordegg that some people really got their backs up about (somewhat justified, I thought). Yep - I'll carry on as usual - not specifically mentioning anything north of highway 11 and I'll pm someone if I think its out of line (but that actually is pretty rare). Its definitely a personal bias for me - I absolutely hate seeing any flowing water that you could call a creek (defined by, say, you could jump across it or its less than 10 yards in width, to be completely and totally arbitrary) being named on the forum. But most of the water is pretty public, and frankly, not much mentioning from us northerner-deadmonton types. Smitty

With all due respect, I don't a viable solution or cure to this issue is to simply have more than one "secret" spot. Very band-aid approach, imho. And cherry picking the Bow is the easiest example possible. Of course we're grateful for the reports and updates; and, as Brian said, smaller water can remain anonymous. Ok, this discussion has come full circle pretty much and a lot of opinions have been heard. The bottom line is, are we just talking or is this forum headed towards an actual official policy? Do we need one? Will it help at all? What say you FFC community? What say you moderators? For example, we could propose any or all of the following; 1. Anyone in the FFC community that objects to a location being named can pm the moderators with a respectful, politely worded request to have the name of the waterbody removed, cc'd to the original poster writing the report. The person objecting should obviously state why they feel the way they do. The mods could make a decision then. Yes, of course, we can already do this, but perhaps we could/should actively or pro-actively encourage it. 2. That would also mean that major rivers like the Bow and Crow are accepted unilaterally and the reports will stay (no one can object to report from major rivers). 3. The FFC community empowers the mods to remove the name even without waiting for a request. This would be in the case of a 3rd stage creek that is tiny and/or critical spawning habitat or something. Or, we can just let this issue die and pretty much cap the discussion and we'll carry on as always. Smitty

On a separate, yet still-related note, is there any update or new info in regards to Trans Alta and the use of the entire K-lake/river system for power generation? The last piece for this fishery is the cherry-on-top of retiring the power generation plants that wreak havoc with the littoral zones of the lakes and the screw the river. The potential is still untapped until the waters levels - both still and flowing - are stabilized. Not to mention, the shoreline areas are - aesthetically speaking - downright ugly. Imagine the fishing then! And heck, if we're going to screw with the system, why not fertilize with phosphates/nitrogen and really kick up the aquatic invertebrate habitat? Take it to the next level folks; just an idea. Was just wondering, Smitty

Part of the reason I started this topic because my thinking has come almost 360 degrees. When I got into fishing as a teen in the mid-80's, I remember reading an article by Scammell about the Crow. Part of the reason he wrote the article was to create awareness about the 3 rivers dam. He, like other writers at the time, felt that "rivers that have friends are protected; those that don't have any friends die". I think that's a basic truism, and flowing waters in particular do need friends. But I agree with Harps now; the spread of information is different in rate and audience. Someone who buys an outdoor magazine I think is more likely to become (or already is) the "Steward" type of angler. But the internet, as we all know, has both "lurkers" and "leechers". People who, in combination, contribute very little to discussions AND use/take advantage of the info presented. With the speed of info these days, who knows where the info regarding hot-spots ultimately ends up. Is there any proof beyond my strong suspicion that poachers have benefited from the internet? Not sure about proof, but I'm pretty convinced. I see what Rickr is saying, the whole point of the community is to share, but I think we must be quite prudent about what info we share. Frankly, I'd like to see more discussions or sub-forums dedicated to techniques and the "how to" as opposed to the "where to". Anyways, I'm incredibly leery about putting "where I was" or "where to go" info on the internet. When you think about it, posting the "where" info really doesn't add alot to the telling of your trip's success (or lack thereof). Does it really detract so much by simply generalizing by saying "hey I fished this watershed this past weekend" Conversely, you have a lot to gain by being a steward by protecting a stream's anonymity. I think about alot of streams in that Hinton-Edson region that are hammered badly by resource extraction and industrial development, they don't need any more attention by anglers, some of which choose their ignorance by not reading the regs or simply, malevolently, ignore them. Either way, some of those people are on the 'net, getting the info on which of those creeks still have half-decent populations of fish. On a somewhat side note comment; I wonder how many anglers will make themselves aware and compliant of the new regs protecting rainbows in the Athabasca watershed? Smitty

Good to see the Athabasca rainbows protected. About time. And now, I see (am I a year behind the times??) that you can't harvest any perch from any stocked trout lake. I wonder if that will really de-motivate / deter any future bucket biologists. With so many lakes "ruined" now anyways, I wonder how effective that regulation will be. I suppose we could wait for some of them to severely winterkill... Smitty

Did some of the pages of your proposal also provide details about supporting native fishes...like pike? Smitty

From another thread, I am quoting Harps: "Pictures and posts identifying exact location and technique have always been frowned on this forum." I get what Harps is saying, I respect and understand his point of view. But I disagree. (somewhat) I just checked; there are no less than 11 subforums on FFC dedicated to reporting where people of fished. How could we claim that location reporting is frowned upon? Ok, I deliberately just took his words out of context: he's saying both exact location and exact technique. Which I can see what he's saying. But nevertheless, all fishing reports are forms are hot-spotting - its simply a matter of degree. And while I don't care alot (but I do a little) about whether a hot-spot gets outed in Eastern Canada, or even some parts of BC (and these forums aren't used alot anyways), Harps got me thinking about the following: Is it time to curtail, limit, restrict, whatever label you want, the fishing reports section - particularly for Alberta? Sure, give us all the Bow-Crow reports you like - surely THOSE ships of sailed, but what about other waters - particularly flowing waters? Should the moderators develop a policy where 1st-2nd-3rd-4th stage tributaries are protected by not having them named (or the names whitewashed out)? Should sections of the other, lesser known but still-big rivers also be eliminated from being publicly mentioned? I can speak for northern Alberta; I wouldn't want to name several Atha-B tribs that contain those precious namesake rainbows, and, alternatively, I'm quite content to have everyone buy into the stereotype that the LSR is the "only" productive grayling fishery within 3 hrs of Edmonton. Selfish? Sure, but I'd like to think that all that water north of hwy 11 that seem so incredibly fragile should remain relatively anonymous. You won't see me naming any spots anymore (and haven't for awhile). Its a question I pose to moderators and the long-time and/or frequent users of the FFC. Thoughts? Comments? Smitty

I agree with your sentiment, but the posters who try hardest to make their constructive criticism tactful have a far better chance of being listened to, than those who make it personal and delve into ad hominen attacks and name calling. Make sure the goal is to educate; not much point in tearing a strip off someone and getting angry about it, unless its about making yourself feel better. Smitty

Dang. Too bad you're in Calgary. I have nearly 3 apartments worth of apt furnishings thanks to the Fort Mac Penhorwood condo fiasco (google it if ya want, not worth delving into details here). Anyways, all the stuff is in storage here in south Edmonton. I'd let a lot go for dirt cheap if you were willing to come and get stuff, and you could pick through what you wanted too. Smitty

Neat. I'm tying the exact same fly myself. Going to try and finish 3 dozen at the ski hill tomorrow. Anyhoo, I picked up some acetone at Wal-Mart the other day. $10 for a canister that should last the rest of my natural life. Found it in Hardware in the paint section. Smitty

So I am getting back into fly-tying after a very prolonged absence. About time. I trying to tie Jeremy Davie’s Acetone worm from an issue of Fly Fusion, and I am experiencing a brain cramp on beginner technique. So here’s the issue: after I tie in the floss tail, I have the following 3 materials to tie: the red wire rib, the lead body, and the acetate floss. My question is, I am going to tie all of those remaining materials at the back of the fly and wrap forward, correct? So the order would be (1) tie in the materials at the back (2) wrap forward with the lead underbody (2) wrap the floss over the lead, (3) wrap the red wire rib over the floss, tie off the right behind the bead and whip finish. Is that right? Or, put it another way; I would never tie in those materials at the front of the hook right behind the bead, and wrap “back” towards the bend of the hook would I? I got stuck trying to figure out if I should tie the lead wire in at the front or at the back… Help! Smitty

I've been eyeing that very rod too. However, I took a Czech nymphing course a couple of years ago with a member of the Canadian Youth Fly Fishing team. The way he taught the method leads me to believe, that to execute the technique properly, a drift boat approach would not be a suitable match. The method itself is more slow and meticulous, and the speed of a drift boat would greatly hamper the success (or at least, the technique) of the European nymphing approach. But! That's not to say you still couldn't use that model rod from a drift bod, or that it would be a bad choice - whatever method. I guess what I am saying is that I've never heard of Czech nymphing from a moving drift boat. Methods continually evolve though, so it wouldn't be surprising in the least to adapt some variation of the method to drifting. Smitty

I'm dizzy, lol. Never is easy as you might hope for... More seriously, I do sincerely appreciate the reply, because the different perspectives really give an idea of whats involved. Eventually, one video I'd like to produce is a fairly "cool" video for the fly-fishing club at school, as a recruitment tool. So ya, about a 2-3 minute video, preferably in HD (but not a deal breaker). So I suppose one very basic choice or fork in the road is whether I simply accept the quality I get with a p&s cam/go pro, versus having dedicated equipment. Another approach is using one of the school's high quality camera's an putting together a slick slide show of still images (but the images could easily be HD). Please keep the advice coming! Cheers, Smitty

Thanks for the reply Roast. Should have made that clear from the get-go; I own a PC. Keep the opinions coming! Cheers, Smitty

Hi all: I was inspired by the IF4 film festival, I am interested in shooting more video when I fish. So I am calling on all you pic-video-media experts and I'll ask this: 1. Best software to edit video (and pics too, but this is secondary) for newbies? Something simple to learn and straightforward (does that exist? Am I reaching?) 2. What's your pic to shoot video in terms of camcorders? Are most of you just using the video mode on your camera's, or are some of you carrying dedicated video camcorders? OK, thanks in advance - I look forward to everyone's opinions. Smitty

Anyone know how long the total running time of the IF4 film festival is? Today in Edmonton, doors open at 4:00pm, and 4:30 the show starts. Supposed to meet a friend tonight, but hard to make plans when I don't know when I'll be finished? Any help from anyone who has been this year? Is it 2 hours? Smitty

Anyone can give negative criticism on the net. Why don't you instead specifically state what you didn't like, how the show didn't meet your objectives? And to compare the boat and sportsman show to the WCFFE is unfair; and apples and oranges comparison. The boat and sportsman show caters to a wide variety of people with diverse interests in the outdoors. For example, you may have - I don't know, since you didn't say anything really - found that the show was somewhat lacking in flyfishing "stuff", "events", "seminars", etc. Well no doubt of course. That would be akin to a boating enthusiast attending the WCFFE and saying it sucked because of the lack of ski boats. Of course its an opinion, but how valid is the viewpoint? Bottom line, don't be a "hater" without explaining why, no matter what the situation in life... Cheers, Smitty

Besides wondering too, I also checked about dealers in Edmonton. Neither the Fishin' Hole, or Wholesale Sports, or Cabelas had any idea of what I was talking about when I inquired about tickets. Hmmmmmm...updates anyone? Smitty