WyomingGeorge

I tried this out years ago and never found anybody. The one shuttle company used to do it but it was very expensive and you had to jump through hoops first. You can rent drift boats at most of the major rivers in Montana, typically for US$150 or so per day including the shuttle of both the boat and your vehicle to the takeout. The Missouri at Craig's a great place to practice handling a driftboat if you're new at it, as the upper river is very gentle and straightforward to row at anything but super high water.

I wanted to do the same thing a decade or so back before I bought my Clackacraft, but found it very hard and/or expensive to find anything around Calgary. I ended up renting driftboats (and confirming that I wanted one) down on the Missouri River at Craig, on the Bighorn River at Ft. Smith and on the North Platte River near Casper. They're typically around US$100-$120 per day, shuttle included, which considering shuttles alone on the Bow start at $60, always seemed like a pretty good deal to me. The nice thing is that down there you can gain exposure to different sizes and models of drift boat.

What about a single layer of rip-rap laid flat underneath the bridge. That would make it all-but impossible to drive upstream without impeding navigation. Granted, it wouldn't withstand a flood, but few things would. I tend to be with Bron on this one, that there's been an overblown reaction to the use of an exposed gravel bar of large cobble that grows only weeds. People throwing garbage is never good, but one sees garbage on the Bow wherever one goes, sadly, and blocking people from this patch of gravel won't stop those same people from littering at all the other places they go. Nor will it stop litter from floating in from upstream, nor youthful cyclists from chucking their empty Big Gulps beside the bike path. The rest of us pick up litter in whatever locations we happen to launch.

Do you think it's been flyfishy all along having you guys on?

If you focus on rowing others in your driftboat for a fee, you at least knock out a good portion of the risks associated with letting the boat out of your sight. But don't kid yourself that you'll be just rowing and not guiding. The oarsman is critical to putting people onto fish, picking out risers, keeping the two anglers working harmoniously, prioritizing water, etc. If you just float aimlessly down the middle with the anglers doing what they want, it's unlikely to be a big-numbers day. So then your conscience and your dedication to fishing get the better of you, and before you know it you're doing a little of this, suggesting a little of that, providing a few helpful tips...and then you're pretty close to guiding for just a rowing fee. There are far, far worse ways to spend one's days, of course.

Louise Shotton, 403-818-1625.

Was it $1,000 each? If so, that does strike me as substantial. If one is truly fishing for sustenance, then saving on $25 worth of store-bought salmon at the cost of a $1,000 fine is a poor economic trade-off and not something one is likely to repeat. If one is killing out of sheer cruelty and bloodlust, or hunting for a record trophy rack or a huge bearskin, that emotional desire is disconnected from economics and a mere fine is unlikely to deter. I know most of you wanted far, far more, but does that view make sense? Do you think the cost will prevent a repeat, or just make them more wily?

Perhaps one reason we're not supposed to discuss politics? But, surely, Taco, the truth or falsehood of a statement shouldn't depend on who is making it. One may object to Ezra, but either it's true that the new premier has hired anti-oil ideologues who would like to destroy Alberta's number-one industry, or she hasn't. If she has done so, it doesn't bode well for our economy...and how I feel about Ezra doesn't change that. The union propaganda posted a couple of days ago did not elicit quite so obscene a response from the guys on the right.

To the guys who say "meh". So then when it's a matter of principle that YOU care about, like say surveillance of phone calls and internet usage, or police forces flying drones over backyards, then the guys on the right get to say "meh"? Did I get that right? If the entire population feels that way, then nothing is a matter of principle any longer. Everything is purely about individual policy preferences. And then we all wake up one day and every freedom we ever had is simply gone because enough people were in favour of chipping away at each individual item. Tyranny has been the default mode of government, in all times and all places. Freedom is the exception. If nobody cares, in fact if people laugh and snort at the idiot who even still uses the word, it goes.

Actually, I can purchase 1,000 vehicles and drive them on my farmland until the end of time and register not one of them, ever. I only have to register a vehicle that will be driven on public roads. But a rusty old .22 hanging from a nail in the barn that would never leave my property and never even be fired again had to be registered with the federal government, egged on by a bunch of people whose open agenda (Allan Rock, quoted in public) was that in a country like Canada, only police and soldiers should have guns. Their agenda, clearly and openly, was confiscation. I don't own a gun, and I never have, but I understand the distinction and the concerns of firearms owners.

For whatever reason, I thought nearly everyone on the forum was kind of a bit left of centre. Of course, a gun-toting commune sounds rather syncretic, or eclectic, or perhaps just anarchic. Who shall be your crazed, charismatic, quasi-religious leader?

Hi Don: I know we are far apart politically, but I do not believe withholding investment dollars because one fears one will lose it all is holding anything or anyone to ransom. To believe that entails believing that investors in other countries owe us their money. Alberta has been a wonderful place to make an excellent living for millions of people over the decades, thanks largely to the energy industry. The spoils from that industry have enriched the provincial and federal treasuries to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. Alberta's GDP is larger than B.C.'s, which has 1 million more people. If that's holding us to ransom, I'm a more than willing hostage. I honestly can't think of a place or a time in the history of civilization when a mere tradesperson could make $150,000 per year and own a house, property, vehicles and innumerable recreational items, and put his/her children through university. An industrial pipefitter in Alberta today lives materially better than my grandparents in Europe, who were of the just-below uppermost class. Bcube: OK, sorry if I mixed up the application of a couple of the laws, you are clearly an expert in this area. But you do know the trend I'm speaking of, surely. It began in the late 1980s with the dispute in Saskatchewan over the Rafferty and Alameda dams, and quickly spread from there. Remember, gents, nothing personal on any level here. Just a discussion, right?

Hey gents, lively discussion. And before I weigh in, let me just remind everyone that I'm not "from" Wyoming, I just go "to" Wyoming and couldn't think of a better forum name for my silly self. Regarding the gutting/non-gutting of protection for lakes and streams, it might be worth recalling that, historically, there was a gigantic pile-on of regulations by previous Liberal federal governments. It could be argued that removing some of these regulations isn't loosening things, appeasing the oilpatch, etc., merely restoring balance. Also, there's the small matter, and I only mean that half-sarcastically, because in today's era of the gigantic administrative state, it really is considered small, namely the Constitution. And it assigns primary responsibility for lands, forests, waters, the environment, wildlife and property in general to the provinces. The giant federal pile-on of environmental regulations beginning in the early 90s was done largely under the cover of trans-boundary or navigable waters authority. So, any stream that crossed a border was suddenly fair game to the feds, and any stream that was "navigable" by birchbark canoe was subjected to...federal fisheries regulation. Constitutionally, it's perverse. Functionally, a given set of new federally imposed regulations may be to people's liking if they happen to like their federal government but don't like their provincial one. But, be careful what you wish for, as the tables can always turn. Personally I'd rather keep the authority to make laws and regulations such as these close to home, where there's at least a chance of local people having some influence. So the feds backing out of this doesn't mean these things can't have the heck regulated out of them, it just means the regs will have to come from the province. Lastly, to say that Alberta's economy will go down only because of the oil price is providing too much cover to the NDP. The capital investment strike began the morning after the provincial election. I know this personally, as a client cancelled plans to take his private company public. So, $400 million that would have come into Alberta from Toronto, NY, Miami and the U.K. even with $50 per barrel oil stayed away purely because of the provincial NDP. They can go ahead and raise royalties all they want, but a 100 percent royalty rate on a well that doesn't get drilled raises exactly how much for the public treasury? Correct: zero. And a higher corporate tax rate on a company that's losing money raises how much? Less than zero, as they'll be paying back the company's tax installments, and this year's losses can be used to offset taxes in future profitable years. It doesn't require NDPers to destroy an industry. We saw it before with the PCs under Stelmach. He raised royalties to get "our fair share" and mineral lease auctions ("land sales") collapsed from $5 billion per year to $1 billion, and drilling rates fell precipitously.

Loomis 1-piece. Yes, 1-piece. Smoothest, most supple thing I've ever cast. Yet powerful. Having only one piece allows the rod to bend in a perfect continuous curve with no flat spots. It's lighter as well, feeling like a 6-wt in your hand, but actually has more power than the same rod made as a three or four piec. Also, the reduced labour costs mean you get a high-end rod at about a $200-$300 lower price point. Ships in a long cardboard tube and comes with a fabric cover. Works best if permanently stowed in a driftboat and used as a boat rod. Hard to transport in a car or to take on approach walks.

Mrmomar: You are right, of course. I got carried away

Fishyfish: I would do the opposite. Think for yourself! Go places others don't go. Fish secondary and tertiary spots, especially on busy days. Don't follow the pack! Fly fishing is intrinsically individualistic. To me, fly fishermen who feel inclined to follow others should stick to team sports. One small anecdote, and yes, it's shamelessly boastful: was following a boat run by a reputable guide a couple of autumns back, down a long riffle ending at one of the big classic banks. The lower part of the riffle widened suddenly behind an island, edged by a seam. Mr. Guide drifts straight on down, oblivious, missing the entire seam. My guy sets us gently to the left, my other guy casts across the seam, and WHAMMO, brown on. Coming near the end of a slow day, it was great. The boat ahead of us missed the entire event. We were following the other boat only in the physical sense.

Also, I'm speculating here but I would assume they are focused on protecting indigenous wildlife from being illegally killed, rather than non-native sport fish on a mostly C&W river that's in generally good shape. They probably would rather save 1 elk than worry about whether a commercially guided drift boat catches 27 rainbows on the Bow rather than 23 because four were eaten. That's just a guess, but if I were a wildlife manager with too few staff and too big an area to cover, that would be my priority.

At this time of year, you'll have to nymph much of the time. You need a good variety of nymphs and you need to graduate beyond the red wire san juan worm, which some anglers seem to fixate on. Some days a size 20 zebra midge will hook toads. And there are a lot of nymphs in-between. Plus stoneflies. You generally need split shot so you get the nymphs down deep quickly -- especially if you're still a novice at casting and mending. If it takes the nymphs three quarters of your drift to get down to the fish, followed by drag, you won't have much dead-drifting time, if any. Also, even at this time of year, there will be fish right at the head of the run or even in the riffle, so you want the nymphs down deep as soon as possible. There's been quite a bit written on nymphing on this site that you can check out. Work lots of different kinds of water, and observe where you get the most hookups. When nymphing, set the hook on ANY movement in your indicator. Lots of times it'll be the bottom, but other times it'll be a fish.

Jay, Big: I think you're being a little naïve. When you are dealing with someone who is being deliberately rude, trying to make an unpleasant point, throwing his weight around, or expressing hostility, why would such a person fold in the face of a friendly request? I'd say sullen refusal or a loud F-off would be more likely. Besides, how do you even CATCH a jet-boater who's leapfrogging? The people who are most likely to respond to friendly input are the very people who are the least likely to require it, because they're doing everything right to begin with. The only recent time I tried to influence anyone's behaviour on the river was when a young couple planted themselves in the middle of the (pre-flood) Policeman's ramp and spent over half an hour inflating their raft and getting all of their little objects organized. They had orange coffee mugs that they placed on the ramp in a row like little pilons to keep people away. It was bizarre. With three other parties waiting and ready to launch, I asked them to make way (since they could have dragged their raft to the side), but they bluntly refused. Even after they were inflated and in the water, they kept their raft in the middle of the holding area, one end on the gravel, physically blocking the rest of us from launching. I finally told them that if they pulled that kind of crap on a busy Sunday in July, somebody would simply drive over their stupid raft. They didn't say a word in reply, but just left.

Nymphs: --stoneflies --October caddis --multiple colours, length and thickness of BWO-type nymphs --midges down to #20 or even #22 --caddis larvae --bright day: bland-coloured SJW; cloudy day: bright SJW

Jay: How do you hold the camera steady as you roar past them in your jetboat down the Class IV rapids?

My second biggest fish count ever on the Bow was in late October on a foggy (but calm) day with a high of only +1 and water temperature just above 40. The fish were chowing virtually all day long. Then again, my WORST day...

Well said, Shining Physician. Water temps will drop significantly. I float with my handy $2.99 pool thermometer and on Sunday the water averaged about 54 F. I have found that the fish will remain highly active and strong down to around 44, hammering nymphs and chasing streamers. Below that, they generally stop chasing streamers actively, but will still gobble nymphs down to about 38 or so. Below that, they're pretty sluggish and will eat only if something is right in front of them in slow water. So as the water temp drops, you should gradually focus your casting on progressively slower water. Right now fish are still in the fastest riffles, burly currents and even rapids. They will gradually shift to slower water as it gets colder. It doesn't mean you need to change patterns -- just where you fish. Also, don't confuse air with water temperature. I've been out on sub-zero mornings when my guides freeze solid and the fish are having already breakfast at first light.

Remember guys that stream flows are not "measurements" (even if they are claimed as being such), they are estimates based on a series of assumptions, extrapolations and mathematical formulae. The only accurate measurement is the height at the gauge. Everything else is calculated based on the physical (simplified) profile of the river (hence the survey) and assumptions about how much water moves past a given point at a given height. That in turn depends on some physics, including air and ground friction and how that affects velocity in different portions of the river profile, as well as how much flows accelerate in response to the river level. As the river rises, the streambed holds more water, and the water flow accelerates, raising the volume per second in two ways. If the streambed profile changes even a little bit from the most recent survey, then the flow calculations are thrown off. The only thing that remains known is the gauge height. And even a dug-in gauge can be ruined by a big enough flood. For the river profile, the easiest thing is to have a permanent surveying cable with one of those little trolleys, allowing pole streambed surveys to be done anytime. You see those on many rivers. Even some of the government guys seem to have trouble wrapping their heads around all this. Because the numbers seem so "accurate", i.e., lots of decimal places, then they must be "measurements" and they must be right. Interestingly (perhaps) the same dilemma afflicts measuring flows in gas wells. The only knowns are the gas pressure and the pipe diameter. Everything else is based on assumptions (based on past experiments) and an accepted mathematical formula. What's my point? Don't put 100 percent faith in "measured" river flows. Believe what you see when you get to the river.

Bmck: you are most welcome. To answer your question: the 1-1.5X setting is as measured by the distance from indicator to split shot. I agree with scel's remarks. It's also very true that lighter leader/tippet will sink faster and let the flies drift more naturally. My choice of rig is a result of compromises, i.e., sacrificing some realism (and probably hookups) for a more robust setup that means fewer lost flies and more control of the fish, i.e., fewer fish going away with flies or having to be played for a very long time. This is definitely a burly, Bow River-style rig. On small streams, where I want more delicacy and where I can retrieve snagged flies without yanking them, I will nymph with 3X or 4X leader, and sometimes even have 5X tippet to the lowest nymph. But not on the Bow. For sure, when fishing three nymphs, the biggest is at the top, and the smallest at the bottom. Another thing I've talked about in the past is that under certain conditions, I'll go "all small", i.e,. not using a stone, worm or other large nymph at all, but three flies in the range of 16-20. There seem to be times when the large nymphs not only don't get eaten, but cause the fish to shy away from the small ones.