WyomingGeorge

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.

You're very, very welcome, and best of luck out there

I'm not one of the pros, but I've done quite a lot of streamer fishing to cutthroat in numerous drainages. My experience has been that typically smaller, slimmer streamers work better on cutties, things imitating what is actually found in the higher-country, freestone environment, and that the cutties can catch. So, not giant 6" bunny tail patterns that mimic juvenile fish, or enormous leeches bigger than what will even grow in that particular stream. Generally, thinner-bodied patterns in various colours, from traditional woolly buggers with a simple tungsten or gold beadhead to somewhat fancier ties like the Beldar Bugger, as well as some heavier-bodied (but not long) flies. Colours should include browns, olives, black, white/cream, as well as some yellow, red and purple. For late summer when the water is low, clear and warm, truly tiny streamers (as little as 1" total length) with small painted-eye-heads but very sparse white synthetic fibres for the body will mimic the tiny, translucent minnows that are flitting about, and can take some remarkably large cutts on the swing or jerky retrieve. An offbeat pattern that has worked well for me in summertime cutt fishing has been the belly-ache (definitely NOT the belly dancer for this application). If you can still find it, the Little Kim by Idylwilde or however it is spelled is devastating.

Doc, you are a prince! I've been fly-fishing for 20 years and your spider-web tip was news to me. What a clever tactic.

Gents, if we're going to have a section entitled "Ask the Pros", then we're going to have to do better than "check the archives", or we'll need to rename it, "Ask the Pros Whether the Forum has an Archive." Sage, the thing I found interesting about your anecdote is that there were stonefly shucks floating by. Stones normally crawl out onto the rocks and transform into adults there. Could the shucks simply have been dislodged by the sudden bump in flows? (The river went from 170 several days ago, back to 230.) I.e., the river providing some devious misdirection of her own? With the fishing having little to do with adult stones that day. As for what to fish with, personally I don't blind fish dries on the Bow except during hopper season. Hearing some rises or seeing a "one and done" doesn't get me convinced I'm about to slay them on the dry. I need to see a fish working, and then I target that fish, watching how it rises and what it eats, then tying on the corresponding fly. With just isolated rises, I would likely have nymphed, swung wet flies or streamer fished. Lots of people are reporting that this spring's profusion of bugs has led to such fat, full fish that they just don't seem to need to eat that badly a lot of the time. Persevere.

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.

Simplest advice I can give: --use a thing-a-ma-bobber as indicator. It's indestructible, easily adjustable and floats well. I use white on the theory that it looks more like natural foam in the water (but that may be delusional) --use a stout leader (3X or even 2X) --tie on two or three nymphs. I tie the tippet for the droppers through the eye of the previous nymph, so that each nymph can wave about freely in the water --use successively lighter tippet as you go down, so that if you hook your lowest fly on the riverbed, you are less likely to lose the entire rig --space the nymphs over 12" apart, especially if one of them is large --use split shot -- your rig MUST get down to the fish quickly -- spaced about 12"-18" above the uppermost fly --use more split shot if all your nymphs are small, and less if the upper nymph is heavily weighted (a wire worm doesn't count as weighted, nor does a tiny bead on a little nymph, but a turd pattern with lead wire inside the chenille or a big stonefly with a large bead does count as weighted) --set your bobber at 1-1.5 times the water's depth to the split shot --you should touch bottom occasionally but not drag continuously -- adjust the bobber's height as needed --you will lose a few flies That's how to rig -- now your challenge is choosing the right flies and the right water. Good luck!

Of course, the key to everything is that you have to LIKE streamer fishing to begin with! I can't believe the number of anglers I run into who think it "doesn't work", or who "only do it when nothing else is working", or that trout somehow aren't "fast enough" to catch them (!) (especially bizarre given that the fastest rippin' streamer retrieve is barely equal to a slow hand-crank of a spinning road). And of course, absolutely for sure, if the water isn't 10 feet of gin-clear crystalline perfection, the fish CAN'T SEE THEM. Oh yeah, and never, never, never streamer fish in a tailwater. Ever. It's a wonder anyone even makes streamer lines. Who buys that stuff? Streamer lines are like those weird consumer products sold on late-night cable to old people, like the garden hose that straightens itself out.

Monger: You are right. But the fellow was talking about chasing bulls in SE B.C. Down in the canyon section the Elk has pools that must be 20 ft deep or more. I've stood on some of the cliffs and looked straight down, with no sign of the bottom, and these murky gray torpedo shapes doing lazy circles way down there somewhere. The 15" cutts swimming around above them look like minnows.

I use the Rio Outbound Short and love it for the type of streamer water I like to fish, which is usually not all that deep (banks, riffles and shallower runs rather than really deep holes). It does, as reputed, hurl streamers like there's no tomorrow. For deep water, a full sinking line or a long sink tip is the way to go. Not only do you get down faster and farther, but you avoid the tendency of a sink tip to form an angle in the water once it does finally get down (meaning you are usually pulling the streamer "up" through the water column, rather than along the bottom) the way a sculpin would swim. The deeper you need to get with a shorter sink tip or sinking leader, the steeper the angle to the floating section becomes, and adding heavier flies or split shot only increase that. So it depends on the type of water you want to fish. From the sounds of it, you want to get pretty deep.

I laughed about the sarcastic endorsement of Beaver Dam. I live near the Beaver Dam Golf Course around Madden, and my twice-weekly bike ride takes me across Beaver Dam creek as well as along it for a good stretch. Every ride, no matter the month, I look intently for rise forms. In hundreds of rides over 10 years I've seen one possible (not confirmed) rise. Lots of muskrats and waterfowl. Today, though, I just about fell off my bike when I saw an incredible rise form, that is to say, the gentlest dimple followed by large waves slapping both banks. I stopped to watch and, sure enough, there was a large to massive fish working. As in, an inch of dainty snout, then big ripples, then three seconds later a tail poking out two feet from where the snout had been. The fish moved around quite a bit and rose about eight times before I headed onward. I was just about jumping out of my shoes. It was well onto private land, though, and I was far from home with just my bike.

I didn't say I was annoyed by it. As I said, I wade more than I float. My point was, some wade fishermen's expectations seem to ebb and flow: if they're the only wade fisherman they expect half a mile of bank to themselves...if it's busy they're OK with 10 metres to the next wade angler...but either way, the boats had better steer clear. One of the reasons it works so well on the Missouri is that the wade fishermen don't expect more from the boats than from other waders, they expect the same thing: one casting radius. If there's a large feature with room for 8 occupied by 2, then it makes no difference whether two more wade fishermen wander in, or three driftboats pull in and each takes a piece. You see this daily on the Missouri. And in some areas where the boats tend to recirculate on the eddy and do repeated laps, the wade fishermen don't even go.

And there are plenty of waders who think that, because they're on foot, they've personally reserved half a mile of riverbank. Yet on busy evenings at Fish Creek Park they're happily lined up 10 metres apart...but the apocalypse befalls them if a boat approaches. When both banks are lined with anglers, the implication would seem to be that boats are required to float down the precise middle of the river, not fishing. I wade fish far more than I float, but sorry, the expectations of some wade fishermen are simply excessive.