Is It Time For A Serious Discussion About This Forum And Fishing Reports

[PGK]

.

[DaveJensen]

I love these threads. It needs jet boats.

The best hwy sign we've come across the past few years is appropriate in this thread.

Brag away!

[bigbowtrout]

Don't forget to blame Scammell, Thornberry, Hilborn,Bergman, and anybody else who wrote fishing articles. I mean, Damn, before these guys started writing, you could fill your freezer with fish, no problem.

 

No Smiley so as not to annoy Taco.

 

Mike

 

 

And we shouldn't leave Dave Jensen off that list

[bigbowtrout]

but hate FFC.

 

 

 

 

[Guest 420FLYFISHIN]

should also blame fly fusion and bow shuttles for putting photos in their mag and moving people from spot to spot lol

[trouthunter]

To change the topic for a second. What do people have to say about fishing shows on TV that are location specific? These programs seem quite popluar. Sometimes I wonder whether there's more people watching these shows than what there are reading forums.

[Guest 420FLYFISHIN]

i think your right on that one but of the total # watching how many of them have access ie. live in the area/able to drive there.

[Hawgstoppah]

For anyone who is against sharing info, how many people appreciate the times when Maxwell posts about the bow and what's working? He tells you what types of water the fish are moving into, and what flies they are having luck on. I bet HUNDREDS of people from here appreciate the hell out of those reports and use them to increase their chances of success on the Bow. When I used to run bowcrows website I ran daily reports on there too. Thousands of hits a month of the page for river conditions (updated daily). Helping people catch fish and enjoy the bow is what guys like max and I and others who guide do, we love the river and love to share info about it so that everyone can share the resource and have fun. I think that far outweighs any negative consequences of a few poachers or whatnot looking for fish too. I can understand the "sensitive" fisheries being kept nameless though. Just my 2 cents.

[gentlemang]

For what it is worth. I am a newbie. I joined this forum specifically to learn more about fly fishing in southern Alberta. I agree that giving away spots is not appropriate, however I do appreciate that some of the members post what flies are working. The comment about buying a book, ok, I bought a book, several in fact. The book helps but I also like to know from the members what flies they are using, how to rig them and when. When in fishing season, I look at the reports often, not to find the hot spots, but to learn about the hatches, flies and techniques. I prefer to do my own exploring for spots, it is more fun that way.

The one thing that I do find aggravating about this site is the need of some members to constantly attack others. If I wanted to see drama, I would watch a realtyTV show.

I thank the memebers that post information about how to and what to use, during x water conditions. This is the reason that I am on this site.

I have read Rickr's nymphing primer a few times, and find it very helpful. This is the type of information that I would like to see more of.

One opinion. Thanks

Greg

[lamponius]

I am sorry, but when a spot is revealed, and thousands of people go for it (yet to prove...), that means LESS people elsewhere...Anglers cannot be everywhere at the same time.

My point is, that for example Mitchell gives so many "secret" spots, that you do not know where to go...Too many options...

 

I agree that if you have a lot of "secret" spots, you dont care if one is given away in a report. You just go to another one. Or you try to find a new one (for you at least).

If you have olny one, obviously you get pissed off...

[SKIDBITCH]

I have a secret spot too... 50.821252,-113.781580

 

And I bet dollars to doughnuts, on April fools day 75% of you will be there.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong... Maybe it's not a secret...

[billie]

For what it is worth. I am a newbie. I joined this forum specifically to learn more about fly fishing in southern Alberta.....

 

 

FWIW, same here, I'm a lurker and a leach, to use the references here. I don't post much but I definitely absorb and try to use the info offered.

 

If someone posts "Go down road X, take trail X until you see a pool in the creek with an overhanging popular, drop a clouser behind the big rock at the far side to catch a 36" bull" I would have ZERO interest (too crowded, J/K). That is not why I'm here.

 

I have no interest in infringing on other's spots but by the same token, I also understand that I will be fishing in the company of others wherever I go. I am a newbie like Don and no matter where I go, experienced fishermen will have been there before me. I also may be in someone's honey hole.

 

I am taking up fishing because I did not have the luxury of time and resources to do it earlier. I grew up fishing as a kid and now live close to one of the best river fisheries in the world (the Bow) and as I look at my latter years (I moved to AB in '77), I feel its time to re-kindle my love of fishing and take advantage of what's offered. When in Rome....

 

I understand the skepticism of some, and also acknowledge that there will be people that abuse the information offered on a public forum. I'm here to collect insight then venture out and try to duplicate what should work. My success to date is marginal at best but I'm pretty proud of my 19 AND A HALF INCH brown last year; my goal was a 20", DAMNIT!!. Point is that there are a myriad of sutle variations of presentation that DO make a difference. I'm trying to learn that and enjoying the journey on it's merits:).

 

I can't afford to spend years and dollars travelling and learning what many of you collected over your lifetimes. I appreciate what is available on the 'net, try to repect the information in the spirit it is offered, and hope to meet some of you in the field one day. I assure you, I will say hello. My home turf is Mac to Jansen's in a white Seamax with swivel seats, say hello if you're so inclined:).

 

Cheers and thanks (seriously).

[ruffsranger]

For anyone who is against sharing info, how many people appreciate the times when Maxwell posts about the bow and what's working? He tells you what types of water the fish are moving into, and what flies they are having luck on. I bet HUNDREDS of people from here appreciate the hell out of those reports and use them to increase their chances of success on the Bow. When I used to run bowcrows website I ran daily reports on there too. Thousands of hits a month of the page for river conditions (updated daily). Helping people catch fish and enjoy the bow is what guys like max and I and others who guide do, we love the river and love to share info about it so that everyone can share the resource and have fun. I think that far outweighs any negative consequences of a few poachers or whatnot looking for fish too. I can understand the "sensitive" fisheries being kept nameless though. Just my 2 cents.

 

 

 

 

Excellent post Hawgstoppah!

I agree 100%.

[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

[SanJuanWorm]

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

 

For me personally, i'd let the issue die and carry on. As far as FFC is concerned I can't comment. It'll have to be put to vote. I can only respond to PM's as far as moderating is concerned as we're down a moderator as of late.

[Smitty]

For me personally, i'd let the issue die and carry on. As far as FFC is concerned I can't comment. It'll have to be put to vote. I can only respond to PM's as far as moderating is concerned as we're down a moderator as of late.

 

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

 

 

[SanJuanWorm]

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

 

Let me know some of your hot spots north of 11 please.

[Smitty]

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

[SilverDoctor]

In the end, no matter what I see from some of the so called "reports" here, a small percentage of fly fisherman catch the largest percentage of the fish, why? because they take the time to get to know the water. As said a few guides and fishermen here give wonderful accurate reports on conditions. But, Just because a spot is pointed out the likelihood of a novice being highly successful is low. Certainly there are exceptional days but I often see reports here that wildly contradict what is actually happening on the water as far as insect life, water conditions and size of catch. people like to boast and stretch it a bit.

 

Fly fishing is getting to know the water, insect life, cycles and seasonal conditions and using that information gathered to present a representation of what the food source is at the given time. In my mind it isn't using a bobber and wire worm, if that is your boast to being a fly fisherman, I believe you're missing the mark. Just my 2 cents.

[Gaffer]

In the end, no matter what I see from some of the so called "reports" here, a small percentage of fly fisherman catch the largest percentage of the fish, why? because they take the time to get to know the water. As said a few guides and fishermen here give wonderful accurate reports on conditions. But, Just because a spot is pointed out the likelihood of a novice being highly successful is low. Certainly there are exceptional days but I often see reports here that wildly contradict what is actually happening on the water as far as insect life, water conditions and size of catch. people like to boast and stretch it a bit.

 

Fly fishing is getting to know the water, insect life, cycles and seasonal conditions and using that information gathered to present a representation of what the food source is at the given time. In my mind it isn't using a bobber and wire worm, if that is your boast to being a fly fisherman, I believe you're missing the mark. Just my 2 cents.

 

Lornce,

 

I could have not said it any better. End of discussion.

 

Andrew

[Guest NamasteMushroom]

Fly fishing is getting to know the water, insect life, cycles and seasonal conditions and using that information gathered to present a representation of what the food source is at the given time. In my mind it isn't using a bobber and wire worm, if that is your boast to being a fly fisherman, I believe you're missing the mark. Just my 2 cents.

 

100%

 

Most of my fishing memories are about exploration and discovery. I actually feel sorry for anglers who miss that part of the sport. That said - it's never too late.

[Guest NamasteMushroom]

 

 

Difference? Nothing. I like a good flick as much as the next guy but it's the gang banger hardcore number stacker mentality that's killing fishing. Hotspotting is just a byproduct of the explosion in that type of mentality and it can be traced directly back to west coast ski/snowboard culture. I miss the old days when the guys I ran into on the river had a bag of smoked whitefish and not a bag of weed.

 

I remember the good old days, when CPs pre-Gifford was the only shop in town. Back then, that place did more hot spotting and exploitation than any of the new guys. The internet changed things as well no doubt, but McLennan, Cahoon, Jennings etc. did the major hot-spotting of the lower toilet bowl, and the mountain streams (geez, in 2002 or 3 or 4? Jim wrote an article in Fly Fisherman about the Oldman....well past the advent of the Internet, and the article was available online).

 

My guess is PGK, judging by your comments you're a part of that crew, the old Bow guides; self-professed experts whose entire existence and vanity comes from the good old days and their 'skills' guiding a river full of effluent. It really is funny. I’d also venture a guess that you can't get any work guiding anymore because of your attitude, bad temper, and the fact that the new guys (and some of us old guys) are better than you.

 

You really need to smoke a joint.

 

 

 

 

[Smitty]

Lornce,

 

I could have not said it any better. End of discussion.

 

Andrew

 

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

[kentan]

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

 

your second last paragraph just sums it up!

[ironfly]

For me, it comes down to overall ethics and philosopy. If you want to be percieved as elitist, go ahead and keep your secrets. Not too many of us have the freedom and spare cash to go exploring enough to have any degree of success discovering our own repetiore of decent fishing spots. I know, because before I had marriage/mortage/children constraints I did find my share of dead ends, marginal fisheries, and wild goose chases.

 

I really don't think poachers are looking to exert much effort. Those that live in Calgary will poach the Bow. Those that are poaching the East Slopes come in 2 types- locals, and those that are paid to be there. I highly doubt either of those groups pay the slightest attention to this website, and if they do, they probably laugh at what we don't know. They don't care what flies are working, because they're generally using bait. I doubt they care much about locations, because they know a heck of a lot more about that than most of us.

 

Lastly, I'd like to reiterate the point that 99% of all fishers were MENTORED into the sport.