bulltrout Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 we all go to great lengths at some point in time to keep from spooking fish with a presentation...whether it be using fluorocarbon tippets, miniscule flies, realistic patterns, etc...the question i have is in regards to flies...in realistic flies, there are the exact number of wingcases, legs, tails, etc. (most people try to explain to me how picky fish only eat exact imitations)...now with that in mind, how does the fish NOT see that chunk of metal sticking out the ass of the fly and how does that not spook the fish??? there's my stupid question of the month... Quote
ladystrange Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 only moments ago i was watching my DVD "tying copper johns with john barr" as i was tying my midge and they put one in the float tank. the video did a close up shot from under the water and oddly, i thought to myself.... self... how come the big piece of metal coming out of the 'bugs' butt doesnt deter the fish?!?!? they must see it. frankly, it would scare me. strange, really. Quote
toolman Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 They see it, as the trout see all in their world, including the fisherman, but ignore the hook if the fly has enough of the key features they are looking for that day, such as profile, size, color, motion or combinations of all of these things etc. But, the most important feature of a good fly, is how it is presented to the trout. We can purchase realistic immitations of any insect that the trout may be feeding on, but when it comes to the business of making perfectly natural presentations, that we can not buy. Quote
Guest bigbadbrent Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 Its the Urinal Cake theory.. http://www.sexyloops.com/articles/urinalcaketheory.shtml Quote
SteveM Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 Its the Urinal Cake theory.. http://www.sexyloops.com/articles/urinalcaketheory.shtml Thanks, Brent; great article. Quote
regdunlop Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 Anyone have a good urinal cake fly recipe? Great article. Thanks Brent. Quote
reevesr1 Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 I liked the Urinal Cake Theory. Here is a related human equivalent. There was a study about performed where people were asked to count cards as they were shown face up. There were 53 cards in the deck, one of them was a queen of diamonds, but black instead of red(it may have been another card, but whatever the case, the suit did not match the color). I don't remember the numbers, but the vast majority of the people would ignore the card and not count it. So when they finished the deck, they had counted 52. In other words, since their mind did not expect a black queen of diamonds, the mind ignored it. Cool, huh? Once the recipients were shown the card after, they would count it on the next go around. Must be the same thing with fish. They don't expect a hook to be hanging from a bug, so they ignore it. They probably don't really even "see" it. There was a book I read one time that talked a bit about the same thing. If a technology is too advanced for the mind to grasp, the mind ignores it because it can't make sense of it. So if a human mind can be tricked, what chance does a poor fish have. Quote
wongrs Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 here's two more theories (i haven't read the urinal cake theory just yet): theory 1 - fish eat nymphs even though they may be attached to things in the drift (algae, leaves, tree bark etc). they eat the whole thing and expel the debris. they might be thinking they can expel the debris the nymph is attached to. theory 2 - if your nymphs are on bottom and the fish is not, then the fish is looking down at the nymph. the hook may be hiding underneath the body of the nymph if the nymph is in the flow as it is on your vise. naturally this is less of a factor for stillwater. Quote
Guest bigbadbrent Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 If you're a guy..im sure a Nipple ring won't persaude you from 'taking' the nymph Quote
TerryH Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 ......... So if a human mind can be tricked, what chance does a poor fish have. Actually, both my life experience and my fishing experience lead me to believe it's the other way round. If a fish mind can be tricked, what chance does a poor human have? Terry Quote
reevesr1 Posted January 7, 2008 Posted January 7, 2008 Actually, both my life experience and my fishing experience lead me to believe it's the other way round. If a fish mind can be tricked, what chance does a poor human have? Terry Too true. Quote
SanJuanWorm Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 Andy, To put it to you another way. Picture yourself in a bar drunk as hell and its 1:50 am and 10 minutes to close. You'll take anything at that point. Quote
bulltrout Posted January 9, 2008 Author Posted January 9, 2008 Andy, To put it to you another way. Picture yourself in a bar drunk as hell and its 1:50 am and 10 minutes to close. You'll take anything at that point. maybe in your case dave as i would already have eaten by 9... Quote
bulltrout Posted January 9, 2008 Author Posted January 9, 2008 the main point i had to get across with this question is why do we put emphasis on replicating the original (three tails on a mayfly or underwings on hoppers)?...if, according to the urinal theory, something comes across as looking like food, then it gets eaten...so why get precise on patterns if imitative patterns that represent the prevailing food item will work just as well...i don't think that fish count tails or wingcases as is demonstrated when they take a pattern that has a hook sticking out of it...hope that makes more sense...i'm not one for precise replicative fly patterns...to me they are meant to catch fishermen and not fish... Quote
reevesr1 Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 In saltwater, I catch fish using a 4" hard plastic bait. One of my favorites is pink/yellow with gold flash. Doesn't look like anything that is, or ever has been, alive. It also has 3 treble hooks sticking out of it. #2s. I've casted it into schools of fish that were feeding on shrimp so hard that the shrimp were jumping out of the water to flee. Unfortunately for the shrimp, the were fleeing right into the kill zone of waiting sea gulls. Anyway, you could throw the most realistic shrimp pattern you wanted and maybe hook a fish. Chunk that mirrolure in there and the strike was instantaneous. Also lots of soft plastics work, but mostly in colors that just do not appear in nature. My bet is a properly presented streamer would be deadly. But it would have lots of pretty colors. My point is that in saltwater, directly representing a food item rarely works as well as an impressionistic approach. I know that does not directly correlate to fresh water, but it has to mean something. Quote
reevesr1 Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Buzzbomb. Whats up with that? Different world my man! And it's called a Mirrolure. On a river fly fishing is very effective, at least for trout. On a bay/surf you gotta WANT it to fish with a fly rod! Quote
birchy Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 the main point i had to get across with this question is why do we put emphasis on replicating the original (three tails on a mayfly or underwings on hoppers)?...if, according to the urinal theory, something comes across as looking like food, then it gets eaten...so why get precise on patterns if imitative patterns that represent the prevailing food item will work just as well...i don't think that fish count tails or wingcases as is demonstrated when they take a pattern that has a hook sticking out of it...hope that makes more sense...i'm not one for precise replicative fly patterns...to me they are meant to catch fishermen and not fish... Fly Tying is an art. Replicating the originals is for "show flies" and probably more to test your skills than anything else. The fugly lookin flies are for catching fish. Quote
reevesr1 Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Buzzbomb. Whats up with that? Hey Hydro, After thinking about this, it did get me to wondering. A buzzbomb, like the mirrolures I used to use, don't represent anything really. I guess some would say a buzzbomb represents a juvenile fish or big ass minnow. Not really though.I think it, like some of the bigger saltwater baits, is trying to draw reaction strikes? Or "I don't know what it is, so I'll eat it" strikes. Are there any smaller "fly" equivalents? I'm sure there have to be fly equivalents. Flies that don't look like anything at all but seem to work? Quote
bulltrout Posted January 10, 2008 Author Posted January 10, 2008 how is your tying coming along? who's that directed to?...if it's for me, i've reached my quota and then some... Quote
birchy Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 how is your tying coming along? PM sent. Quote
ladystrange Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 who's that directed to?...if it's for me, i've reached my quota and then some... birchy, but you can tie some for me if your boxes are full. i still have some room Quote
lonefisher Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 well I figure this is a question with a few answers...... I think its possible that the Hook generally being a reflective silver colour will reflect many of the colours in its surrondings. This to a certain extent could make the hook harder to see. It could also be related to the right shape, right place, right time where they just hit something that seems to be similar to the naturals they are feeding on. In some ways that hook, or things that make our flys look different could actually be getting them noticed....... Its something to do with the predator prey relationships.... In some cases there is safety in numbers and a safety in not standing out or being different from the rest. Its a theory that predators will sometimes attack individuals that in some way stand out from the group. I have heard this theory more in regards to saltwater fishing which I will now explain. Your a shark or some fish that feeds on smaller fish...... you are cruising around and find a school of some baitfish. The first thing the baitfish will do is go into their defensive position which is they all school together really tight. http://www.borneo.com.au/images/divefish/reeffish3.jpg As a predator you are now looking for the weakness's here the fish that fall out of place, leave the school, can't keep up ect. A fishermans lure will never copy the uniform precise movements that these schooling fish make which is likely why they catch fish. If you toss a your lure into a school of fish or shrimp it will simply pass through the school of baitfish and emerge from the school into the danger zone where the predators are. Once the predators who are intent on the attack see an individual leave the group or outside the group, or simply behaving differently they will attack it sometimes even if does not resemble the members of the school. This is an example of how acting different can get you noticed. Of course one could draw parallels to certain situations in freshwater. In some instances the predator fish may even single out certain fish that are noticably different then the rest of the group, say an odd colouring, parasitic orange spot in scuds and shrimp ect. Sometimes in the face of a lot of food a predator will be in some ways overwhelmed by all the same individuals so they attack the ones that look a bit different. I figure that having an individual that stands out allows them to better focus their attack. I think the best example of this is when you catch a lot more fish on scuds or shrimp with the orange hot spot...... I would imagine the majority of the scuds do not have this but sometimes you can have major action on the hotspot and nothing on the regular.This could be an example of how looking different gets you noticed. I can't really say for sure how this all relates in regards to fly fishing but I think in ways it does. Especially in situations where the fish is facing a lot of prey food rather then a lack of it. Anyways I'm done my BSing...... as long as they kep catching fish who cares about the hook. Quote
hydropsyche Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Are there any smaller "fly" equivalents? I'm sure there have to be fly equivalents. Flies that don't look like anything at all but seem to work? Buzzbombs send out vibrations that must really tease fish's lateral lines but I used to catch fish almost dead drifting them. If fish are able to count the number to tails on nymph, you'd think they can tell that hunk of lead isn't edible I can't think of anything fly fishers use that at least looks like something, however remote. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.