Have you ever forgotten your waders? Part II

Though my fishing trip (fortunately it was only going to be a half-day trip) ended as soon as I found out that I had forgotten my waders, I quickly developed a "Plan B".  I always have a small waterproof camera in my vest, but I realized that I also had one of my "pretty decent" cameras in the glove box. It's not a dSLR, but a high-performance compact camera I would happy to be my sole camera on vacation.

So, not wanting to go home right away, I decided I would enjoy a couple of hours along the river taking photos.  If I couldn't capture any fish, perhaps I could catch a "keeper" of a photo!

A beautiful building in Millers Falls.  It was completely vacant.

I found myself spending more time looking at the old mills and bridges than ever before. At this point today's post might be a bit OT (off topic) as mill town architecture and fly fishing don't exactly fit together.  But both deal with the life of the river.



Before the mills and dams, the Millers was filled with Atlantic salmon during their spawning runs.  The salmon would swim upstream from the Atlantic Ocean into the Connecticut River, which travels north through Connecticut, bisecting Massachusetts and then becoming the border between Vermont and New Hampshire.  Its flow starts in northern New Hampshire, in what are called the Connecticut Lakes.  The Millers River and the Deerfield River are the two biggest tributaries in Massachusetts.

The history here along the Millers is old and the towns were once filled with the economy of the paper mills and tanneries.  The water was polluted then, of course, just as it was in other areas of the country where raw waste was dumped into the river.  The water is "clean" now, but PCBs still exist in the bottom sediment.  Though the fish seem healthy, it is not wise to eat them as PCBs work their way up the food chain.

The three photos below were taken in Orange, MA.

I have caught every species of warm water fish imaginable below the dam to the left.  The trout fishery is quite a bit downstream (and also far upstream) from here.

Viewing upstream toward the dam.  (For those into photography, I took three identical photos at different exposures and combined them in photoshop to get this image, as I wanted a reasonable exposure of the dark buildings without overexposing the beautiful blue sky and puffy clouds.)

Have you ever forgotten your waders? Part I

After my day of panfishing earlier this week (see the previous blog post) I decided today was the day to get out to the Millers River to find a few rainbows.  As usual, I packed the car and then ran through my mental checklist, starting with my feet and working up my body.  Here's how the routine checklist goes: boots, socks, waders, wader belt with wading stiff attached, fishing shirt, vest, raincoat, sunglasses, hat with flip-down focals.  I also have a bag with an extra set of clothes. 

I can't believe I mentally checked off "waders" and merrily drove off for the one hour trip to the river.

The only problem was that my waders were hanging in the garage where I'd left them to dry after the last trip.  And there was no way I was going to wet-wade with nylon cargo pants and Teva sandals. My trip ended as soon as I arrived.

So, am I the only idiot out there?  I hope others have done this.  Or, something similar.

I actually forgave myself fairly quickly because this sort of thing (for me) is bound to happen.  It seems I do something like this every five years or so. 

The last time it was my fishing reel.  But my friend Paul always has extras of everything in his car (he drove) and he came to the rescue with a reel and spool of the exact line weight to match my rod.

The time before that I left my boots at home. That was maybe 10 years ago.  But that trip was saved by a pair of sneakers in the back of my van.

Tomorrow is Fathers Day.  Perhaps it will be easy for me to get to the river.  The van is packed (I didn't take anything out of it) and my waders are in a pile by the front door with my keys on top of them... but I think I will put them in the van as soon as I hit the "publish" button on this post, just to be safe.

First day of panfishing this seasn felt a bit weird... plus a few pictures

I spent Thursday morning fishing one of my favorite ponds for sunfish and bass.  Though it is usually during the last two weeks of June that I get in my first day of float-tubing for panfish, this year nevertheless felt a bit weird. 

That's because by now I typically have logged in multiple days of trout fishing on at least two of my favorite trout rivers.  High water is periodically a problem on rivers and streams, and this year was no exception.  Not only does high water make wading difficult, but it interferes with the stocking program. 

It also seemed that whenever I had time to fish, there were threats of thunderstorms (not my favorite thing), torrential rains, or tornado warnings. (You may have heard about the record-breaking tornadoes we had in Massachusetts, in May.)

Then, when the fishing looked good I had family commitments and then a long weekend at a college reunion (I'm not complaining about the family commitments and the reunion... they were far more important than fishing!). 

The bottom line:  I haven't been out much this year.  So, fishing today made me feel that I've missed a big part of the season.  Well.... that's life.

Below are a few images:

This is the first bluegill of the year.  A real 8.5" beauty.

Above is my first sunfish of the year.  A real beauty 8.5 inches long.  I measured every large and every small fish I caught, which I do from time to time to get a sense of the fishery.  I caught about 50 sunfish though I only found them in bunches along two 30-foot sections of the shoreline.  The circumference of the pond is about one mile.  Anyway, the smallest was 8" and the largest (pictured below) was 9.5".  This is typical.  If I didn't know any better I would say sunfish are born 8" long!  I wish I knew the biology of this.  Where are the small fish?  I can only speculate that the large ones are more aggressive, or that the small ones are taught to wait in line (LOL).  Perhaps it is because I use big flies, the one used today being 1.5" long on a size 8 hook.

This was the largest, at 9.5"



Nearly void of color.  Post spawn?

The fly of the day was a brown Conehead Combo on a size 6, 2xl hook.
Here's the recipe: http://www.fishingwithflies.com/MyFavoriteFliesTheConeheadCombo.htm

Held in water, you can see how nicely soft hackles like mallard and marabou display themselves.  I used three of these. The first two remain in submerged logs.

 

I also catch the occasional bass.  Just two today.  Now, if I were willing to fish with spinning gear and shiners I would have a ton of big bass to show you!  But I will leave that kind of fishing to others.

Are flies still packaged this way?

My dad found this Grey Ghost from LL Bean in his stuff the other day.  He doesn't know where it came from.  He doesn't (nor did he) fish, so its a quandary.  But I love the old packaging and can't remember the last time I saw a streamer packaged this way. 

It seems that all the shops I visit now have the little wooden bins all set out in a grid. On the other hand, I don't buy flies, so maybe in some shops (even LL Bean?) they still come packaged up like this. 



Switching to simple flies: The "One Feather Fly"

Over the years I have switched more and more to simple flies. It gives me a thrill to catch fish on a fly that is made with just one or a few simple and easy-to-find materials. To be sure, if I felt that such flies compromised my fishing success I would not use them. But I am convinced that most of the time the fly chosen makes very little difference.  As long as it is presented effectively (eg. action, depth, speed) by the flyfisher, I believe that most of the time the fly chosen is perhaps only 10% of the success equation. I say "most of the time"; there are of course times when the fish are very selective and fly selection is correspondingly more important. Such selectivity is experienced when "fishing the hatch".

But most of the time I would say that the fisherman's skill is 80% of the formula, the equipment is 10% and the fly is the final 10%. The fly is just part of the "tool kit". It is up to the fisherman to know how to present the fly and "work it".

This is why over the years I have worked to reduce the number of flies I carry (though I always have a few "experimentals" along). Instead I am concentrating on a smaller selection of flies. By doing this I have become more confident in the flies I am fishing.

A couple of the the subsurface flies I have concentrated on in recent years are the Conehead Combo (clickable for recipe and pictures) which I now carry only in olive and only in two sizes, and the Hare and Herl Bugger (clickable for recipe and pictures) which I carry weighted with 10 wraps of lead and in only one hook size.

There are two other simple subsurface flies that I have enjoyed fishing that I have not yet reported on. The first one is tied with just one feather. The second pattern requires two feathers. 

I plan to follow up this post first with step-by-step instructions and photos for the "One Feather Fly". But until I do, pictured below are the simple materials required: 5/32" beadhead, sizes 8 Tiemco 1xl hook, and one rump feather from a ring neck pheasant.

If you had to tie a fly with only these materials, what would it look like?



Directions for the One Feather Fly

How to follow water-flow information on your favorite rivers

Here in southern New England we have been deluged with rain over the past week.  At times like this I find it important to study water flow information from the federal government's Web site before heading out.  Below, for example, is the current status of the Millers River in Erving, MA.  I fished it last Friday (May 13) when it was below my self-imposed threshhold of 500 cfs (cubic feet per second).  As you can see, today, a week later things are quite different, with water flow at about 1,500 cfs.  That's unfishable.

If you'd like to find out how your river is doing, just go to http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/rt.

rt= real time data.  You will get on your monitor a page that looks like the image below.  It's fun to see what other parts of the country are doing.  New England is wet (blue and black dots), and across the south things look below normal (red dots).

(Note: The image below is a screenshot and is not active.  It is not click-able.)

Once you get this page up on your computer using the link above, just click on your state to get to your state-specific page. You'll be able to negotiate your way from there.  Each dot is a different river location. 



The Waterproof Store offers fishingwithfliesblog.com readers 10% discount

After my post earlier this week about the leakproof bags I bought from The Waterproof Store a while back, I received an email from Mike in their customer service department offering a 10% discount to readers who order using the code rg419. Probably "rg" refers to Rock Gear, as The Waterproof Store is a division of Rock Gear, Inc.

At any rate the coupon code can be used at any time (and as often as you want) up through August 31, 2011. Check out their Web site. They have much more than just leakproof zip lock bags.

Again, I have no financial connection... other than that I, too, can get the 10% discount !!

Happy shopping.

A good online source for leakproof, clear-plastic zip bags

I always have a water-resistant camera with me when fishing, to record the day or perhaps even get a good picture or two. However, most people leave their cell phones and cameras in the car to avoid getting them wet.  That's a good idea.  But there are times when it would be nice to have these devices with you.

A couple of years ago I found  relatively inexpensive and heavy-duty leak proof zip lock bags at a Web site called http://www.thewaterproofstore.com/.

I bought a multi-pack selection of four Aloksak bags (direct link: http://www.thewaterproofstore.com/aloksakmulti.html) for under $12, the largest of which is 12" x 12". The store has quite a few other nice products as well.  I have no connection with the company.

The image below shows my old Panasonic ultrazoom camera, a small Canon not-waterproof point and shoot camera, and my old and still-in-use cell phone.  The fourth bag in the kit has gone missing *LOL*.

I bought a few more multi-packs last December.  They make great gifts for your fishing buddies, or perhaps stocking stuffers for outdoorsmen/women in your family.



I thought my flyfishing camera was broken, and why 3 megapixels is enough

The Souhegan River on Friday

On Friday I took my first outing of the season. (Yes, I did catch trout: two rather blah looking stocked rainbows, about 9 and 12 inches.)

But before starting out I had to get my gear together, never an easy task when it's your first time fishing in 6 or 7 months. Fortunately I keep (nearly) all of my gear in one huge duffel bag. Nevertheless I dumped everything and spread it out on a bed.

Like many others I am sure, the next step in getting organized is to go through a mental checklist of everything needed for a day on the water. I always start with my feet and work my way up my body. Boot, yes. Socks, yes. Long underwear, yes. Neoprene waders, yes. Wading belt (with staff attached), yes.... etc. When I get the vest, I look in each pocket to be sure everything is there. These pockets are filled with the same stuff for each outing whether it be for smallmouth bass or trout, so I have a high likelihood of having everything I need. The only exception is my old 3.2 megapixel Pentax digital water resistant camera... it needs two fresh AA batteries from time to time.

Well, I took two AA's out of my desk drawer. I knew they were new, as I had just bought a 20-pack at Staples. But, when I plunked the batteries correctly into the camera and I turned it on, nothing happened. My heart sank. I opened the battery compartment and reinserted the batteries in exactly the same manner. Thankfully, this time it lit up and made a couple of "I'm ready" beeps.

I realized how old this camera is when I went into the menu to input the correct date and time, and saw the date choices starting with the year 2003! And of course a 1.5" screen and "only" 3.2 megapixels also suggests its old age (for a digital camera).

About megapixels: Almost always 3 MEGAPIXELS IS ENOUGH.

Let me explain. Ninety-nine percent of all point and shoot cameras have a sensor about 4.5mm x 6mm in size. The sensor is the digital equivalent of film. It collects the light that enters the camera body through the lens. The light is channeled onto a honeycomb of pixels (except pixels are generally square and not hexagonal) that cover the surface of the sensor, and from there software uses the information collected in each pixel to create the image. This camera has a grid of pixels that measure 2048x1536 pixels = 3,145,728 pixels = 3.2 million pixels = 3.2 megapixels.

So, how many pixels do you need? Well, the marketing departments of the camera companies seem to think that answer is about 12-16 megapixels. But that's too many. Here' why.

For viewing images on your high def television (1920 x 1080 pixels) or 24" computer monitor (mine has a resolution of 1800 x 1200), 2 megapixels is enough. Just multiply those numbers and you will find that the area is about 2 million pixels.  If your original image has more than that, it has to be downsized to fit. With a 12mp image, for example, software will squish 6 pixels into 1 pixel (in other words 12mp squeezed into 2).

Here's another example. The pictures on this blog must fit into a box that measures 650 x 650 pixels. That is approximately 4/10th of 1mp! Again, any image bigger than that has to be downsized.

But what about prints? Anywhere between 200 and 300 dots per inch looks great. At 200 dots per inch an image of 2048 x 1536 will make an excellent 10" x7.5" print. The image below was made into a 9" x 12" print and submitted into my photo club's monthly competition.  The print was sharp and full of color.  The judge liked especially the orange reflection in the water. The fact that it scored a reasonable but not great 26 out of a possible 30 points had nothing to do with the camera.

Many experts believe that optimal for these small sensors is 6mp. Why not more? Because as you cram in more pixels they each must get smaller. And this makes collecting light more difficult. Technological advances have helped, but the result of cramming in so many pixels is that taking pictures in low light conditions becomes difficult and the result is grainy looking images. The image quality on many older cameras with fewer megapixels is better than the image quality on many newer cameras with more megapixels. Unfortunately, the older cameras lack many of the cool features we find on the newest models; such as, image stabilization, 3" monitors, better handling, GPS, high def video, and speedy performance.

On the other hand, if you make prints bigger than 12"x9" then more pixels will help.

A tip for collecting your tying trash

Rather than discarding an empty tissue box, try using it as a scrap receptacle.  The tissue boxes with the clear plastic covering the hole works great.  It is easy to push in your trash, and the plastic essentially traps little feathers tips and butts and fluff from escaping. 

This old tissue box has been on the side of my desk for years. When (if?) it gets full I'll just replace it with another.