Nymphing for steelhead

[Flycanoe]

I read a post on the general forum about nymphing for steelhead. Would like to hear more details about how that is done.

So far, I've just been swinging using a sinktip. This type of setup is easy to cast and allows you to cover a lot of water.

But I learned a deep nymphing technique for the lower Sac last June that worked great for the wild rainbows there and seems like it would also work for steelhead as well.

It consisted of using a strike indicator with a post. The leader below the indicator is straight mono, not tapered with shot about 1-2ft above a weighted fly. This setup allows the fly to sink quickly and the post gives you an indication of how vertical your leader is as it goes through the run. But this setup is a pain to cast so is used more for drifting in a boat.

Thinking of giving this setup a try while wading, but would like to hear how others nymph deep for steelhead from the shore.

[Adam Grace]

A lot of people fish that same setup from the bank, but they have to get used to casting that rig.

[sculpin]

That rig will catch lotsa fish. It works best from the bank with a 10' rod and a Rio Atlantic Salmon/Steelhead taper.

Mark

[A Matthews]

What is a post? I use a rig like that a lot for steelhead in winter....Works great.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

Indicator nymphing works better than swinging flies when:

The water is very cold (under 50 degrees).

When fish are 'stale' because they have been in the river a long time.

When you have mostly hatchery fish.

When fish have been 'pounded'.

When the sun is on the water.

When salmon are spawning in the river.

Most of the time, generally.

__________________________________________________ _________

I believe that swinging flies/classic Steelheading is on a big comeback mostly because of the popularity of Spey casting.

__________________________________________________ _________

For swinging flies to be effective you need:

More Wild Steelhead,

Sun off the water.

Water over 50 degrees.

No salmon spawning in the river.

Fresh run of fish, but not always.

Fish that have not been pounded.

A little luck.

__________________________________________________ ____


Catching a lot of Steelhead is not necessary to have a good day of Steelheading.

This is just general info that can be disputed by anyone who thinks he is a Steelheader.

[dtp916]

I'd nymph for steelies with an indicator and a caddis pupa and egg dropper on the American. I'd probably switch to a stone nymph if it was the Trinity, but egg as the trailer.

Level mono/flouro just gets down quicker. If you think about it, you don't really need a tapered leader for nymphing...But hey, I do it. Czech nymphing and tight line nymphing are best with straight mono or flour leaders.

I think you will catch a lot more fish using an indicator - its cheating :lol:

[MrBig]

I don't mean to ramble off topic but...I have fished the Trinity a lot in the last year. I rarely see anyone swinging, which I find strange. I swing soft hackles and a few other flies there more than nymphing/dries. ???

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

The middle Rogue River in October and the upper Trinity River in November are usually full of fish now but the big problem with both is the water is usually around 50 degrees which makes indicator nymphing a fare better method than swinging flies.

Salmon spawning too.

Lots of "pounding" too.

__________________________________________________ ___________

Klamath River in Sept/Oct is warmer so swing flies early and late on the top with low light works very well. We are headed there soon.

__________________________________________________ __________

I promote classic Steelheading but you have to do it when it is most effective.

__________________________________________________ ______

You can swing flies in Sept/Oct on the lower American river. April/May can be good too without flooding.

__________________________________________________ ________

Lower Trinity River in Sept/Oct is a time and place you can swing flies.

__________________________________________________ __________

Deschutes River in Sept/Oct is a good time and place to swing flies.

__________________________________________________ _________

Grand Ronde in October is a great situation.

__________________________________________________ __________

Not saying you can't swing flies for Steelhead all the time but try to go when your odds are better, especially if you are in the newbie situation.

__________________________________________________ ________

I'm so spoiled at my age I always fish a floating line and swing flies in the surface now. I'm not even really interested in fishing sinktips in cold water either. If I hook a fish once and a while on top I am in heaven. I like that type of fly casting without a bunch of junk on my line.

[Flycanoe]

What is a post?

This is the type of indicator with a post I was talking about.

http://store.theflyshop.com/catalog/images/acbfrs.gif

Thanks for all the replies, very helpful to understand when it is most favorable to use each technique.

Sounds like for the lower American, nymphing is the way to go most of the time.

[jbird]

Bill

I like the way you broke down time/temp= technique. You are spot on. You have to match your technique to the fishs' motabolism. Being cold blooded, they are totally at the mercy of the conditions. Not only does it dictate the technique that is most effective, but also the type of water to target. I cant say that I have noticed a lopsided number of hatchery or native fish liking one technique over the other.

one of the cool things about nymphing is, you typically have a lot of loose line laying around you in the water. When that big steelhead grabs and goes, the situation becomes critical instantly. Anything and everything can happen to that loose line as it clears in a second or two. One of the many memmorable ones was a huge loop of line arched up in the air and straight over my head and around the back of my neck :shock: ...it was a salmon if i recall it right. I had to run after the fish with my head bowed to it and thankfully the loop slid off of my head :D Fun stuff!

Jay

[bigtj]

The upper trinity lends itself to indicator fishing because it's tight and narrow. The middle & lower river (N. Fork down esp. around Hoopa) has a combination of water that eventually lends itself more to swinging. Herb Burton's shop doesn't even guide indicator trips and they do just fine. I will say this...the trinity was fished with the swing over 100 years before the first indicator set-up was tried and in that time plenty of fish were caught. That being said, my best all-time day #'s wise of steelhead fishing was on the Trinity indicator fishing, from shore. It was obscene, almost too easy. So anyway it is deadly effective.

Indicator fishing for steelhead is a blast. Not much different from trout fishing really. In fact the best steelhead fishermen I know learned the craft fishing for trout. Fishing from shore it's essential to pick your water carefully. If you can't get a good drift in it, you're wasting your time. It's all about getting a perfect drift. Getting the right drift at the right depth is much more important than the type of fly you are using.

Jay the only caveat I would make to your statement is that some races of fish are more aggressive than others. For example, in BC the steelhead can be really aggressive at 45 degrees because they are used to colder temps. Last year I fished there the last week in October and I got chases to a dry as well as caught fish on the swing with a floating line and unweighted fly even though the water temp never got above 45 degrees. That would never happen with hatchery fish on the coast in the winter in Oregon when water temps are 40-45. There isn't ever a reason to nymph up in BC because the fish are aggressive to the swing. I guess what I'm saying is you have to know the relationship between temps and aggressiveness for the river you're fishing.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

jbird & bigtj,

You guys are right on it.

Fall is near.

[bigtj]

Bill,

I am starting to get antsy...only a few more weeks! I can hardly stand it right now...

-John

[jbird]

John
excellent points! as always. I will take it back to the motabolism theory tho. It is a relative factor. Fish in different systems have different "ideals". A great example is winter steelhead. Those fish have different requirements than summers. They will take a swung fly in 'warmer' winter water...which is equivelant to 'colder' summer steelhead conditions...when swinging rarely produces.
As fall progresses and the temps drop. It has always served me well to look to new water types. I know the rogue doesnt represent every river, but it is my stomping grounds, so it will serve as my subject. I have definite spots that produce at different times of year and especially when the frigid fog of december decsends on us, I know where to find willing fish in 39 degree water. It has taken alot of trial and error but I feel pretty confident in finding fish in all seasons. It is an endless puzzle with sweet rewards and tons of humble pie.

I think another reason the BC rivers are good swing rivers is because their low gradient profile. They are classic swing water without many pockets to isolate fish.

Having a good grasp of the ins and outs of both swinging and nymphing will serve you well wherever steelhead swim...and trout for that matter.

Jay

[bigtj]

As usual very good points Jay. Especially the water types! The fish really move around as the water temps drop, no matter where you are talking about. When it's hot they're in the riffles and heads, when it gets cold they drop down into slow-moving structure, just like clockwork.

[WinterrunRon]

Sounds right to me fellas, excellent observation and advice.

Only thing I can add, from a personal standpoint is: On the American, my "home water" when not on our costal rivers, I hook most (and last year ALL) of my fish on a swung fly... and I didn't care what the temperature was, because the American temperature is fairly constant in winter and rarely gets that cold. And every fish last year on a swung fly for me was big, big, big!

What made the difference for me last year was that I developed a high level of confidence in what I was doing, knowing that I was going to hook a fish. Of course it didn't happen every outing, but I felt like it could have and came back the next day to try again!

[aaron]

I've got strong feelings about the subject so I'll bite...

To me swinging is the only way to go 100% of the time. It is about giving the fish a choice about whether or not to move towards the fly crossing in the overhead currents. Why drop a nymph on a fish? Sure you will still find the active fish but you are also prone to catch fish that are stressed due to any number of conditions. Forcing stressed fish to battle for their lives is ethically questionable IMHO. I'd much rather target the active fish. As long as there are fresh steelhead in a system they will move for a fly no matter how cold the water is. Lee Spencer has brought a number of fish to the surface on the North Umpqua when the water has been in the 30's!

Maybe swinging won't catch quite as many fish, but it will bring fresh active fish to the fly. If you nymph because you are concerned about numbers of fish then maybe you should reconsider the reasons you go fishing.

[jbird]

In light of your recent trip to the umpqua, as I read this post, I knew that Lee Spencer had an influence on this oppinion before I even read far enough to see his name. Yes, I am very familiar with Lees wrightings. It is one mans OPINION based on his observation. It is an extremely biased opinion..much like yours. There is no conclusive evidence for this view on nymphing...none. We here in southern oregon, along with you guys in nor cal, fish many rivers that are absolutely hammered by nymphers. I have been fishing the rogue for a long time, and I have never, not once, seen a single dead steelhead laying in the river aside from a filet victim.

Now, if you dont like nymphing, that is fine and it is your perogative to swing only. But to warn people that it is dangerous to the fishery is just wrong.

I have kept my mouth shut about this for a long time. I am really sick of the traditional, swing only guys (who are the self proclaimed "Holier then thou") looking down their noses at their fellow flyfishermen because they are fishing in a way that is totally UNJUSTIFIABLY unethical.

Every time someone comes home after a visit with Lee, they are all on their high horse about this. I personally believe it is hooey!

I am a fisherman who likes to be versitile in my aproach and am just as apt to swing as to nymph. I like them both equally. And I look on my fellow flyfisherman with equality no matter which way he chooses to fish.

I know Bill Kiene is a big advocate for swinging with a dry fly. Take a look at his posts and how he presents the reason he does it. He does it cause he likes to do it that way..period. He doesnt play the unethical card to add guilt to the equation.

I better stop :oops:

J

PS

Winterrun

What made the difference for me last year was that I developed a high level of confidence in what I was doing, knowing that I was going to hook a fish

You just unlocked THE code to catching steelhead anywhere!

[aaron]

Well my apologies for ruffling some feathers but I am apt to side with a man with a background in science who has spent more time observing and angling for steelhead than just about anyone else on earth. His opinion may be biased, but only in the best interest of the fish. I can hardly see how this is a bad thing. If you're more interested in the numbers of fish you catch than the health of your fisheries so be it, but don't get down on me for promoting his love for conserving and ethically angling for wild steelhead.

[jbird]

ethically angling for wild steelhead.

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

The technique being promoted is hardly a bad thing, I never said that. The problem is planting the seed that every other way of fishing is unethical. Lee loves his fish, no doubt. If I were Lee and lived in that station for that long and saw what he saw, I would probably view it the same as he. That wouldnt automatically make me right. My views would be overbiased by my love for MY fish. And if i lectured my views to the flyfishing community, I would certainly expect controversy.

Lee has a personal relationship with those fish, He loves them, I repect that.

The guy fishes for them hookless...not barbless..hookless. Thats fine and wonderful, I respect him for having that much self control. I really do!

The real issue is telling people what is ethical and unethical in the techniques of this sport with no justification whatsoever.

The only reason I can see nymphing as being harder on the fishery is because it catches more fish. Swinging is harder on the sport because of the tension and controversy the traditional swingers bring to the sport.

Again, I have no beef with swinging at all..I absolutely, positively love it..I really do. But its the guys who think that nymphing is a sin are the ones who ruin the freedom of this sport and limit the possibilties of a friendship with any fly angler.

Time to dawn my flack jacket :D

Jay

[Hairstacker]

If you nymph because you are concerned about numbers of fish then maybe you should reconsider the reasons you go fishing.


If you're more interested in the numbers of fish you catch than the health of your fisheries so be it. . . .

Awfully strong and presumptuous statements for a moderator on this board. Coming from anyone else, I might have thought it was a troll. . . . :?

[aaron]

Jay has his opinion and I have mine. Just goes to show the variety of opinions in one aspect of the sport. As with most things in life, to each their own.

[bigtj]

Aaron,

I understand where you are coming from, because I love to fish the swing as well, but keep this in perspective. Unlike the NU, most of the places where you can fish for steelhead on the swing you can also fish for them with a big old blob of eggs, a pink worm under a float, or a kastmaster. Which would you rather see? Somebody fishing with a blob of eggs or a nymph? And which is more dangerous to the fish? I don't really know for certain, although I do know a blob of egg catches the most fish usually. The simple fact of the matter is that I would not be at all surprised if 90% of steelhead caught in the US are caught on a blob of eggs. Whatever the percentage is, it is a lot. Fishing with nymphs probably can't be any more harmful than a blob of eggs or a kastmaster. And in reality it's probably a lot less harmful to a run.

Your statement:
If you nymph because you are concerned about numbers of fish then maybe you should reconsider the reasons you go fishing. is a lot to swallow for most folks. It isn't going to win you any friends or convince anybody to fish the swing. All it is going to do is reinforce the idea that swing-only guys are pretty stuck-up. If you really are passionate about convincing guys to switch over to the swing, come up with a new approach, something that will work and not drive people away - honey always catches more flies than vinegar. Coming on the board and dropping a bomb like that won't get you anywhere.

The most ironic part about all this is I really tried to make that trip with you guys but couldn't because of work. I would have fished the whole week on the swing and I'm willing to bet you would have found I was a pretty nice guy to be around. In fact, I sent a really long e-mail to Jason that hopefully gave you guys some ideas on where and when to fish. The fact that I will fish a nymph or an egg on occasion doesn't make me any less of a good guy, any less ethical, or any less of a sportsman. I fish glo-bugs in the winter for steelhead because it usually means the difference between catching a fish or not. I don't think that is any reason to reconsider why I fish.

Hopefully we can meet on the river some time and have a chance to carry on this conversation in person. I'm glad you guys had a great trip, and impressed with the fact you are so passionate about the sport.

[MrBig]

Stay away from the swing, it's mine. :lol: lol :lol:

[sculpin]

Very well said TJ. I considered why I fish and after a lot of thought I came to a conclusion. Hang on to your seats, I fish to catch fish. Hmmm, maybe that's why it's called fishing rather than casting. :D I'm just flipping stuff at you Aaron. :D No disrespect intended.

[jbird]

I would have fished the whole week on the swing

Sure John! You probably wouldve snuck off to do some kind of North umpqua rebellion :D :D :D

"John? Is that a nightcrawler I see coming out of your vest pocket?" :evil: :D :D

J

PS When pasting a quote from another poster, How do you get the title.."quote from..." to appear? rather than just "quote" like mine always do?

[bigtj]

Very funny Jay. By the way those nightcrawlers come out of my chest pack, not my vest; that way I can hold the bigger foam containers in there.

Seriously though the NU is one place where I always fish the swing, even below the deadline. There is some good nymphing water on the NU below the deadline but I don't ever fish it with a nymph. BC is the same way...I don't nymph up there, either. Not sure why. I guess maybe because swinging is such a fun way to fish and it suits those rivers and the fish better for me. Whatever reason, it's a blast.

Later,

-John

[Adam Grace]

May I add my own limited steelhead river knowledge here....

I have fished rivers like the Klamath that are perfect for swinging with long fish holding runs and tailouts that are a swinger's dream come true.

I have also fished smaller steelhead rivers, like a lot of the water in the upper Trinity, that are more conducive to nymphing along with the current not across the current. Nymphing allows us to fish different waters that swinging cannot properly tackle.

I have also fished waters like the Rogue that have great water for both types of techniques and in that situation you should use the technique that you enjoy the most.

After all fishing is about enjoying time away from the stresses and worries of normal day-today life.

[Jasonh]

Well said Adam. If i had anything to say it would be along the same lines. Fish on. Its about that time of year for steelies. I love the late summer, early fall!

[Darian]

How do you guys feel about using cast nets :?: :?: :?: Rarely misses, quick landing, all fish caught can be released relatively unharmed, no flies or bait involved 8) :lol: :lol: :lol:

[aaron]

Good point about conventional gear John.

I think my statement
If you nymph because you are concerned about numbers of fish then maybe you should reconsider the reasons you go fishing. is being misunderstood. I look at it in terms of all of the disgusting angling I see and hear about on a daily basis during the fall/winter of anglers on the American and Trinity and other rivers as well. They have no desire to put the work in that constitutes true steelhead fishing and just wish to catch large numbers of fish for the purpose of bragging. As a consequence nymphers regularly pound the redds on the American and on the Trinity armadas of boats eagerly fish through bank anglers and treat the already stressed out fish poorly in order to get their "hero shots". The point to this is it seems like more and more people have lost site of what the steelhead experience should be. Working hard for fish and getting a chance to enjoy the beautiful scenery in which they are found. Not targeting fish that should be left alone for the purpose of showing off. I'd just as soon get skunked and enjoy the scenery rather than target a fish I know would I would do unjust harm. I know Jay and John are responsible fisherman so I could care less how they fish. The point of my original post was to ruffle the feathers of those who fish for fish that are to the point that they should be left alone. Their uniting factor so happens to be nymphing. It is just downright depressing seeing this day after day. My apologies if I offended anyone.

John I look forward to meeting you on the river, maybe the Trinity this fall? We can discuss around the campfire.

-Aaron

[Terry Thomas]

As fly fishers, we have fought many battles and unfortunately, the wars are far from over. The LAST thing we need to be doing is arguing among ourselves. Just fish...fly fish that is.
T.

[Jasonh]

Tristan, i hate to say it but the Skeena is a bad example. The reason the steelhead counts are down up there is due to the Canadian fish and game allowing commercial netting way past their alloted times and limits. This has been a big problem for many years now. The commercial sockeye fishery is a big money maker up there and it just so happens that the sockeye and steelhead enter the system at the same time. The government looks the other way because of all the money in commercial fishing. Swing or nymph fishing has nothing to do with the diminished runs of fish in BC. It is really what is happening in BC and i know there are a lot of efforts try to change what is going on up there.

[Rick J]

ok my turn!! I love to swing and rarely fish any other way. But as others have mentined, there is some water that is not conducive to the swing - in deep slots and runs, a steelhead will not come up for a swung fly - alot of this water exists on the NU - he may move to a deeply swung fly on a sink tip and he will more apt move to a fly/glob of eggs/or spoon/spinner bounced near the bottom. There are some great gear fishermen I know that love the game and love their environment and catch lots of fish and release most of them and I respect them immensely!

Now just because this fish is hanging out in a deep slot is not to say he is stressed or not an active steelhead so if you choose to fish this type of water, it makes sense to me that you should use the proper technique for this type of water and swinging is not it.

I will grant you that if you nymph, you will target fish that would not otherwise grab so you are stressing more fish by catching more fish but I do not buy the fact that most of these fish are already stressed and therefore should be left alone

[SuperFlyGuy]

How do you guys feel about using cast nets :?: :?: :?: Rarely misses, quick landing, all fish caught can be released relatively unharmed, no flies or bait involved 8) :lol: :lol: :lol:

HAHA you are so funny man. I mean technically if we didn't want to harm ANY fish, we'd use rubber cast nets, take your picture then release.
I think it brings up a good point though.

The fact that as fly fisherman, we are all just fishing. If we didn't want to harm fish at all, we'd pretty much just go out and cast leaders. But the fact is we do harm fish to a small degree, whether nymphing or swinging. The fact that catching them on nymphs will usually produce more fish is not debatable, but I don't see anyone complaining when the water temp is higher and people do great swinging. I don't think I've ever seen a fisherman, whether swing or nymph, say "Hey, you know what? Im catching WAY TOO many fish.. I think I'd better stop..." Sometimes on the A I would be happy just to catch 1 fish, either on nymph or swung.... or nightcrawler on a size 1 treble.. :roll: J/k!! But I think we are overlooking one big point also. *Ability* Some fly fisherman are masters, and can catch fish on a hook and peice of thread. Others, like myself are still learning (even after 4 years!), so we would try any fly to get into A fish if it calls for it on one of THOSE days. I don't think anyone would look down upon a beginner right?

Bottom line, people do what works for them... based on their ability, knowledge, and experiences. To each his own.. But at the end of the day we're all just fisherman.

[bigtj]

Aaron,

Well said. I see where you are coming from now and totally agree about the redd pounding. Thanks for clarifying and listening to what I had to say.

Best regards, talk to you later,

-John

[bubzilla]

Rick J nailed it. It's all about water type. I have caught literally hundreds of winter fish on Oregon's North Coast swinging wet flies in water that was hardly ever even into the mid 40s. At least 90 percent of them were hatchery brats. The key was even flow hydraulics characteristic of low gradient streams close to the ocean. In English: good swing water. Move a few miles upstream and it's time to nymph. Why? No even flow hydraulics; rather, pocket water and slots characteristic of high-gradient waters further from the ocean. Think Smith River: mouth compared to either of the forks. If you don't adjust, it's like playing golf with only one club.

Thing is, it tends to be a lot more crowded in the low-gradient stretches these days. Which means, as a matter of necessity, more nymphing.

The arguments about nymphing being unethical, or even more absurd somehow biologically dangerous to fisheries, are about as lame as it comes. When I hear that [expletive deleted], I just turn a deaf ear and shake my head in wonder at how the idiot whose mouth I now see moving has defied Darwinian theory for as long as they have. Choosing to swing only regardless of water type is purely about aesthetics. If that is someone's bag, then sincerely more power to them. They're going to be a wonderful caster someday that can wax poetically about fish and fauna for hours on end while nary drawing a breath. There is even a wonderful section of public property in Oregon set aside entirely, by operation of law, for their pursuit. They can go there and be marry! I would only ask that they please save the self-sanctimonious nonsense about protecting the fishery by fishing traditionally for that place. I think a lot of the rest of us would like to keep the lunacy localized to that one river at this point while fly anglers still have some semblance of credibility with professional biologists and other river users when it comes to actual threats to fisheries like habitat destruction and pollution. After all, when someone gets to the point of fishing with a fly with no hook, I think most of us would agree that person needs professional therapy and medication--not a pat on the back or a place in fishing lore.

[Darian]

Bubz.... =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

[aaron]

"Bubzilla"

Before you turn your deaf ear and accuse me of being an idiot or a snob please take a moment to consider my point of view.

I choose to swing because it requires a fish to move considerably for the fly. Thus I feel I am targeting hot active fish that will be capable of surviving with as little damage as possible.

While you will still hook hot fish nymphing, the fly is much deeper and will move within inches of fish that hang deeper because they are stressed or conserving energy in order to complete their life's mission. In some cases you will be hooking a fish that may not have otherwise had the energy to expend chasing a swung fly.

Thus I target water conducive to swinging because I feel it gives me the best shot at healthy active fish.

To me steelhead are too valuable to risk using a method that I feel has a greater chance of targeting a fish that should be left alone. It is not about me being a snob, it is about trying to minimizing my impact on a fishery.

If fishing was all about catching to me like it is to some people then I'm sure I would actively Nymph. The fact is, to me, fishing is not all about catching. I find greater piece of mind knowing I enjoyed the outdoors and left a minimal impact than any number of fish landed can provide.

I would appreciate it if you considerred my point of view before calling me names or suggesting therapy/medication. 8)

[jbird]

Aaron




the fly is much deeper and will move within inches of fish that hang deeper because they are stressed or conserving energy in order to complete their life's mission.

Why does this keep coming up? Why are deeper fish stressed? Do we have conclusive proof of this? ALL fish travel along the river bottom, it is the path of least resistance. That is THE primary reason we fish deep to them. Are you also suggesting then that swinging with a sinking head is plausably unethical?
Your stance on swinging and your reason for doing it is really elitist and you certainly arent the only one. I am sure there are dozens of readers out there that are in your camp that just arent speaking up. (which seems really odd to me) I honestly believe there is an underlying resentment (jealousy) for nymphing and the numbers it brings.
Just because you put on a nymph and an indicator doesnt automatically put you in the numbers. It is an extremely dificult technique to master. It takes very specific equipment, endless consentration and a profound understanding of river currents and steelhead behavior. I think these reasons are high on the list for swingers to keep swinging and look down on nymphing. Its easier to just say "what you are doing is wrong and unethical" than to put in the time and energy to understand a very technical method of steelheading.

I really wished I lived on a river that was condusive to swinging all the time. It is a much simpler technique and only takes the ability to cast a little. You dont have to wade as deep and you dont have to have pin point focus from start to finish. you dont need to be able to mentally disect a run into "buckets". And your limited success if often early morning and late evening....

Bubzillas medication/therapy comment wasnt directed to you, I think he was speaking of professor Spencer :D

Jay

[Flycanoe]

Nice discussion here guys. Didn't realize there were such strong opinions on this subject with respect to steelheading.

My view is that I've yet to catch a steelhead and will reserve judgement on which technique I want to use in the future after I catch one using each. :D

FWIW, my opinion is that I don't think there's any correlation between the way a fish is eating at any particular time and it's chances of survival. Fish feed in different ways at different times, some aggressively, some passively, some opportunistically, etc. Again, this has nothing to do with chances for survival, but more with the type of water they are in, the time of day, the type of food present, etc. I think there chances for survival is much more dependent on how quickly the fish is brought in and released. The less time fighting and using it's reserves the better for survival.

[bubzilla]

I never specifically called you an idiot, "Aaron". I do stand behind the statement that those who would argue that nymphing is unethical or otherwise imperils fisheries are in fact idiots, however. I never mentioned elitism at all, but that shoe does frequently fit on those who argue the alleged conservation ethic of traditional fishing only.

Rest assured, I understand your point of view. I have heard it for close to 20 years at this point. It was not founded in science the first time it was espoused on the North Umpqua in an effort to remove those who did not subscribe to the traditional-only mantra of the Steamboaters then any more than it is today. It is now, as it was then, a red herring intended to veil an intent to coercively enforce an aesthetic. That simple. Sure, at this point I am certain there are many who actually believe what they are saying to be true; however, sincerity and veracity are not the same thing. Lots of people genuinely believe in Santa Claus too, after all.

The argument is essentially this: only steelhead that are in good shape will move to a fly; swinging only targets fish that will move; therefore, swinging is more ethical because it only targets fish that are in good shape. Well, like most little syllogisms, it sounds good on the surface and gives the person making the argument warm fuzzies about their good deed. The problem, like with most simple little syllogisms, is that the logic is flawed.

The basic assumption in all of this is that fish that are on the bottom and will not move to a swung fly do so because they are stressed. People with lots of experience with steelhead know this to be false; however, a lot of fly anglers unfortunately do not have very much experience with steelhead. Steelhead hold on or very close to the bottom for a variety of reasons. They sulk there for many more reasons. They also sulk suspended from the bottom. They react, or don't react as the case may be, to swung flies for even more reasons--all of which generally have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with whether they are stressed. There are myriad of conditions under which steelhead are fished for throughout the world; yet, many of the traditional only crowd would argue the conservation ethic applied ubiquitously. That's a hard sell. After all, I doubt that the winter fish that I pursue each spring, which are invariably on the bottom, are there because they are "stressed".

The second fallacious assumption is that fish that are taking nymphs fished dead-drifted are not moving to take those flies. Once again, that is a statement that could only be made by someone with little or no experience with steelhead, or in the alternative an ulterior motive. Anyone who has caught a lot of steelhead, nymphing or otherwise, knows that they will frequently move great distances horizontally when they will not move very much at all vertically. Again, an assumption that this is somehow related to their being stressed would be dubious at best.

Lets assume for arguments sake, however, that there is merit to the syllogism. That is, swinging prevents adverse selection by fish that are stressed. The problem there is very straightforward: there is no scientific basis to assume that only non-stressed fish will move to swung flies any more than there is merit to the assumption that fish do not move to nymphs. Moreover, if there are stressed fish in the system, then the ethical thing to do is not angle at all. That's right, don't fish at all. It shouldn't be, "oh, I'll hurt fewer by being less successful."

I may have indirectly implied that you were an idiot, Aaron, but you implied that all of us are unethical. Worse yet, you impugned our character by suggesting that we are only about numbers when it comes to angling. The false analogy arguments that come from those attacking nymphing always seem to make it to the point of comparing nymphing to gill nets or even dynamite. The next step, although this discussion did not make it there yet, is the implication that nymphing requires less skill and therefore appeals to the inferior fly angler. Or, my personal favorite, that it's not "fly fishing" at all.

What people who say [expletive deleted] like that don't get is how they damage the relationship between what should be a fraternity of anglers. They similarly don't get how much that attitude drives new anglers away from the sport. Worse yet, they don't get how focusing on such trivial nonsense--that clearly has no merit whatsoever for really protecting fisheries and steelhead from actual dangers--expends the limited political capital of the fly angling community for very little in return.

People are all excited about getting a prohibition passed on harvesting wild steelhead on the NU. That saved what, 100-200 steelhead a year? If that. But it expended quite a bit of political capital. What a return on investment that amounts to, huh? Clueless. Anyone stop to think that maybe the area biologists didn't support the initiative because it had no biological basis? And, I can assure you it's not the biologists that are motivated by license and harvest card sales--that's the Game Commission's thing. The biologists I know truly love fish and game, and do all they can to fight the politics that damages our precious resources. But the Game Commission? That's a different ball of wax. You know, the same group that gave the fly anglers exactly what they wanted on their one little, tiny piece of water yet again. Now go ask them for something important like a prohibition on bait on the Upper Rogue during the summer run and see how far fly anglers get. Better yet, propose a prohibition on the retention of wild steelhead on places where it is really needed like the South Coast. See how much traction the "whinny feather huckers" get then. That's what happens when you lose focus on what's really important or when you cry wolf too much. And, claiming traditional fly fishing is all about conservation is precisely that: crying wolf. It was [expletive deleted] 15 years ago when it started as a way to get the likes of Dean Schubert and Dave Hickson off the NU, and it's a load now too.

P.S. how about a yawn emicon on the site so that I can just post that in the future when this topic comes up?

[dtp916]

I'm not getting how nymphin for steelies is any worse than nymphin for trout.........Aaron :?:

Throwing an indicator rig on the American, Truckee, Trinity, Lower Sac - whatever water - is this unethical or does it has a certain criteria as far a water temps and fishing pressure or what?

Sure swinging will catch fish. Indicators will catch more fish, or on days when you you normally wouldn't get a bite swinging, you catch one or 2 using an indicator.

Sounds to me you're just preaching the old school, steelhead swinging purist/snob mentality on all of us. :?

While your busy enjoying nature and your surroundings, sitting on a log, I'll be out fishing and hopefully catching - most likely using an indicator and a nymph. Or maybe a bead pegged 6" above a streamer hook :lol:

I'm kidding :)

[Rick J]

I support Aaron's view on fishing over redds big time but the rest I do not buy. If nymphing harms fish then gear fishing, throwing lures certainly should be banned and I do not buy that. When I nymph, I generally prefer to do it sans indicator and just tumble bug- on the NU I would use the ugly bug in runs that were not conducive to the swing before they said no lead (PS you can now use lead after Oct for late fall fish and winter fish). When they banned lead, they have essentially cut off a fair amount of water that is not effective swing water that now places limits on available water to fish. So guess they are protecting fish in those runs.

[Rick J]

one last comment about the NU and the indicator guys. At least many of the folks up ther that used nymphs and indicators were pretty rude and I for one was happy to see most of them go! The NU is a beautiful stream full of tradition and the guys that fish it will fish a run through and move on and would not encroach on someone who was in a run.

Many of the nymphers would come in eithor on top of you or worse below you. They would camp on a run and force feed a visible fish - in this case Aaron could be right tha some of these fish were stressed and by force feeding them you finally got them to grab. I would not go so far as to say this is unethical but certainly it is a type of fishing I would not chose to do and largly becasue of this behavior, there was a push to ban nymphs and indicators on this magical river.

[jbird]

Aaron

I respect your desire to swing and am sorry for the personal attacks from me and others.

I think whats important is that we dont tell eachother how to fish. Someone mentioned how this kind of thing can negatively effect greenhorns in the sport. That is very true. I think what happens there is those guys just dont want any part of us and just go back to chucking roe. talk about a negative result! A good friend of mine once said "If thats the way fly fisherman think of there fellow flyfisherman, just imagine what the gear chuckers must think of us?"

Come on now, lets just enjoy the gift of fishing God has given us and play together :D Its unity that changes things.

Peace out 8) :D

Jay

[bubzilla]

one last comment about the NU and the indicator guys. At least many of the folks up ther that used nymphs and indicators were pretty rude and I for one was happy to see most of them go! The NU is a beautiful stream full of tradition and the guys that fish it will fish a run through and move on and would not encroach on someone who was in a run.

Many of the nymphers would come in eithor on top of you or worse below you. They would camp on a run and force feed a visible fish - in this case Aaron could be right tha some of these fish were stressed and by force feeding them you finally got them to grab. I would not go so far as to say this is unethical but certainly it is a type of fishing I would not chose to do and largly becasue of this behavior, there was a push to ban nymphs and indicators on this magical river.

Rick,

I live less than 100 miles from Steamboat. I have in years passed fished the NU more in a single season, winter or summer, than most of the people reading this will in a lifetime. I have been cuttoff by guys swining more times than I could possibly count; raced to holes by big-name guides with their clients; watched guys sleep in their cars to get first light only to have someone pull up on them just before dawn and scramble down the bank to the water ahead of them laughing about their coup; and just generally encountered some of the least pleasant people I have ever had the misfortune of meeting along a river anywher. I have said it a lot, and unfortunately it's true: the NU is a river with more a*!holes per square mile than any other on Earth.

There might have been some rude indicator fishermen; in fact, I am sure there were. Most fished when nobody else was on the water, i.e. mid day, and few ever frequented the Camp Water or other more traditionally-oriented stretches. And, now that they have been regulated off the river, there certainly isn't a shortage of jerks as a result. Like I said in a previous post, that's the place to go to be a traditional-only fly anlger. It's a beautiful river, and I encourage anyone interested in swinging wets or dries to spend as much time there as they can. It's gorgeous. I just ask that they please not take the fireside science and unique culture of the place and try and export it to other less radically regulated fisheries.

[Rick J]

Budzilla,
No question there are some rude swing guys as well. And I truly believe the regulations placed on that river had little to do with sound biology and fish science.

I have on more than one occasion had someone "hole-hop" me but I generally don't hold that against someone - if they beat me to the run then they get it - but few swing guys will camp on a run like the indicator guys did and that is what bugged me the most about some of them. I am more than happy to go through a run after someone else and feel comfortable that I still have a chance at a fish but when a run holds a number of fish and a guy will just stay there and force feed them for hours and not move on that pretty well locks up a piece of water and I saw a number of them in the Camp Water doing just that such as at Station. Some of my best fishing was in the middle of the day in Camp Water tumble bugging the ugly bug but I did not camp on any run but would still fish through.

I feel lucky to have not had that many folks come in on me when I have been fishing a run in the almost 30 years I have been fishing that river. I still think the majority of peolpe respect at least that tradition. Nothing wrong in my view trying to be the first one on a piece of water and I will say I have done my share of early morning drives to a place I want to be first through :)

[jbird]

camp on a run like the indicator guys

I think this is a really important etiquet (sp) topic in itself. I think many nymph fishermen are guilty of hole hogging. Especially beginners. Even I will sometimes realize I havnt moved in 15 or 20 minutes cause I am maniacaly trying to get the right drift thu a distant, dificult bucket. Its wrong. I think nymph fishermen need to be educated on moving thru holes. When I am sharing water and am nymphing. I make a point to move through the hole quickly. 5-6 good drifts, then step down 30 feet. With this movement, you can move as quickly as the swing guys that are the 'cast, take 3 steps' guys. If you dont feel like you covered it well, get back in line at the top.

PLEASE MOVE THROUGH HOLES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE! Even when you are alone cause it ingrains it into you.
You will also catch more fish :D

Jay

[Frank Pipgras]

After reading all these posts I will only swing for steelhead in the future while using a cane rod with a silk fly line and a gut leader. Anyone who is not fishing traditionally like me is clearly doing it wrong.

[Rick J]

Ah yes - I much prefer gut leaders to that damn new fangled nylon and flourocarbon crap on the market now!!! What is this flyfishing stuff coming to - glass rods an all!!

[Darian]

Yeah!!! But are you guys castring nymphs or traditonal, featherwing Steelhead flies :?: :?: :?: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[dtp916]

This is why I indicator nymph with a swing on the end....to make everybody happy :lol:

[roostersgt]

James,

I agree with your method wholeheartedly! I catch most of my fish on the "swing" end of bobicator fishing (steelhead + trout). Heck, I even swing dries for my fish. I prefer to refer to my nymphing as "crossover" traditional swinging.

[Rick J]

in my recent trip to the mecca of spring creeks - Silver Creek where perfect drifts are a must, right at dark we got hammered when our dry swung near the end of the drift!!!! Go figure!!!

[SSPey]

facts seem to be in short supply, and asserting that merely 100-200 wild steelhead were being killed in the winter NU fishery reflects this

see p. 24 of below for the long-term estimate of wild-winter kill on the NU - an average of 1000 wild winter fish killed in the NU annually. This doesn't even include wild kill of SU and mainstem fish. And if this is an overestimate, it is overestimated by 5-10X? bad odds.

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/04/sep/Umpqua_Winter_Steelhead.pdf

[roostersgt]

I know a sure way to convince a nympher to switch to swinging flies. Have the nympher swing flies until he gets bit. The GRAB will convince him to switch. There is nothing like the GRAB. You know what I'm talking about. The GRAB.

[bubzilla]

facts seem to be in short supply, and asserting that merely 100-200 wild steelhead were being killed in the winter NU fishery reflects this

see p. 24 of below for the long-term estimate of wild-winter kill on the NU - an average of 1000 wild winter fish killed in the NU annually. This doesn't even include wild kill of SU and mainstem fish. And if this is an overestimate, it is overestimated by 5-10X? bad odds.

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/04/sep/Umpqua_Winter_Steelhead.pdf

Facts certainly are in short supply. Let's take a look at the assumptions before throwing out a number like 1000, why don't we?

The cited work provides the following:

"The harvest of winter steelhead on the North Umpqua has ranged from a low of 853 fish in 1991-92 (and 1993-94) to a high of 1,749 fish in 1987-88, with an average catch of 1,147 fish. The harvest of the winter steelhead on the South Umpqua River has ranged from a low of 179 fish in 1997-98 to a high of 1,360 fish in 1986-87, with an average of 656 fish. The harvest of winter steelhead on the mainstem Umpqua River has ranged from a low of 410 fish in 1998-99 to a high of 3,567 fish in 1986-87, with an average of 1,080 fish."

p. 22

Let's note that those numbers include ALL FISH harvested, i.e., both wild and hatchery. The work cited continues with the following:

"Wild fish harvest estimates for the Umpqua Basin are shown in Table 5. Winchester Dam counts have shown that an average of 88% of the winter steelhead counted is [sic] wild. We assumed that catch rates are similar for wild and hatchery, and therefore estimated wild catch rates on the North Umpqua from the punch card data by removing the hatchery catch of 12%. These calculations are probably high due to the fact that anglers usually retain all hatchery fish while voluntarily releasing wild fish; and that hatchery fish hold in the North Umpqua near the popular Rock Creek Hatchery hole and thus are more vulnerable to higher harvest rates."

p. 23

In English ODFW assumed 88 percent of harvest was wild because 88 percent of the fish crossing over the dam were wild. Of course, in fairness, they also recognized the enormous problems with this assumption, but wow wish I could get paid for ballparking it like that! :D Heck, a dart board with numbers on it has about the same scientific value. I mean damn, really even calling that an "estimate" takes balls! The work cited continues with the following:

"ODFW performed a creel survey on the South Umpqua in 2003-2004, and determined the wild catch on the South Umpqua is 57.5%. We assume again that wild and hatchery harvest are caught equal and removed 42.5% of the hatchery catch from the punch card data on the South Umpqua. The acclimation site for hatchery fish is located on Canyon Creek near the city of Canyonville. Again, most hatchery fish hold near the mouth of Canyon Creek and are more susceptible to higher harvest than wild fish. ODFW performed a creel survey on the mainstem Umpqua River in 2004. The creel showed that 19% of the catch was wild fish, and thus we applied this catch rate from the punch card data to determine the number of wild fish caught."

p. 24

So ODFW assumed that because 88 percent of the dam count was wild the harvest rate would be similar, i.e., 88 percent of the total harvest would be wild. Okay? Yet, the creel surveys on the mainstem and the South Umpqua both showed much lower total native harvest. Huh. And, ODFW says "[t]hese calculations are probably high...." Really? Yeah, I'd guess by a lot. Definitely short on facts.

But let's assume, as ODFW has, that the harvest rate is as high as 88 percent of the total harvest. And, once again, let's assume that translates to as many as 1000 wild fish per year on average. How does that compare to the harvest on the South Coast? Or the Rogue? Or the myriad of fisheries for which the folks who have NU on the brain all the time could not give a rat's ass about? That was the point. I still believe we're really only talking about a couple hundred fish max, and what a waste of political capital that is in light of the much larger problems steelhead fisheries face. It's just more of the myopic focus on the self-proclaimed crown jewel, but at what cost?

[bigtj]

roostersgt,

At least 30% of my grabs on the nymph happen when the fly is swinging. Think of nymphing as a way to get a much deeper swing. Those grabs are every bit as good as on the swing. If you don't nymph, then how do you really know what the grab is like? Yes, it is about the grab, and sometimes it's about getting grabs when you otherwise wouldn't. Why suggest convincing a nymph fisherman to swing? Why not just let him/her decide to use whatever method they like, when they like?

Sspey,

Thankfully the wild kill is more or less a moot point now as the new C&R regs have been approved for the winter run on the NU. Whenever there is such uncertainty in a precious system as the NU I say let's use a conservative approach. Seems like ODFW agrees.

[jbird]

I have caught at least a couple hundred steelhead on the swing. I would say 1 out of every 10 or 15 grabs are viscious. The large majority of them are "takes" not grabs. To be honest I dont see what all the hype about it is...yes, its wonderful, but all the talk about "go for the grab" and "youll never go back once you feel the grab" I personally dont get it. Maybe my impression of a viscious grab is different than those guys'.
The rush for me is the fishes first run. Some fish give you first runs over and over. but with a few exceptions you allways get that exciting first run no matter how you hook up.
The only reason I'd rather fish the swing all the time is because its less work. It has nothing to do with the grab. Alas, I fish to catch fish, I'm one of those derelicts that is disapointed at the end of the day if I didnt catch fish.
I love the excitement of fishing productive water, when I first step in and start stripping line off the reel...swing or nymph...theres nothin like it.

Jay

[Ed Wahl]

I just can't believe this thread has gone on for 5 pages. :shock: :shock: :shock: Ed

[Adam Grace]

Ed, I can't either. This debate/argument has the potential to go on for many more pages with similar repetition. How 'bout we agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I'm going back to nightcrawlers?

[MSP]

I feel so guilty I'm quitting fishing altogether! FORE!

[Rick J]

Bill - do you fish your night crawlers with an indicator or on the swing? :D

Read an article not too long ago about a guy who uses rubber worms with his fly rig - says they work better than leeches!!

[roostersgt]

My apologies if someone took it that I'm against nymphing, I'm not. I use both methods. I do catch far more fish on the swing, probably due to my lack of noticing the "take" unless my indicator goes under or sideways. Even when nymphing, most of my fish are caught at the very end, on the swing. I love the grab,whether or not its a light take or a viscious hand jarring yank. I love it. I'm not trying to convince anyone on how they should fish, just killing time typing and yakking about one aspect of my favorite pastime.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

Rick,

We use to go down the 24th & C Street in Sacramento when I was a youngster and we used a flshlight in our mouth with some red colored transparent paper to cut the light down.

We crawled on our knees at night to catch those 'night crawlers'.

It was almost as much fun as fishing.

[Rick J]

boy do I remeber that - we used to sprinkle the lawn then go out at night - what a trip that was catching night crawlers on my unlce's lawn on Vancouver Island!!!!

[bigtj]

Personally I don't have a problem with long threads. Obviously everybody has a lot to say about this topic. And I am really glad to see that common ground is being found by folks. Thanks to everyone for their thoughtful comments.

Roostersgt,

Thanks for the clarification. I hear what you are saying, all good points. No need to apologize for expressing your views that's what it's all about.

RickJ,

I had a slightly less ethical technique. I hooked up an old extension cord to a meat rotisserie stake, about 2 feet long. Sprinkle some water on the lawn, then just put the rotisserie in the ground. All the nightcrawlers you could want would be on the surface of the ground in about 30 seconds. Definitely not PETA or Ralph Nader approved, but it worked!

[David Lee]

I feel so guilty I'm quitting fishing altogether! FORE!

:shock: :shock: :shock:

OHHH , GOD - say it isn't so !!

I can see the photos now .... a hand holding a little white ball :P :evil:

David :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Adam Grace]

:lol: Yes, a hand holding a little white ball sounds pretty sad :lol: