"What You See Is Not What You Get"

[Golden]

Most of us think of water as being a clear transparent medium, but it is not. Fishing waters come in a multiplicity of shades of 3 primary colors: Blue for clear water, green for algae tinted water, and red/brown for muddy and tannin stained waters. As fly fishermen we should be choosing flies to fish based on the colors of the waters we are fishing to get optimal results in catching fish, which is not generally known or understood by the fly fishing public. To further understanding and knowledge along these lines, I am going to post a link to an article published by Mepps spinner lure company, on their Color Technology. While this article is not aimed at fly fishermen, it contains important and relevant information for fly pattern selection and fly tying. For sure read the text. But more importantly study the 3 pictures of how the different lure colors show up in the different colored water conditions. Look for the few colors that show up the best in each water color, and that show up the best in all of the different water colors. http://www.mepps.com/fishing-article/color-technology-what-you-see-is-not-what-you-get/77

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

There is a lot to this color thing.....the lure companies have been working on it for decades.

[Ralph]

If visibility was the primary trigger, we'd be fishing nothing but fluorescent orange and chartreuse flies. Regardless of the water color, a brown bug is a brown bug is a brown bug. These guys evolved to be difficult to see and trout have evolved to see them. There are certainly times when attractors work well, but from my experience imitating the approximate size, shape, silhouette, color, and behavior of the trout food is what gets eaten the most frequently. Adding a hot spot or bit of flash can make a difference sometimes, but buying into the whole "make your fly more visible" theory has never panned out.

[Golden]

Color is not a constant. It changes with depth. If you look at magnified pictures of nymphs, it will quickly become clear that they are made up of many different colors and textural patterns of light and dark. You are right that insects take on the colors of their surroundings to make them less visible to the fish. The fish counter with their evolved visual abilities to discern the minute light and dark color patterns in the bug's camouflage coloration. So it is not the color in and of itself so much as it is contrast that the trout's eyes hone in on, both contrast with the surrounding space light of the watery environment and the contrast found on the bug or fly itself.

Trout do not look for what is wrong in a fly pattern as long as what is wrong is not too obvious, and one would think that the hook alone would be a dead give away. None of the natural bugs have hooks sticking out of their butts. The motion of the fly tying materials in the water automatically excites the trout's brain, just as the gills of a breathing nymph do. The fish can over ride this stimulation but exciting the fish is better than winning half of the battle. Exact imitation can be, and often is, counter productive. If our flies look just like all the natural insects the fish are eating, what are the odds of a fish taking your fly? About 1 in how ever many bugs there are out there. Look at all the bugs the trout do not eat. But through the use of contrast and movement it is possible to make flies that the trout will be more attracted to than they are attracted to the naturals they are eating, assuming proper presentation of course. And for the fish to pick your fly out of a crowd, it has to have something about it that makes it stand out from all the rest of the bugs that are out there. Take a look at my 2010 Pattern Testing Results for more detailed information on this subject. Of all the things you have mentioned, behavior is the most important. As long as the presentational behavior is right, great liberties can be taken with shape, silhouette and size with out compromising performance much at all. Note how successful the Sheeps Creel fly patterns were, and they look like nothing to be found in nature.

[Ralph]

You are correct that color changes with depth. A red bug in 2" of water is going to look different at 30'. I tend to believe that if you imitate the red bug with a like looking imitation at the surface it will undergo precisely the same color shift as the natural when it sinks 30'.

Un-matching the hatch is a concept that predates George La Branche's writings of nearly a century ago. It works at certain times in certain waters, but is the exception rather than the rule. Trout in Sierra lakes are wildly opportunistic feeders because they rarely have a lot on the plate. Seldom are they swimming through an insect soup where your fly has to look more attractive than all the others to get noticed. A Sierra brite dot will get hammered more times than not on a Sierra water, but that same pattern on The Fork during a PMD blizzard or on Hebgen when gulpers are slurping tricos will likely be ignored.

The Sheep Creek was actually tied to imitate snails and originally fished in the film without motion. It has evolved into being a general attractor pattern that most people fish with a retrieve (I love the fly by the way).

[Bryan Morgan]

Size and shape is always more important than color.

[Mike O]

Always? Then why does a #6 orange Stimulator work on streams with neither salmonflies, mother's day caddis, nor hoppers?

[jbird]

Always? Then why does a #6 orange Stimulator work on streams with neither salmonflies, mother's day caddis, nor hoppers?

Because a green one and a tan one would work too. I think you actually make Bryans point with your point :)

[JGB]

Stimmies = Can you say "attractor" pattern?

Can bugs change color with short term(relatively) water color changes? I would imagine that they might evolve(not to offend creationists) to a certain color if the water is one tint or another, but wouldn't that be over a loooong period of time?

I'm with the size and shape crowd.

JGB

[DLJeff]

I think the only absolute when it comes to fly selection is that sometimes the fish will eat, and sometimes they won't. I tried a little experiment on the Green one time. Fished a standard pheasant tail and a green pheasant tail tandem. Switched them back and forth so they had equal time as the point fly and as the dropper. The fish ate the green one 5 to 1. Next day they ate the standard colored one. I left just as confused as I was before - although I did come away believing that once you find the color they prefer it's worth it to stick with that color for the day. I've had big brown trout in New Zealand eat a big hopper dry when there were no hoppers present for months. I watched big trout in Tasmania spook at the slightest overhead shadow or movement even though there were no overhead predators there. Personally, as much as I enjoy reading all the scientific testing reports - I hope we never figure them out. For me that's what makes fly fishing so much fun.

[Bryan Morgan]

Amen to that brother.

[Ralph]

"Personally, as much as I enjoy reading all the scientific testing reports - I hope we never figure them out. For me that's what makes fly fishing so much fun".. . . ditto, ditto, and double ditto. I don't know who you are, but would be honored to fish with you. If ever you are in the Nevada City area and so inclined, drop me a note at cutter@flyline.com.
~R

[Adam Grace]

I always wondered if you were Ralph Cutter! I'm kinda excited, and somewhat embarrassed to have just now found that out, lol.
BTW, the E/C Caddis is one of my GO TO bugs for picky trout..... which leads me into this discussion.... The E/C has fooled fish during both caddis and mayfly hatches for me based (IMHO) on the patterns shape, and the way it sits in the film. I realize that color has it's place but if the shape/profile and movement aren't there the color won't really matter. I love all of these kinds of discussions btw, it's what makes fly fishing a challenge, in addition to Ralphs comments above.

[Ralph]

Thanks Adam.
As the bug drifts on the surface toward the fish, the only thing the fish sees is the impression the fly makes on the film. Many more times than not the fish is rising to the impression well before it sees any color. It certainly doesn't hurt to have the right color and sometimes it is critical, but usually an appropriate shape and silhouette along with a good presentation is what matters most.

[JGB]

+ 1 on the e/c caddis!

JGB

[Frank R. Pisciotta]

Et al-----Great discussion. It seems to be primarily about the "match the hatch" school of thought; not a lot about the "presentation" school of thought. They are both important, not mutually exclusive and IMO,most important interdependent of each other.

Below is my personal, light on science, take on fly selection. It was printed in the 2010 winter issue of Sierra Fisherman magazine (www.sierrafisherman.com)....it is copyrighted, reprints per request.

WHAT FLY DO I USE?

Politicians have diametrically opposed views on how the country ought to be managed. Strong positions are staked-out and voices are raised in shrill debate. Each side points out the weaknesses of the opposition’s arguments. Usually neither side has all the right answers, and the solution lies somewhere in the middle.

It is not much different when you choose a fly. What’s a practical angler to do? For a start recognize that…as in politics…truth is usually in the middle.

The age-old question a fly angler has is: What fly do I use? Well if there is a black/white answer to this question we’d probably quit the sport because it would be entirely too easy and simple. We indulge in our passion for fly fishing because we thrive on putting all the variables together to produce success. We love this challenge.

An understanding of the two acknowledged “schools of thought” in the world of trout fly angling is useful when selecting a fly pattern. The schools are the “Match the Hatch” and “Presentation” schools. What is important to the fly angler is that the schools are inter-dependent of each other, not mutually exclusive. Understanding this relationship will aid you in selecting the proper fly to use in a specific fly angling situation.

The “match-the-hatchers” believe that you must have the correct size, shape and color of the food item. There is some debate whether size or shape is the most important of the three, but there is no debate that color is of least importance. An exact imitation is preferred, which in reality is a bit difficult. Regardless, tiers strive for a life-like pattern. For this discussion, size is the primary focal point of the Match the Hatch school.

On the opposite side are the “presentationists” who insist that the fly pattern must act like a food item. All that counts is that your fraud is presented in a life-like manner; be it dead-drifting or with movement such as twitching, skating or swimming. Simply, if your fly acts like the natural a trout will grab it. Flies used are attractor, searching, impressionistic and suggestive patterns. Ideally the designs are easy and quick to tie. This group’s primary focal point is a dead-drift presentation.

Now you have a notion of the two divergent schools of thought. What is next? Place both schools’ focal points to a middle ground. From this point, current flow and speed determine which school’s concepts you’ll…initially…rely. The slower the water (e.g. placid pool or smooth tail-out), the more time a trout has to scrutinize your offering. In quick flows (freestone riffles or pocket-water), the trout does not have the leisure of unhurried inspection because it has to grab now or the food is gone. Nevertheless, do not forget the inter-dependence of the two schools.

So on slow water, matching-the-hatch is more right. However, presentation is still important. For example, consider the following situation.

It’s a cool and overcast day. You have just arrived at your favorite, slow-moving, dry fly pool and you notice the snout of a trout just breaking the surface film as it ingests an adult mayfly. There are good numbers adults flying about. You get a sample in-hand, hold-it up for viewing, note its size shape and color. From your fly-box you locate an exact replica and attach it to your tippet. From an ideal casting position you make a drag-free presentation to the steadily rising trout. You make several perfect dead-drifts in the feeding-lane of the surface-feeder…nothing. Each time the trout ignores your offering and then eats a natural bug floating behind your fly. You’re befuddled.

Because of the cool day you have not observed that it takes longer for the emerging duns’ wings to dry, thus spending more time at the surface. As the fresh adults attempt to take-off they make false-starts on the surface…twitching. The trout’s refusal is a result of having the right pattern…but the wrong presentation. You have been dead-drifting the fly, not twitching it. You had the correct fly, the “primary trigger”, but did not impart a twitch, the “secondary trigger”.

On the other hand, trout in a fast-water environment have to make very quick and instinctive decisions. Otherwise the food item passes by and the trout goes hungry.

Envision this scenario as you have arrived at a 500 yard, boulder-strewn, pocket-water stretch on a free-stone stream. You’re hunting for a large trout and know they prefer high-caloric food items. Your seining indicates there is an abundance of Golden Stonefly nymphs present so you knot-on an impressionistic #6 Stonefly pattern. You locate a huge, bank-side boulder which provides a perfect “prime-lie” for a hefty trout. You get close and make numerous dead-drift presentations in the only current seam coming around and past the boulder…nothing.

Well, you have correct presentation, but…the wrong size. In this case, the trout are currently conditioned to seeing/eating size 16 PMD nymphs, in a ratio of 30-1 in relation to the stonefly. This is one reason why I always use a tandem, nymphing rig; one large-sized fly and the other smaller.

The presentation school says a dead-drift is the tactic of choice BUT your chances will be much better if it is the same size as whatever has been on the trout’s current menu. If it’s too big, you may get that frustrating chase and refusal, regardless of how well you made the presentation.

A good angling buddy is fond of saying “If it looks and acts like food the trout will eat it”. Fortunately, the results for us fly anglers selecting the correct fly and making the proper presentation is more satisfying than the compromises made by politicians. Plus, it seems less confusing…most times.

[Darian]

I accept most of what has been said about size/shape but I do think color and flash play a more important role than has been assigned in this discussion. I can only relate anecdotal evidence but have too often fished down thru a run with what I thought was something that looked like food to a trout and what I thought was the correct presentation that resulted in one or more fish to hand only to have a guy come along right after me with a gaudy colored/silver or gold spinner and do the same thing. BTW, I'm of the presentationalist persuasion myself (not that there's anything wrong with that....).

Question: Is action of the fly/lure (supplied by the angler or built into a fly/lure) a part of presentation or separate????

In fishing for other species, fisherman have assigned a higher position of importance to color than in fly fishing. For example, choice of color appears to be very important in picking craws/worms, etc., for black bass. Ask any good conventional Bass guy how important the color "june bug" is and chartreuse has been the dominant color in flies for Delta Bass/Stripers. Even fly fisherman select colors carefully when fishing for Stripers and Black Bass. Exact detail doesn't appear to be as important as color/size and presentation. Don't have the answer to this but is the vision of Bass and Stripers so different than that of Trout??? Maybe other factors play into it.... :confused:

[Golden]

If anyone is interested I posted a link to an article that gives the materials listings and tying instructions for the Sheeps Creek fly patterns on the Fly Tying board.

[Golden]

There seems to be a pretty strong consensus here that color, water color and lighting conditions do not matter much in the catching of fish. Todd Oishi, someone who has extensive experience in international fly fishing competitions, would disagree. Here is a link to information on Todd and an Advanced Stillwater Strategies fly fishing course he teaches: http://bcflyfishingadventures.blogspot.com/2010/03/advanced-stillwater-strategies-fly_9867.html

[Frank R. Pisciotta]

Golden---I went to the Todd's link. He seems to be a stillwater specialist and mentions color briefly in the blog's home-page.

Since most of my fly angling is done on moving waters, I admit that there may be different considerations on stillwaters versus running waters as it pertains to color being the prime concern relative to lesser degrees of size and shape. My time on stillwaters I focus on three main considerations relative to strategy/tactics; 1) retrieve, 2) depth and 3) fly pattern (...of which size, shape & color come into play).

I do know fly anglers who have been/are competitive flyanglers since the mid-90's and one good friend who currently competes in the the US World Team qualifying events. Thus far he has not made the final cut of twelve for the traveling team. He like most fly anglers I know, if push came to shove, would place himself in the "Presentation School of Thought"; being fully aware that the school is not mutually exclusive andis interdependent with the "Match the Hatch" school.

Frank R. Pisciotta

[Darian]

Karl,.... If you're lumping fly color, lighting and water conditions together in your post, now, that would be an expansion from just the importance of color/vision over the course of this discussion. Including the extra factors changes things a bit for me. Going a bit further, it seems to me we could include water temps and a couple of other factors as well. I can't speak for the others but it seems to me that all of these factors, each in relation to the other, are important. I believe that at any one time these factors change in importance in relation to each other.

However, when we expand the discussion beyond UV reflection, fluorescence and color, we're getting into a generalized area which might elevate or deflate the importance of color in relation to other factors. Others on this BB may not've read, "The New Scientific Angling...." where the author seeks to overturn long accepted ideas by elevating the importance of UV light/vision on the part of trout. If/when they do and accept or deny it's validity, their collective/consensus opinions are probably not going to be influenced. Give it some time.... :cool:

[Golden]

I believe the reason Todd why does not give much information on light/color and contrast and such on his sight is because he, understandably enough, wants you to pony up the 50.00 dollars to take his one day seminar. If you look at the course outline, you will see that he placed the section on the understanding of light/color and contrast before pattern selection, because selecting the right colored pattern is largely dependent on the color of the water the fly will be fished in, and the quality of the light the trout has to work with. Trout, just like you and me, are governed by the laws of physics with respect to their ability to see light/color and contrast, except that they are seeing those things through the medium of water and we see them through air, with eyes that have considerably different design characteristics built into them, so it is more than reasonable to assume that we and the fish do not see things in the same way. Most anglers assume fish see things in exactly the same way that we see them, which is far from being accurate or true.

I would be interested in any information you could come up with on what the US National Fly Fishing Team does or does not do with respect to fly pattern to water color selection process. I believe, in international Fly Fishing Competitions, competitors are required to fish in both stillwater and running water venues. And we (the US Team) do not usually place nearly as well as the UK and Canadian National Teams do. A lot of my work has concentrated on lake fisheries, where I find the fish a lot harder to catch than I do in streams. In running waters I fish only dry flies. And with dry flies, I do not consider the color of the pattern being used to be of much importance to the fish. But the fly color can make or break the angler's ability to see his pattern on the water and to catch the fish that rise to it.

I am not trying to convert anyone to any particular school of thought in angling. I am making this information available because there are things here that I believe are not commonly known, and taking these things into consideration has improved the quality and quantity of my catches considerably. If you have no knowledge that these things exist, you can not act on them. Whether you choose to dig into these topics and learn more about them in the hope of bettering your catches is purely up to all of you. I believe most anglers will choose not to do anything any differently than they are already doing them - to resist change seems to be a part of human nature. But for the adventuresome few who who do decide to tie or fish flies that are constructed to appeal to what trout are programed to see and hard wired to react to, they will have some very productive fishing days to come in their futures, assuming good presentations. You always have to keep up your end of the deal to succeed.