Aboyne Water - May 2007

[tyneandrew]

Conditions were against us this year and we did not really know what to expect driving over the Cairngorms heading into the stunning Dee valley. The gauge at Aboyne was on a tiny 4 inches and spring fish generally scarce and bombing to the upper ricer. But we were full of enthusiasm as ever, with the prospect of possible rain, great company and a steady yet constant flow of drink to keep us going. A pleasure to fish with Bill Currie and his son Mark once more, and of course our wonderful ghillie Jim.

On the first three days the water never moved and we were restricted to smaller areas of the river. Lummels held a good stock of fish as it always does - surely it is in the top three pools on the river. I know what it produces from our bank, so combine it with Birse and you are looking in the region of 125 salmon and perhaps 150 sea trout per season from a single pool.

Fast water below Lummels going into Red Brae.


Fishing Upper Irrigation at very low levels


So, when on one of the best sea trout beats in Scotland why not have a go at night, you might be rewarded...


The lunch's we had were fantastic, all you need is a bbq and some commitment! My dad, Mark and Kirsty (the dog) waiting with eager anticipation


The dogs getting in on the action!


Red rock is a gem of a pool and fishes well at any height


Things changed on Wednesday night. The rain came and it was looking ominous on Wednesday evening. Photo taken from Jetty looking up to the Stone where the fisherman can be seen.


A sunray shadow can often produce a fish, a sea trout from Jetty that i kept due to bleeding


Lummels on Saturday evening at 1ft 8' with fish showing all the time but not taking. Were they just bombing through???


During the week i hooked four salmon and four sea trout but unfortunately only landed two of the sea trout. Some of the fish were on for quite sometime but sometimes luck is not with you. Tristan had two salmon out of Lummels and Mark also had one which spat the hook on dry land after being beached. Bill insisted it did not count!

If you ever get the chance to fish Aboyne in the spring go for it.

[elwyman]

Lovely looking beat and some nice sea trout.

Good to hear that Bill Currie is still fishing.

[hornet]

Looks excellent and sounds like you had a good time.

Hornet

[donnieW]

tyneandrew said:

. Tristan had two salmon out of Lummels and Mark also had one which spat the hook on dry land after being beached. Bill insisted it did not count.

If the fish was landed/beached and was being returned - IMO it was caught. Why does it matter what happened after it was beached?

[tyneandrew]

I agree with you ;D

[splash]

donniewhiteford said:

tyneandrew said:

. Tristan had two salmon out of Lummels and Mark also had one which spat the hook on dry land after being beached. Bill insisted it did not count.

If the fish was landed/beached and was being returned - IMO it was caught. Why does it matter what happened after it was beached?

This happened to me for about 5 fish in a row on the Dee in early Spring last year. When I netted or beached the fish the hook popped out. Its not happened since then and occurred with both tubes and waddingtons using doubles Mind you wish I faced the same problem this Spring...

[tyneandrew]

It happened to my fish on the Spey, but i was quicker than a cat jumping on a mouse. Absolutely whacked my knee on a rock but got hold of the fish

[macd]

lovely pics andrew. I have fished birse, so its nice to see things from the other side. Did you get a whiff of the 'Irrigation Incense'.

Delighted to hear BC is still at it. I have been reading his river within recently- great book and marvelllous description of Aboyne in May.

C&R does seem to allow for some creative accounting. If you recall an earlier thread on the price hikes on certain beats, this inflation of catch returns plays into their hands.

"Ach, its going back, chalk her up".


Surely if the fish is to count the angler must participate in the release. If the fish spits the hook and goes back of its own volition, how can it be counted?

Sorry to disagree andrew and donnie, but its not caught, its lost. In the days when the fish were killed, they would be regarded as lost-so are we changing the rules of engagement?

The use of a net instead of beaching would remedy this and is better for the fish any way.


Ross

[castlikeaghille]

macd said:

lovely pics andrew. I have fished birse, so its nice to see things from the other side. Did you get a whiff of the 'Irrigation Incense'.

Delighted to hear BC is still at it. I have been reading his river within recently- great book and marvelllous description of Aboyne in May.

C&R does seem to allow for some creative accounting. If you recall an earlier thread on the price hikes on certain beats, this inflation of catch returns plays into their hands.

"Ach, its going back, chalk her up".


Surely if the fish is to count the angler must participate in the release. If the fish spits the hook and goes back of its own volition, how can it be counted?

Sorry to disagree andrew and donnie, but its not caught, its lost. In the days when the fish were killed, they would be regarded as lost-so are we changing the rules of engagement?

The use of a net instead of beaching would remedy this and is better for the fish any way.


Ross

I tend to agree with Ross on this one, particularly in the case of catch and release only rivers. Unless you had the opportunity to release, or more specifically 'keep' the fish then it is lost.

John Gierach wryly observed that the fish we remember most vividly are the ones we didn't catch or those that got away. To illustrate the point, I remember in painful detail an incident 25 years ago when on a difficult high water day I hooked a fresh run Tweed Autumn fish of about 12lbs. The fish being beaten and in at the side where the bank dropped staright into 2 1/2 ft, my friend offered to tail it. On his first attempt instead of pulling the mechanical tailer shut up toward the head he did it backward toward the tail and the loop shut off the fish. While he was resetting the tailer the hooks came out in that for no apparent reason type of way that we all love. I watched, gutted, as the fish paused and then slowly swam away. That fish was lost (although it shouldn't have been) and did not count toward the season's total; nor was there any suggestion that it should.

I am not entirely convinced, for the reasons Ross suggests, that such a strict attitude to such encounters is taken today on some beats. The price of salmon fishing has always been driven by catches. In the past there was little doubt about the numbers because of the carcasses. In current times we should really define what is meant by saying a salmon is 'caught' if we are to compare like with like - or at least be charged on that basis.

That is one of the reasons I ask people who fish with me, if possible/practical, to take a quick picture of anything they have caught before the fish goes back. The pictures are generally rushed and not usually good copy, but they provide some certainty that the fish has been:

a) caught; and
b) in spring that it is not a kelt/baggot/rawner

Regards

CLaG

P.S. Somehow our friendship survived the trauma of that loss, but that was the last time I ever used or carried a mechanical tailer

[tyneandrew]

I suppose if you 'could' have killed the fish it is caught. I could have with mine on the Spey but Bill/Mark could not have with the Dee fish. So it is fair not to count it - as you say.

[Sloggi]

Thanks for the great pictures (except for the begging dogs - but each to their own) - hopefully I'll get to fish there one day!

As to the "losing" of a fish before "capture", I have the following thoughts and I roughly agree with the sentiments of CLag and Macd:

1. You can't lose something you never had in the first place so, for me, saying "I lost it" really shouldn't apply. I have read and used "parted company" which may be more accurate. Any other "phrases"?
2. As a fly-tyer, I like to think of the fish being caught when it takes the fly I have sat and made dreaming of the same.
3. I only count fish when it's in my, pre-wetted, hands or when I remove the hook. Netting is better than beaching but where possible releasing the fish while still in the water is the best way.

[zephead]

Haven't a strong view either way here on what is a catch or not but I do think the difference on a C&R beat these days is that fish aren't played out til they're lying half dead,"pan ready", on their side the way the denoument to a classic fight to the death used to/would be and would as Clag says be counted as a catch beause they were killed.

Ive beached a fish in quick time myself,dropped the rod tip and given it some slack and by the time I've walked up to it's twisted itself back into the water sans hook in its gob and is making its way thro the shallows whereas if I were going to kill it I would have beached it well and truly and followed round behind it and tailed/killed it.

I have seen a big tendency recently to give fish a bit more stick on C&R beats from fishers that are out regularly and veteran fishers certainly giving them a bit more heave to get them in and released quickly.

It begs the question,possibly on another thread,that do we fish for the fight or the thrill of the take........................................?

ZH

[Sloggi]

zephead said:

It begs the question,possibly on another thread,that do we fish for the fight or the thrill of the take........................................?

ZH

The take

[elwyman]

sloggi said:

zephead said:

It begs the question,possibly on another thread,that do we fish for the fight or the thrill of the take........................................?

ZH

The take

Agreed 95% of the time, but occasionally hooking and playing a good fish in a strong stream is even better than the take.

On the subject of lost fish, I hooked and beached (1/2 in 1/2 out of the water) a 8lb salmon on the Galway weir a couple of years ago. Another angler offered to help and as he bent down the dropper fly snagged his jacket and the leader parted. I felt I had caught the fish even though I never touched it.

I had hooks pull out as I've been beaching fish, and don't count them as caught because the "fight"wasn't over.

Perhaps we should follow the lead of big game anglers - touch the leader and the fish counts as caught.