Presentation and Angle On Rivers

[paulsewin]

rpsalmon said:

I don’t mind anybody learning, in fact I enjoy learning.

Perhaps we can start again from this common ground.

1. Grilse feeding grounds. If grilse retain their feeding memory more than salmon, this would suggest that they are feeding closer to the UK coastline than salmon.

My question is this. Do you know of any scientific research to support this view? If not, is your reasoned explanation the basis of this conclusion? Yes or no will do.

2. Sea winter. A grilse is usually defined as a salmon which has spent one sea winter feeding. Given that the main smolt run occurs in May, surely they have adequate time to reach thed same feeding grounds, even if you discount their swimming speeds to say 10 miles per day.

Grilse are essentially summer fish so, if they do swim at 30 miles per day, two months would see them arriving on the UK coastline. So they could continue feeding until March or April and still arrive on time.

3. Salmon don't posses any crushing teeth in their throats as do some fish, chub, for example. Consequently, they must bite or chew their prey. It is highly likely that they will have felt the backbone of fish or the spikes and hard segments of prawns. Surely, they are used to feeling sharp objects.

Metal, on the other hand, may be a different thing all together. There was a time when all restaurants used to use silver or EPNS (electro plated nickel silver) cuttlery when serving fish. If we humans were able to taste the metallic cuttlery, do salmon possess the same ability? I don't know the answer but I think it is an interesting thought?

In practice, however, I don't know how to reconcile the number of salmon I have caught on spoons and spinners with this enhanced sense.

4. Please tell me you were joking when you stated salmon were at the top of the food chain (your point 6). There is little scientific evidence concerning predation at sea but it is surely unreasonable to exclude seals, sharks, dophins and killer whales.

5. My point about presentation was simply this. Whilst salmon will take a fast moving fly at times, MY approach is to give the reluctant takers, the largest part of the population at any time in the day, the opportunity to take a fly presented slowly to make it as easy as possible for these fish to take.

If that doesn't work, I will then try other methods, which may include larger patterns fished quickly.

I like to think of it this way. Imagine a party. A buffet has been laid out. Some people are quite happy to fill a plate with food, from the buffet table, and eat that. Others may eat from some food placed on a table, in front of them. Some will only eat if the plate is actually offered to them.

It is likely that the willing taker (eater) would accept food however it is presented to them while the reluctant taker, who is unwilling to walk across to the buffet table won't.

6. My fishing. As anglers, we are all products of the types of water we are used to fishing. Just as tennis players or golfers are often specialists on particular courts or courses.

I am not surprised that you have not encountered similar salmon behaviour. Few anglers can claim to have experienced all types of water, in all rivers holding stocks of salmon.

I have always been surprised by the positive takes, more like attacks, to a tiny slow moving fly. That has been my experience, you are free to make of it what you will. I can say that I have caught salmon on Tweed in similar low water, so the method is not unique to West Wales. Other friends have used similar approaches on the Dee and Deveron.

The keys to this method are stealth, accurate casting, intimate knowledge of the lies and the choice of fly (plastic tube flies, 1/2" and smaller).

7. Hook sizes. Thank you for sharing your rationale for choosing a fly size. It reinforces my feeling that hook size is potentially misleading. I am interested to note that you discount the length of the tail. I think that the tail is part of the overall image of the fly. You have an approach which works for you. It would be interesting to compare our choice of fly size on a given day, to see if differing thought processes produced the same results.

8. Previous authors experiences. All these authors ever do is record their own experiences. I have a library of over 60 salmon fishing books. These cover Scrope and Chaytor through to Crawford Little and Francis Grant. Art Lee and Derek Knowles provided additional specialised reading.

I read the information, question the assumptions, take the advice and then ultimately test it against my own experience.

The simple fact is that if you only ever use one pattern, the only fish you catch fish will be on that pattern. Similarly, if you only ever use one method you will only catch fish using that method.

The fact that other methods have emerged over the years does not undermine the writings of older authors, it merely adds further insight into the behaviour of salmon. The fact that one angler has a style that works for him, but appears to contradict the writings of angling "greats" is no justification for attacking them. They are merely sharing their experiences.

I never met Falkus but several of my friends did. One thing about Falkus was his distain for many authors who just repeated previous dogma, his active encouragement of innovation, his acknowledgment of "new" methods (illustrated by his inclusion of Derek Knowles' methods) and his desire to encourage people to think for themselves.


Hopefully, you will accept this post as a desire to explore some of the points you raised and can respond in that spirit.

[rpsalmon]

Dear paulsewin

Point 1.
Yes I do know of work to support the view, and generally accepted fact amongst scientists/fishery scientists, that Grilse feed closer to our coast than MSW Salmon. Unfortunately I can not put my hands on the paper that comes to mind immediately, and the thought of even going through part of the rest of my cabinet full of fisheries reports fills me with dread. However, a quick search for Faroes on the internet confirms the following accept that Grilse have different feeding grounds to MW salmon. The last report covers the river Tyne system in England, their smolts/salmon are on the same lanes and direction as the Scottish east coast rivers up to the Moray Firth area, and shows grilse being taken around the UK, Irish, Scottish, & Faroes coast(page 40). You will note in that report there are figures for Greenland and are recorded as 1SW but, obviously, they couldn’t be split from MSW! Within these various documents it is also recognised that it is MSW salmon who feed off the coast of Greenland and that grilse and salmon have differing feeding areas (though there is a good proportion of MSW Salmon in the Faroes-don’t know the time of year the salmon were counted!). A basic look at the sizes and growth rates of grilse/salmon and the fact that we know the MSW salmon usually end up off Greenland, together with our knowledge of timings of runs of grilse/salmon into rivers around our coast, only confirms our existing knowledge as recognised in the links below.

Tay District Fisheries Board www.tdsfb.org/salmon-sea.htm
Kyle of Sutherland Fisheries Trust www.ksft.org/files/downloads/download266.pdf
EA www.environment-agency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/onffactorsaffect_766479.pdf
EA www.environment-agency.gov.uk/commondata/105385/review_10.4_version2b_885710.pdf

Also, I have looked at the English EA’s Fish Status Report for 2001 and this admits to Greenland having MSW but the Faroes mainly having mainly Grilse (though it has MSW, it doesn’t know the origins).

I can also remember a report from Iceland in the Early/Mid eighties, recording tagged smolts staying near the coast and returning as small grilse (up to 1kg), those that ventured away from their coast returned as far larger grilse (up to 4kg). I’ll have to have a little search for this report because thinking upon it now, it catches my interest.

Grilse returning to north and north east Scottish rivers (down to the Moray area) from the Faroes etc can swim in a southern direction down the coast and arrive at their rivers earlier than other east coast Scottish rivers because the later normally go further east and down the North Sea and come into the English coast, only for them to go up the English coast and up to the Tweed, Tay, Dee, Spey etc. (in effect taking the long way around-supposedly something to do with the currents). During the latter’s longer journey the feeding suppression will have increased and feeding instinct/habit decreased. The grilse returning to the North and North East coast rivers have the tendency to act more boisterously and act like other fish returning to rivers in Iceland/Norway that are closer to their feeding grounds. Just because grilse generally have a higher feeding suppression than salmon it does not follow that they are all feeding nearer the coast, because they can probably travel quicker than salmon, but I do think the majority feed nearer the coast. The current work of various bodies, testing to see where salmon smolts migrate over the seas, will probably confirm what we have learnt to date.

If I find the report I’m thinking of, and I’m not going to bust a gut looking for it, I’ll let you know within the next week.

Point 2.
While the main smolt run is in May there are smolts leaving earlier and later than May, also there are 1SW fish (grilse) returning virtually year around. The speed of a fish quoted at 30 miles per day was recorded average maximum on returning to the river with a focus/ultimate objective in mind, and this is obviously when it is following its instinct and knows where it has to go. A salmon parr/grilse/salmon on the high seas that is feeding does not know it is going to the Faroes/Greenland etc, they end up there from following the ocean currents looking for food, and fish would move at inconsistent speeds that would undoubtedly be less than 30 miles per day. You could make the general assumption that the longer it spends at sea, the bigger it gets, and this is borne out by the larger MSW salmon at Greenland and smaller grilse around the UK coast/Faroes. So when you take the fishes wanderings in differing directions into account, on average it is doubtful that a smolt/Grilse would have had the time to get to Greenland and feed heavily before returning within the space of a year as a far bigger fish.

Point 3.
With the majority of shrimp/prawn/small fish/squid, a salmon will take it down whole and without any bother, larger fish will be taken across the body and then turned before swallowing. At sea they will use their teeth to keep hold and kill something, perhaps even use them to take a bite out of something that can’t be swallowed, but I can’t see how they would chew. They could crush something in their mouth. If they do take a bite out of something I am sure they then would probably feel bones, but fish bones are not as hard as metal and certainly don’t feel the same. Perhaps when a salmon takes (and lets remember, lots of game fish react to lures in the same way as salmon so it isn’t unique to the subject fish) it also uses its taste to assess whether to swallow an object, also possible that under some circumstances it tests the temperature of the object (fish can sense temperature down to 1/10th of 1 Fahrenheit.

In the cold waters of the spring and Autumn (if we ever get cold water again in the Autumn) a fish will more often than not take and lure and attempt to take it back to its lie. This happens even with a metal Toby and I don’t think it is bothered in these circumstances, however in warmer waters the increased senses make it increasing unlikely that it would hold onto a metal Toby. Experience bears this out, also there are other game fish that react in the same way in cold/water water. Off the top of my head, we already know for sure that many fish carp/catfish have incredible senses of touch and can detect metal. I know trout and sea trout, from bait fishing, can sense metal hooks with points well hidden in baits; and I know of an instance where a shrimp fisherman ran out of pins and found his catch rate increased-he didn’t buy any more and his catches went up exponentially! So, even discounting my experiences with metal flies, I have no reason to doubt salmon can’t feel metal either.

I’m certainly glad to see Kit Kat & Club biscuit wrappers change, just the thought of that metal foil gave me pains in the teeth. I have spent an hour or so searching links related to EPNS to see whether there is something special about the process in relation to an effect with fish, can’t find anything. I had some metal spoons electroplated about 15 years ago, but only used them in the very cold water during spring, but the fish didn’t have a problem hanging onto them.

Point 4.
Yes, it was narrow minded and wrong of me to state salmon were at the top of the food chain. In “natural” terms it would be a seal, whale or shark but sadly we humans have come in above them to become top of the food chain.

Point 5.
The problem with your buffet scenario is that you have humans who aren’t really hungry (I’ve seen civilised people fight & kill for food and they don’t act the same as if we were just hungry) and even if they were, they would probably have to be “anorexic like” to simulate the physiological/psychological effect on a salmon. I do understand your analogy and agree with your thought process, up to the point of what is likely to motivate a reluctant salmon.

I think I would agree with part of your approach in that the best way to fish for resident/reluctant takers is to fish a fly smoothly/steadily and within natural speed limits, ensuring it is neither scared or educated for the sake of yourself/everyone else fishing. But I would not agree that a slow lure is the best way to attract a reluctant fish. In a swift current, and near the surface, I would say that a fly moving slowly across a fast current is a very tempting and easy object as it mimics most fishes idea of an easy target to consume and the fast water will probably help in the hooking process.

I can not see (and it is my experience) that the “trigger” would not be more likely to occur with a slow/lively modern fly than it would be with a fly that has been drawn ever quickly away from the fish. When the aspect of hooking the fish is included, and of course it depends on the current speed/direction of fish pre/post take, I would rate my chances of a successful hooking higher because I am creating the momentum for the fish’s weight to act against it once the lure is in its mouth.

It is strange that I am in the north of the Britain where down and across is entirely normal, yet prefer to fish from the side; you are near to Crossfield’s/Pashley’s Wye and they liked to fish the fly quickly, yet you like to fish the fly slowly.

Your addition of your remark “to make it as easy as possible for these fish to take” is where I really become concerned, to me such an approach is more likely to disinterest a fish and educate it. The only time a salmon needs “help” to get hold of the lure is when that lure is moving irregularly and because of its body’s inflexibility the salmon can’t necessarily hit an irregularly moving target accurately, if a lure is moved steadily then this problem is usually solved.

Point 6.
I don’t think the behaviour of the salmon is too different, yes there are separate genetic strains and runs of fish with different experiences and slightly different habits but not to the extent that they act so differently as I think you imply. I have hard takes from salmon to small flies fishes slowly, but like other forms of fishing, they have something to do with currents, the fish’s position/direction pre/post take and their feeling of security at the time of the take.

Point 7.
I think that the hook is also part of the fly, and when you look at sat a size 12 l/w double stoats tail it is surely nonsense to pretend the bends of the hook do not exist. To me the bends of hooks are probably seen by the fish as something akin to legs or antenna on a shrimp. I prefer black because they do seem to have the least effect. I tried green hooks in a strong but smooth stream, so the salmon could see the bends, but the salmon turned away. It is strange but they worked with trout! Yellow hooks worked fine. We know gold/silver/grey work ok.

Point 8.
I am delighted you’re so well read and apologise for suggesting you weren’t. Yes, Hugh had a few choice words to describe certain authors (authors I actually liked) as well as strong opinions on a great many other subjects. Knowlesie deserves credit for simply pushing his head above the parapets. While “his” techniques are not particularly sophisticated when compared to techniques developed abroad, and part of this is a result of the limited availability of appropriate fishing water/time, I think they should be considered another of the standard techniques any competent salmon angler should have.

[minitube]

paulsewin and I spent quite a few days salmon angling together using all methods on all method water and fly on fly water. He kindly has lent me many of his classic salmon angling books from time to time and in fact I have some of his books now.

We concluded many things is our discussions, paulsewin a man for detail. One of the things we concluded was that the statement that there are no rules in salmon angling - while perhaps true - is really quite irrelevant to the angler who wants to be consistently successful. I wrote about this afterwards. Basically something along the lines that what matters is not what the odd fish takes, (i.e. on the tidal whatever in March during a five food flood of dirty water someone caught a fresh fish on a floating line on a piece of daisy they hooked on the bank or whatever) but what most potential taking fish would take.
What actually really matters is what more fish will do, or what more fish will take more of the time in a given set of circumstances. What will be a more effective presentation is what matters. The rules are there are no rules until you want to be consistently successful; and reduce down time or ineffective fishing time, then there are plenty of rules to follow. It is still then possible to fish with a less effective fly fishing technique than what we know would be more successful, simply on the basis that the enjoyment of that particular style is greater for the individual angler.

[rpsalmon]

Dear minitube

One of the fundamental reasons for my statement that “there are no ABSOLUTE rules in salmon fishing” is that the salmon’s behaviour changes according to circumstances and conditions, therefore to achieve the highest results in salmon fishing we must recognise the behaviour and habits of the fish our strategy and tactics must take account of those changes in the salmon. If we are attempting to catch an odd fish then that single salmon becomes very important, I do not use one method to the exclusion of others but naturally take more satisfaction afterwards when I know to have caught a fish using more skills. I believe the difference to our opinion stems from my approach to the water, and without attempting to be condescending, I think I look at a piece of water and the salmon itself more specifically than you with the result that my tactics are more specific. I would not want to fish for salmon on the basis of using a particular method rather than what I consider to be the best method, as such I abhor bans on appropriate bait fishing.

[flybox]

The only time a salmon needs “help” to get hold of the lure is when that lure is moving irregularly and because of its body’s inflexibility the salmon can’t necessarily hit an irregularly moving target accurately, if a lure is moved steadily then this problem is usually solved.

Does that mean the Scandanavian saw - which gives the fly a very irregular motion - makes it harder for the salmon to be caught?

[rpsalmon]

Any lure that moves in an irregular fashion, and putting aside the undoubted attraction of certain irregular motions, becomes proportionately more difficult for a large fish to successfully take when the irregular motion becomes excessive. While the salmon has become a highly successful predator, and just like the pike, with its size and body structure it finds adjusting the last stages of an attack to intercept a small irregularly moving lure as difficult. As long as the irregular movement is not too extreme and the speed of the fish not too great, a successful take is likely.

[paulsewin]

Dear RP salmon, thank you very much for your detailed reply.

I particularly appreciated the information about grilse feeding grounds.

To respond to your question about the Wye, it is perhaps the least typical of all Welsh rivers both in size and character. It really doesn't have much in common with the spate rivers in the rest of Wales, it's catchment area is so much bigger.

In a later post, you mentioned the difficulty large erratic movements could cause a salmon attempting to take a fly. I find this quite interesting.

I don't know how a Blair spoon should be fished, I've never been shown by a Dee regular. However, it certainly seems to have plenty of erratic movement, possibly more than any fly angler could achieve without stripping and exaggerated movements of the rod tip. I like to fish it with plenty of life. In a heavy current it often feels like you're playing a small fish just fishing it!

It could just be that the Blair has more "presence" in the water and the additional vibration allows the fish to home in on it more easily because it can use other senses than just sight. So perhaps this isn't an anomaly at all. It's food for thought though.

Please take the next part of this post in the spirit it is intended, namely a bit of background about another forum member. It may prevent any embarrassment in the future.

I had better declare an interest before we go any further. Minitube is a good friend of mine and is my salmon fishing mentor. His advice provided the framework for all my understanding of salmon behaviour. I will never forget his remark, while I was sitting in his kitchen "I hope you don't mind me saying this Paul, but you only catch salmon in water. After that, it's all about physics" I just knew enough to appreciate the significance of that remark.

He is probably the most respected guide in the Moy valley, other guides buy their flies from him. He is an APGAI Ireland qualified instructor and was the first person to ever pass all three American FFF tests in one sitting.

His services are regularly sought by golfers, Nick Faldo and Mark O'Meara to name two. In fact Mark O'Meara actually showed him the Snap C cast and he first saw cone heads in action when a Swedish golfer used them, a full year before they were written about.

All his knowledge has be gained by doing it and what he has learnt from the other anglers he has fished with on the association waters he fishes. I lent him a few books, Flying Salmon, Tales of a Wye Fisherman, Fine and Far Off together with a few others because he had not read many books on fishing.

He is well aware of all the methods of extracting salmon from the Moy including worm, shrimp, prawn all with or without floats, spinning, fly fishing and bubble and fly.

He can also tell you exactly where to fish, taking into account your chosen method, from the mouth of the Moy up to Swinford having regard for the time of year, height of water, clarity of water and your ability as an angler. Why? Simply because he has intimate knowledge of the whole river.

In short he is someone who is worth listening to.

[rpsalmon]

Dear paulsewin

The Crossfield/Pashley techniques were used in fast as well as slow water.

I have fished a Blair lure, I’ll not use the correct word because this web site is incapable of displaying the word that is also a piece of cutlery, but would not count the lure as hard to take because the pattern is rhythmic. The kind of “last moment movement” that I am talking about as being difficult for the salmon to take, is when an object moves quickly at a sharp angle and not when it is just moving around about. A salmon that is following a lure that is in itself traveling at a consistent speed will set the interception point on the basis of that movement/speed, if it unexpectedly moves 60-90 degrees at the last moment then the salmon will find this difficult to catch.

I know of coneheads, and a lot of other "new developments", being used in the 1960's. I am sure they and others were used before that! Painted pistol bullets were used prior to WW1 !