The Underground Goes From Hero to Zero: Fly Fishing, Stupidity, and October Caddis
By Tom Chandler on Oct 3, 2007 in Fishing Report, Upper Sacramento
Sure, my last fishing report detailed my triumph over one of the Upper Sac’s heftier wild specimens, but if the ancient Greeks taught us anything, it’s that humanity largely sucks at the game of life, and big days are inevitably followed by small days.
At least that’s what I gleaned from a short bout with Greek literature (I’ll admit my interpretation isn’t wholly supported by literary experts, but damnit, it’s my blog).
So I guess this was inevitable; I went fishing with Dave Edmondson, made a huge mistake on the equipment front, and got skunked. As in nada. No fish (three takes, zero hookups). Zilch.
Instead of covering myself in glory, I covered myself with loose fly line — after setting on and missing fish. Just like the Ancient Greeks predicted.
The Gear Gaffe
Regular readers know I’ve been testing some gear as of late, and anytime you get away from the stuff that you know works, you’re looking for trouble.
In this case, I dragged along Rio’s new Gold Line (a WF5). A less radical departure from traditional fly lines than the Sharkskin line I tested Sunday (and generally liked), this one had a shorter body taper, and I couldn’t rollcast it all the way across the pool.
And of course, you pretty much need to rollcast all the way across this pool.
It’s not the line’s fault — the head just wasn’t quite long enough — but it illustrates what will likely be the topic of an upcoming rant about weight forward fly lines, which might be one of the greatest hoaxes ever foisted on the fly fishing universe.
OK, It Wasn’t Just The Fly Line
I fished an 8.5′ 5wt Steffen Brothers glass rod — a rod that’s happily conquered this highly technical stretch of the Upper Sacramento several times (provided I brought the right line) — and I’d love to say I didn’t catch fish because I was limited by the roll cast, but in truth, I never really got on top of the 20-minute-long hatch.
The hatch looked like an overlapping affair including a #20/#22 BWO, a similarly small PED, a handful of spinners, and a pretty decent emergence of October Caddis.
I didn’t see a single fish chasing an October Caddis — the rising fish were definitely eating the small flies — but the big bugs are coming out. Big fly junkies rejoice.
Edmondson ended up with two fish, and I missed a couple, but even the few fish I could reach weren’t exactly falling all over themselves to get at my flies — which included a Sully-tied “Sno-Fly” that looked pretty damned ideal to me.
Apparently, it didn’t look ideal to the trout.
The Rio line? It fished nicely, floated high, but seemed prone to the same problem I experienced with my older Rio lines; it felt a little stiff instead of being nice and supple. While stiff works OK on faster graphite fly rods, it’s not as much fun with a softer, low-modulus rod.
I’ll give it another test, but I’m unlikely to do so on this particular stretch of water. The moral? It’s inescapable: The Ancients Greeks fished double-taper fly lines. At least that’s how I interpret the literature.
See you on the river, Tom Chandler.
[tags]fly fishing, upper sac, upper sacramento river, roll cast, rio fly line, bwo, rainbow trout, trout[/tags]
Not Dave | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
Wow, that Edmondson must be quite the fisherman. How did he manage to land fish in those conditions?
Tom Chandler | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
Just between you and me, I’m pretty sure he was snagging those fish.
Curly Friede | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
That which is pursued, tends to elude.
-Socrates-
Best I could do off the top of my head.
And yes, recent discoveries from Macedonia seem to indicate that the Greeks did indeed employ double-tapers.
Alex | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
DT? The Romans introduced the WF and conqueed the world.
Curly Friede | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
…Then became debauched, fell into decline and were eventually sacked — and are now making pizzas and funny shoes.
Tom Chandler | Oct 3, 2007 | Reply
Other blogs might reference history. At the Underground, we re-interpret it.
greg hall | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Well the Romans may have declined a bit from ruling the world but there’s always Sophia Loren.
Tom Chandler | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
There’s that.
Curly Friede | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Their crowning achievment.
John Davidson | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Given your trouble casting and getting to the other side of the pool, you may consider taking a casting lesson from a certified Master in casting. Woody at the fly shop is very good
Tom Chandler | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
John: Tell ya what — you take a relatively soft 8.5′ rod out there with short-head WF line, and see how far you roll cast. Then you can take the lesson for me…
Smellslikefish | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
I’d think a guy named Woody would be prone to casting only stiffer rods.
Steve | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Did I miss something? Is this the same “October Caddis” that was due for a catchy, marketable, hip name? What a letdown. The time, effort, blood, sweat, tears and ideas of loyal readers were freely given. But you retain the name October Caddis? All that work… for nothing.
No. You are not a victim in a Greek tragedy, but your readers are. As Sisyphus is eternally sentenced to roll the boulder up the mountain only to have it roll down at the close of the day, your readers toil to name a fly only to find, at the close of the day, that you still call it “October Caddis”.
(The Chorus Boos and Hisses Tom at this point)
May the Fishing Blog gods overlook your hubris.
Steve
Alex | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
In my experience, the rod action is what’s gonna decide if your roll casts roll or not. The stiffer the better. The limper your noodle, the tougher it will be to make the line listen.
Smellslikefish | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Steve,
I’m all for giving Chandler a hard time whenever possible - after all, what are fishing buddies for? But you need to re-read the post. No one fished an October Caddis that night and no one fished the bug in the naming contest.
Steve | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Smells,
Thanks, I misinterpreted the lines about fish not chasing the October Caddis. And I also failed to differentiate between October Caddis and Tom’s Dying October Caddis. I have harrased wrongly and apologize.
(The Chorus Boos and Hisses Steve at this point)
Smellslikefish | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
You just want the book. And the glory from coming up with the name. I understand.
Steve | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Yeah, I’m all about the glory. I have the confidence of a Christian with four Aces.
Tom Chandler | Oct 4, 2007 | Reply
Yes, I’m afraid I still haven’t picked a winner. The L&T Nancy’s been working all day and night, and this is just too important a decision to leave to the likes of me…
greg hall | Oct 5, 2007 | Reply
Well kudos to Tom for continuing his field testing of new products as promised and kudos for not blaming his tackle. A short head WF line and a medium soft rod are just not a good combination for stream casting. In fact a short head WF line isn’t a very good line for making traditional roll casts. Put that line with a faster action rod and use single handed spey techniques and you can do much better. Chris King who has a guide service in Redding is an excellent teacher for these techiques.
TC you have my sympathy for what must have a terribly frustrating time on the water.
Tom Chandler | Oct 5, 2007 | Reply
Actually, I am blaming that fly line; my not-as-soft-as-you-think 8.5′ Steffen makes that rather sizable rollcast with a DT line (hell, I do it with my 8.5′ 4wt Diamondglass rod), but trying to move the head of a WF fly line by pushing it with the running line just doesn’t get the job done.
Greg | Oct 5, 2007 | Reply
TC,
That’s my point about the WF line but apparently I was wrong about you being man enough to take responsibility for using it in the first place.