a little something to change from the norm for you today.
it’s all about fish but not the kind that typically pops up when we think of our slimy friends.
clever, charming, a simplicity of filming that greatly flatters the subject and really-really funny.
it’s in the now but also in the then all the while being timeless; the Charlie Lyne/Caspar Salmon duo have produced a real gem. here’s Fish Story, if this doesn’t bring a smile i don’t know what will, enjoy !
generally speaking, i’m not a fan of flags. however, i like things that flap around in the wind… and have been working on a small series of wind-flappers that have no national, regional or societal connotations but instead are an attempt to, and this is a big word, to glorify nature. here’s the Rainbow flag.
Bubbles reminded me of being a little kid in the local lake just sitting there, feeling the water, head just above the surface blowing little bubbles because blowing little bubbles is tingly, they make a heck of a lot more noise underwater than above and it just feels good and exciting.
this is probably the most beautiful fish film i’ve ever seen.
no more words are necessary nor could they do it justice… enjoy !
or, could that be Dick and Phillip or, Jane and Dory ? to tell you the truth i couldn’t care less about their names or genders, they’re both beautiful and doing what we love to see them do: peacefully slurping down bugs and getting fat.
filmed road-side on the Goulburn river Victorian Alps-Australia, these two video treats are wonderfully unpolluted by fisherman, their gear or raunchy music. maybe they’re there to remind us that its not all about us but whatever they are… i hope you’ll enjoy.
tip- resize the image and watch them both at the same time, its really cool.
i’ve always pondered that. some of us accept we come from the sea (and i firmly intend to go back) but it’s not so clear which creature we evolved from.
MinuteEarth‘s video suggests its fish and whether it’s exact or not i like the idea as its somehow more pleasant than thinking we have our roots in kelp or some other drab organism.
whilst some of my friends appear to be direct descendants of the infamous Pink
here’s an interesting short film i hope both big and little will enjoy.
even if the only image in the article appears to be a cod,
based on Atlantic salmon research, MCX goes a stretch further on explaining and going into great detail (and be sure to follow the adjoing links !*) on, eh, there’s no way i can add any more info on this subject so here’s a few excerpts:
“The underwater sound environment is entirely different to that in which we live in air. Accordingly, when thinking about the underwater world we have to dump our experience and preconceptions. Simply, salmon don’t ‘hear’ like us, because they don’t have ears”
“The key features of sound in water are that it:
– Is about 800 times more intense than in air, because the water is incompressible and therefore a much more efficient transmitter. In addition the surface layer reflects sound back into the water.
-Travels far further than in air: relatively minor events are detectable at ranges measured in kilometres, but the level of background noise is relatively very high because it is drawn from a much wider area.
-Goes about 4.4 times faster.
-Is influenced by the composition of the water.”
“So much, so interesting, but what is its relevance to the angler?
If certain frequencies can stimulate a salmon to attack oceanic prey, can we exploit this in fresh water? In thinking about this it helps to grasp what 300 Hz sounds like in air : for comparison Middle C is 261 Hz. It is certainly much higher than the dull thrum of commonplace line vibration in fast water, which is in the range 10-30 Hz.”
“The moment you step into a pool the salmon’s formidable sensors will detect your activity, even if you have felt soles and a light step. However, they don’t know it’s you or what you’re doing, because in evolutionary terms humans haven’t been angling long enough to achieve any genetic impact on salmon. Unlike the calls of whales, seals and other fish, salmon anglers’ noises aren’t in the salmon signal library. Certainly they wouldn’t be able to connect the crunch of your studs on the gravel and the clink of your wading staff on the rocks with the drama of being caught, except perhaps if they’d been caught shortly before by another heavy-footed fisherman.”
but there’s a gazillion more fascinating things to read on this noisy subject and to do so simply click the cod ! enjoy !
* and one of those happens to be a really geeky but eversocool Beeps, Chirps and Noise channel on youtube where i found this little brown noise treat ! (yeah, that’s sounds a little idon’tknowwhat but don’t be afraid, you won’t have to go clean up after listening to it… )
“Brown noise is noise with a power spectral density inversely proportional to the frequency squared. It decreases in power by 6 dB per octave or 20 dB per decade. The sound of brown noise mimics a waterfall or heavy rainfall.”
but his face told her things which she was glad to know.”
best known for his books about the teddy bear Winnie-the-Pooh, it’s pretty clear Milne knew a thing or two about perch as well.
way in the back there, yup, on top of the peaks. the white stuff; it’s snow, the first snow of the season and what might be the last snow to melt later on next spring.
for now its just an insignificant sprinkling but if there’s a lot more and our little friends are lucky this’ll all end up in their home and they’ll have a lot more space to do all the fishy things they do when they’re not confined to barren rivers.
gotta start somewhere…
ok, but what’s in it ?
as a fisher who doesn’t kill fish its not a question i regularly ask myself but its indeed an interesting topic. i’ve always heard of weird things like license plates, beer cans and whatnot showing up in shark bellies but it seems like our slimy friends have a diverse appetite that goes far beyond the typical insect or smaller fish.
“A friend of mine was trolling in Loch Long, and hooked a seithe. An enormous cod seized the seithe, and paid the penalty by being brought into the boat himself. His girth seemed unnaturally large, and, upon opening him, a brown paper packet of sandwiches, enough for luncheon for a pretty large party, was taken out. They could not have been less injured, mustard and all, had the cod’s stomach been a sandwich-box.
No-one knows whether they ate the sandwiches or not. The fish can consider itself lucky it didn’t meet Colquhoun himself – bloodthirsty old rascal, he would probably have shot it. Cod are the dustbins of the sea and will eat almost anything, accounting for how, in his 1895 Sea Fishing, John Bickerdyke remembered how a captain called Hill accidentally dropped a bunch of keys over the side in the North Sea and thought them lost for good, only to recover them several weeks later in the belly of a cod he trawled up many miles distant – but I guess in those days cod were so abundant that the idea of a dropped set of keys not ending up inside one must have seemed fairly ludicrous. Then there is Dr. Day’s story of a seven inch candle found inside a cod which may have been in search of enlightenment; and others said to have swallowed guillemots, partridges, turnips and even whole hares. The mind boggles at how or where a cod would come across a hare, but then again…”
click here for the complete gastro-piscatorial article on Thefishingmuseum online. enjoy !
* yes, Fround…
we’ll change colours, flop around in the sand and squirt gooey stuff all over each other but first, let’s dance !
most don’t listen but we should because he has a lot to say…
click here for more of Steve Dildarian’s funny stuff. enjoy !
short, good, with all sorts cinematographic and animation influences and definitely not your usual fishing or nature film.
this visual treat from Paul Whittington most probably won’t leave you indifferent. enjoy !
i’ll admit it, i’m biased. i love fish and that’s why i don’t eat them.
add to that that since i was a child the slightest taste of some semi-cleverly hiddden-within-the-meal fish flesh would bring an instant gag reflex and copious spewing… the decision for me to not kill or eat them was a no brainer but that’s just me.
in matters like today’s topic it’s always very difficult to convey an important message and plea for action or in this case restraint without sounding like an alarmist or other end-of-the-world nitwit but i believe that Sylvia’s message is clear, honest, simple and straightforward and it all makes sense.
don’t take it as an order but as information and an invitation for thought. here’s a few extracts.
“for most people, eating fish is a choice, not a necessity. Some people believe that the sole purpose of fish is for us to eat them. They are seen as commodities. Yet wild fish, like wild birds, have a place in the natural ecosystem which outweighs their value as food. They’re part of the systems that make the planet function in our favor, and we should be protecting them because of their importance to the ocean. They are carbon-based units, conduits for nutrients, and critical elements in ocean food webs. If people really understood the methods being used to capture wild fish, they might think about choosing whether to eat them at all, because the methods are so destructive and wasteful. It isn’t just a matter of caring about the fish or the corals, but also about all the things that are destroyed in the process of capturing ocean wildlife.”
“I’m not saying that you have to stop eating meat, but think about what it takes to make a plant compared to what it takes to make a plant-eater, like a cow, chicken or pig. Even carnivores on land are lower on the food chain than most fish. Think of a tiger or lion or a snow leopard. They eat plant-eating animals. They eat rabbits or deer. So, food chains on land tend to be fairly short. Over 10,000 years, we have come to understand that it’s far more efficient not to eat carnivores. We eat grazers, the ones that we choose to raise, such as cows and pigs. Perversely, many of the animals that are natural grazers, we are force feeding wild fish. We’re taking large quantities of ocean wildlife, grinding them up, and turning them into chicken food or cow food or pig food — or even into fish food.”
click the image for the complete interview.
there’s a lot to think about in this short 9 minute video.
– it’s about not taking short cuts and thinking ahead.
– it’s about doing right when wrong was done.
– it’s where man and nature work together for mutual benefit.
– and basically, it’s about love.
– enjoy !
the answer’s more than obvious…
although not exclusively as we’ll also find sculptures, fish art tends to be a painted, drawn or digitised, two-dimensional affair.
regular readers here already know how much i love 2D fly fishing art but clever stuff like this anamorphic object made out of 160 glass strips adds another level of magic to this love. beyond the cool visual stimulation, the inevitable fish/bird symbiotic connection makes it all the more special, i hope you’ll enjoy this as much as i do.
for more visual/mind candy by Thomas Medicus click here.
they’re so cute, enjoy !
“The brook lamprey is a fish that like blind larva lives in the stream bottom for most of his life, and see themselves only late in the spawning season. From the month of August a metamorphosis of the oldest lamprey larvae, which develop the animal eyes and genitals. From that moment, waiting for the first sunny spring days that do heat up the water. In spring everything is in the sign of reproduction, which only lasts a few weeks at the brook lamprey. If the stream prick ready to spawn, they die.” *
* yet another lovely achievement from the genius robotic mind of Google Translate.
be sure to check out blikonderwater‘s page for more super-nice underwater footage.
and a few flanks and heads.
by Eiko Jones, here’s a lovely, can’t-get-enough, intimate and wonderfully silent underwater escapade featuring these fascinating migrators in their glorious party attire. be sure to watch it in full screen, enjoy !
and plenty of beauty. here’s two examples of the latter to help balance out the first.
first up, Boreal Trouts‘ first film “A collection of underwater footage collected during the 2014 field season in Northeastern Minnesota” filled with babies, not-so babies and mature adult trout doing the rub-thing. yet another of these underwater river films giving us terrestrials an intimate vision of our little friends a million times better than any aquarium could.
and some magic from 3hund, this time not entirely natural but an awesome (yes, the term is justified for once) combination where man meets nature in a rare complementary form. maybe something we might see on the way to or from the river should we divert our eyes from the beaten path…
be sure to watch them in full screen and HD. enjoy !
by Peter Lapsley via FlyFishing & FlyTying
one of the more interesting articles i’ve read on this oft heated argue/debate: preserving the genetic and ecological integrity of wild indigenous trout species while introducing farmed diploid (fertile) or triploid (infertile) trout to their environment.
in the article we’ll notice that a few taken-as-facts notions aren’t what we might have thought.
even if these studies where performed in the UK let’s not forget that most ‘wild’ brown trout around the world where stocked, brought in from elsewhere, not exclusively, but often from the UK so these findings are probably valid for any trout waters around the globe, and since they’re salmonids we can also suppose that these findings could very well be applicable to all the other salmonids whether they be purely freshwater or seagoing .
ok, i’m no ichthyologist and that last part is just a guess but i’d bet its mostly true. anyhow,
here’s a few random tidbits from this great article i highly recommend reading in its entirety.
“It seems reasonable to suppose that farmed brown trout stocked into rivers will necessarily discomfort those rivers’ wild trout – that they will harass the wild fish, dislodging them from their lies; that they may prey on small wild fish, particularly if they themselves are large; that they may disturb wild trouts’ spawning redds; or worse, that they may mate with wild fish, diluting the genetic integrity of wild trout populations.”
“Intriguingly, the outcomes show the suppositions set out at the beginning of this article to be completely wrong on both upland and lowland rivers, chiefly because wild trout – far more stream-wise than farmed fish – have no difficulty in holding their own.
There was no statistically significant drop in abundance or growth of wild fish when stocking took place. Stocking did not cause the displacement of wild fish. Fish formed a very small part of the diets of both stocked and wild fish, and bullheads, stone loach and minnows were the predominant species found in the stomachs of the few trout that did occasionally take fish. The growth of stocked fish was negligible.”
“The question that must niggle away in the back of one’s mind, of course, is how so distinct a sub-species could have come to be present in waters as far apart as Lough Melvin in Ireland and Lochs Awe and Laggan in Scotland. The answer may lie in the fact the as recently as 15,000 years ago there were no fish at all in British or Irish lakes or rivers, because those waters were buried beneath 13,000ft of ice. All our freshwater fish came in from the sea after the ice cap had receded.”
and that’s just to wet your appetite. click the trout image for the complete article, enjoy !
Sonahgan trout image courtesy of Paul Vecsei on flickr
not all fish are pretty, soft and cuddly and the Synanceia is a good example of a seemingly non-threatening yet very dangerous fish.
don’t let yourself be tricked by this little one’s cuteness, specially if your walking around barefoot in the coastal regions of Indo-Pacific oceans as well as off the coast of Florida and in the Caribbean. of special note is you most probably won’t even see it before walking on or touching it as it buries itself in the sand, blending in to its natural environment.
“I got spiked on the finger by a Stonefish in Australia … never mind a bee sting. … Imagine having each knuckle, then the wrist, elbow and shoulder being hit in turn with a sledgehammer over the course of about an hour. Then about an hour later imagine taking a real kicking to both kidneys for about 45 minutes so that you couldn’t stand or straighten up. I was late 20s, pretty fit physically and this was the tiniest of nicks. Got sensation back in my finger after a few days but had recurrent kidney pains periodically for several years afterwards.”
they don’t attack people. in a sense its people who un-expectantly ‘attack’ them by pressing their venom-filled dorsal fin spines unknowingly. the video below shows how people get stung.
apart from the joys of massive pain and being messed up for a long time, people can die from the sting, it’s that bad.
you might want to keep your everyday Doc Martins on at the beach.
i typically like to include an enjoy ! at the end of my articles but today’s post is more of a watch out !
for more on the Synanceia click the top image.
fascinating piece on the study of how fish are adjusting to increasing sound pollution levels around the world. basically, just as we do when in a noisy environment, we start to raise our voices. the more ambient noise, the louder we speak until we get to the point of yelling. this is the Lombard Effect.
” We may think of them as silent, but fish make many sounds that are rarely appreciated by the human ear. Clownfish chirp and pop by gnashing their teeth together. Oyster toadfish hum and blare like foghorns by quickly contracting muscles attached to their swim bladders. Croaking gourami make their signature noise by snapping the tendons of their pectoral fins.
Altogether, more than eight hundred fish species are known to hoot, moan, grunt, groan, thump, bark, or otherwise vocalize. Carol Johnston, an ecologist at Auburn University, is partial to the sounds made by lollipop darters, small fish native to Alabama and Tennessee. “They sound like whales,” she told me. “
and that’s just a scratch of this subject’s surface. after reading a bit we’ll soon realise that this isn’t so fishy-churpy-cheery because its yet another reminder of how we negatively impact the world we live in.
however, many many thanks to Emily for making us aware of this, i’m sure i’m far from the only person to not have considered underwater sound pollution and how it affects its creatures.
click the image for the complete article including actual sound recordings of several yelling fish. enjoy ! but quietly…
you’re both butt-ugly and beautiful.
“Deep-sea anglerfish are strange and elusive creatures that are very rarely observed in their natural habitat. Fewer than half a dozen have ever been captured on film or video by deep diving research vehicles. This little angler, about 9 cm long, is named Melanocetus. It is also known as the Black Seadevil and it lives in the deep dark waters of the Monterey Canyon. Doc Ricketts* observed this anglerfish for the first time at 600 m on a midwater research expedition in November 2014. We believe that this is the first video footage ever made of this species alive and at depth.”
* a research submarine. scientist humour i guess.
i love all you readers and i can’t leave you with this vision before going to bed so, here’s a much cuter cousin to the Melanocetus, the pink and purple panda bear of the anglerfish family- Chaunacops coloratus
and in case you’re wondering what it might sound like down there, wonder no more. enjoy !
“It is not every day I find a special stream like this with such robust wild brookies and indescribable beauty below the surface.”
i couldn’t agree more. here’s a lovely little river snorkelling film filled with curious and adorable little brookies and bigger ones making more curious and adorable little brook trout.
there’s also a whole lot of leaves. billions.
big thanks to BlueBlood for this gorgeous treat. enjoy !
in a nutshell, that’s what underwater fish portraits are about, specially when the camera’s held at arm’s length and i’m not looking at the screen or viewfinder while playing ‘my third eye is in the palm of my hand’ and gently holding a slippery/slimy creature that would rather not be held all the while trying to keep most of me above the water and not loose anything to the watery gods in the process.
this lovely out of season she-chunk wasn’t in an area known to have trout making it an even lovelier surprise even if she didn’t like posing, but that’s part of fun and joys as well. just as fly fishing itself and about a gazillion other things in life, getting a good portrait is hit or miss. best not to get expectations up too high.
sure, i’m always happy to see kids and friends displaying with joy the fish they just caught but i’m so over the typical grip and grin shot its not even funny. its actually turned into a turn-off/repulsion of sorts thats hard to explain in a blog post but one thing’s for sure, the turn-off is at its strongest when there’s a clear disrespect for the fish and the image or film is all centred around the angler and not the magnificent, temporary partner.
as an obsessed fly fisher, i get more and more flack from by my flybrethren by saying things like this but the truth is, i like seeing fish unattached and free. its not like i don’t want to catch them, in fact, i’ve been fishing like crazy lately but the image that i want to remain doesn’t include tackle marketing, hands or a face.
something like these pretties…
2% by museline
Tarpon Cave by Frans De Backer–
Love in a Mountain Stream by Mathew Hall
via the New York Zoological Society (1896)
these magnificent little tropical fish are very colourful and have a distinctive black stripe that goes down their head, covering the eyes (“to confuse predators”) when they’re alive but the subtle transparency and graphic qualities outlined by the fish’s bone structure make this zoology specimen quite beautiful, even in its death.
“That is a really big step.” indeed. that’s right folks, contrary to what our mammalian pride might have us believe, recent research suggests our slimy Microbrachius dicki… friends beat us at doing the do about 385 million years ago.
“Constrained by their anatomy, the fish probably had to mate side by side.
“They couldn’t have done it in a ‘missionary position’,” said Prof Long. “The very first act of copulation was done sideways, square-dance style.”
we won’t hold it against them but starting off by doing it side-to-side instead of the natural, universally accepted from-behind was a brave yet stupid move and Evolution rightly punished them for this nonsense. “Surprisingly, the researchers think this first attempt to reproduce internally was not around for long. As fish evolved, they reverted back to spawning. It took another few million years for copulation to make a come-back, reappearing in ancestors of sharks and rays.” dummies…
“It is very remarkable that we haven’t noticed this before.”
these guys look like cute little robots with sporty sunglasses. i think this would make a lovely tattoo.
here’s a troutstract of the King of the Pond.
tomorrow, the Return.
it always leaves a strange feeling seeing our little friends get sliced up, have an antenna pushed up their butt and find themselves with one of R2D2’s spare parts placed in their belly… but if its good for the many then i guess its a good thing.
having but the most rudimentary notions of fish biology and studies, i have no idea of the validity or effectiveness of these types of study projects but knowing about the process is quite interesting. enjoy !
don’t know if its Etta James’ lovely voice, cannibalism caught on film or the sight of all those super-excited Alaskan trout slurping down eggs like there’s no tomorrow that makes this short underwater video interesting. probably all three.
brought to us by deneki.com, bon appétit !
with a little of this and a little of that, this self explanatory compendium of different species gives a non-exhaustive but pretty good nomenclature idea of our slimy friend’s propulsion systems, their shapes and specificities. enjoy !
– click either image for its source and a lot more specific information –
“A dive into into some of North America’s richest rivers, and a fun look at an innovative river snorkeling program that has brought thousands of citizen snorkelers to the vibrant waters of Southern Appalachia.”
what instantly comes to mind is how great and enriching on all levels programs like this can be. lets hope this acts as a platform to inspire others.
for more on the Cherokee Snorkeling Program click here
via TED’s Discovering the Deep
“Coral reef fish, like the yellow tang surgeonfish, begin life in a fascinating and weird way – as tiny floating larvae! These babies are capable of drifting thousands of miles on ocean currents, far from the reefs where they were born. Amy McDermott describes how these tiny trekkers travel across vast oceans, searching for the far-flung reefs they will one day call home.”
although in cartoon form, this very interesting account of coral reef baby fish and their growing-up process is anything but childish but you just might want to share this with your little ones as well as its never too early to help them discover the wonders of the water world. enjoy !
“What’s a fish to do? Swim into a cannon, perhaps, which will launch it over the dam and allow it to get on with its migration.
This is not a parody. It’s not even just a crazy Internet idea. It’s a real-life solution currently undergoing testing in Washington with the cooperation of the Department of Energy and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The vacuum tube technology was originally designed for fruit, but according to biologists at the Yakama Nation Fisheries, it appears to be safe for fish (researchers are continuing to study the long-term effects).”
too cool ! i’d love to be shot through a soft tube like this.
click here for more info.
fascinating stuff here from Smarter Every Day via The Ozark Fly Fisher Journal showing us just how cool and more importantly, how our slimy friends have adapted and evolved their eating methods through time.
i’d found the image above years ago on the net (sorry, no source) where the explanation behind it was that in many cases, trout will suck in a bug from quite a distance through a vortex created by opening the mouth and thrusting the water out through the gills effectively sucking the prey in instead of munching down on the meal with its teeth as most of us mammals do.
the videos below show and explain this action in high-quality slomo video confirming the ‘vortex’ method of feeding.
note that this method is mostly used by toothless or smaller-toothed fish. in the case of trout, a lot of bugs and smaller stuff will get sucked in and use their teeth when they go for forage fish.
an example of a (very) toothed fish that clamps its prey are pike. they’ll typically chomp, grab and hold their prey for a while until its stunned and later turn it so its facing them and then swallow it whole. yum !
but then, some fish aren’t all that smart and sometimes they get a little confused on which technique to use…
when they’re about to eat you.
“The clip features three sounds. The first is a “bark” produced in what the researchers called a “frontal display”, meaning where two fish swam quickly towards each other and stayed still, aggressively intimidating and staring at each other. The second is a “drum beat” produced by the largest fish in the group when circling the shoal, mostly when there was competition for food. The third “croak” was generally associated with a piranha chasing and biting another fish.”
via The Cabinet of Freshwater Curiosities, click the pic for more on the Red-Bellied Piranha.
more great underwater footage from River Snorkel, this time some feisty and and oh-so cute rainbows busily feeding on subsurface bugs while doing their river dance. enjoy !
another gem from Takashi Kuwahara.
i love how this one makes the corners of my mouth slightly raise…
some really nice underwater footage of spawning Steelhead in the Methow river, Washington USA by River Snorkel.
i particularly like the ‘Explore your local rivers’ suggestion at the end of the film. what better way to know your waters than actually immersing yourself ? heck, it’s the closest we can get to actually ‘thinking like a fish’ and getting to know more about them. enjoy !
-‘Pachu’ is how this fish is pronounced in Malaysia-
“Pacu (Portuguese pronunciation: [paˈku]) is a common name used to refer to several common species of omnivorous South American freshwater fish that are related to the piranha. Pacu and piranha do not have similar teeth, the main difference being jaw alignment; piranha have pointed, razor-sharp teeth in a pronounced underbite, whereas pacu have squarer, straighter teeth, like a human, and a less severe underbite, or a slight overbite. Additionally, full-grown pacu are much larger than piranha, reaching up to 0.9 m (3 feet) and 25 kg (55 pounds) in the wild.”
as for their infamous balls-biting reputation i can’t really add much as i fished from the bank.., however Wiki has this to say about this tender subject-
“In 2013, a pacu specimen was found by a fisherman in Denmark. This led to media reports mistakenly warning that the fish could attack male testicles. The reports were based on a joke that was not meant to be taken seriously.” which in a way, makes me think that if i was a tropical fish stuck in the cold Scandinavian waters i’d probably want to bite off a few as well…
“In Appendix B of Through the Brazilian Wilderness, Theodore Roosevelt advised, “For small fish like the pacu and piranha an ordinary bass hook will do.” Concerning the pacu, he added: “A light rod and reel would be a convenience in catching the pacu. We used to fish for the latter variety in the quiet pools while allowing the canoe to drift. We fished for the pacu as the native does, kneading a ball of mandioc farina with water and placing it on the hook as bait. I should not be surprised, though, if it were possible, with carefully chosen flies, to catch some of the fish that every once in a while we saw rise to the surface and drag some luckless insect under.”
well Theodor wasn’t in the least bit wrong. this little fellow fell for a black leech imitation just as it hit the water a certain unknown distance away. (we where fishing in the dark)(an activity that’s quite unusual for me as local regulations prevent it)(that made it even more funner!) but, the most important was this little Pacu was a first for me and one of two new species to add to my ‘caught’ list. the circumstances leading to this catch make it even more special. C.K. ‘Doc Ling, new friend and Master Certified Casting Instructor with the International Federation of Fly Fishers picked me up at Kuala Lumpur airport and before even being out of the doors asked me if i was up to fishing just after dinner. conditioned reflex said ‘SURE !’ without even thinking i had spent the last 30 or so hours traveling…
nevermind sleep, tiredness and weariness. when you’re completely engulfed by fishing mojo it all works out in the end !
even at this size they put up a great fight. nothing like the typical jump up and down, left and right and all around as say, a trout or largemouth bass will generally do but these guys are strong, fit and pull hard. fine-fine sport on a lightish wt fly rod. i’ll be back for more.
“The Hindi name of mahāsir, mahāser, or mahāsaulā is used for a number of fishes of the group. British anglers in India called them the Indian salmon. Several sources of the common name mahseer have been suggested: It has been said to be derived from Sanskrit, while others claim it is derived from Indo-Persian, mahi- fish and sher- tiger or tiger among fish in Persian. Alternatively, mahā-śalka, meaning large-scaled, as the scales are so large that Buchanan mentions that playing cards were made from them at Dacca. Another theory by Henry Sullivan Thomas suggests mahā-āsya; great mouth. The name Mahasher is commonly used in Urdu, Punjabi and Kashmiri languages in Pakistan for this fish and is said to be made up of two local words: Maha = big and sher = lion as it ascends in the hilly rivers and streams of Himalaya courageously.”
let’s just say that this one was a cub…
a very strong fish for its size though. no jumping, tailing or splashing as say, a trout might do but they pull strong along the bottom while searching the stronger current making for lots a fun on the 5wt. Stickman Evil Black.
i can only imagine what a 5 or so kg. masheer would feel like !
photo: Dron Lee
more info on Masheer
cute little film from Blue Tail Films with simple enough instructions:
dream – realise them – repeat
some nice little gifts for us from The Watershed
this should come in handy when we’re in one of those
‘can’t figure out what fly to use for whatever that species is’ moods.
ok, it’s not me but because of the title well, i couldn’t help it…
today’s little fishing film is a lovely little glimpse of how fly fishing in France can be. i have no idea where it was filmed but the river sure is a beautiful one and so is the fish, enjoy !
but while we’re at it and since it feels so good, let’s make that seven.
some thoroughly enjoyable, slowed-down fly fishing moments from Silver Creek Outfitters. enjoy !
ever heard of southern California steelhead ? neither had i until this film.
as noted in the beginning, we all know of this wondrous species but it’s basically all from much further north along the Pacific coast or north-east Great Lakes region.
much more than just a ‘save the fish so we can fish it… ‘ type of movement, these people are interested in simply trying to restore a balance between a thriving human presence and nature. if the steelhead do well, then it’s the whole ecosystem that does well. the canary effect.
i hope you’ll enjoy this very informative film enough to pass it on. as mentioned, few know of the presence of these fish in this region of the world and the more people know, the more chances we’ll have to give them the chance to go have fish sex where fish sex is supposed to happen: in their upstream bedroom.
Damsels in Distress by Sharptail Media.
’nuff said. enjoy !
another lovely rendition by Jake Keeler at 20acrecarcass, this one pen and watercolour on paper. be sure to check out Jake’s site for a lot more fishy excellentness.
ever heard of southern California steelhead ? neither had i until this film.
as noted in the beginning, we all know of this wondrous species but it’s basically all from much further north along the Pacific coast or north-east Great Lakes region. much more than just a ‘save the fish so we can fish it… ‘ type of effort, these people are interested in simply trying to restore a balance between a thriving human presence and nature. if the steelhead do well, then it’s the whole ecosystem that does well. the canary effect.
i hope you’ll enjoy this very informative film and feel moved enough to pass it on. as mentioned, few people know of the presence of these fish in this region of the world and the more people know, the more chances we’ll have to give them the possibility to go have fish sex where fish sex is supposed to happen: in their upstream bedrooms.
we can worry about how to catch and release them later if all goes well.
lets hope it does.
this image reminds of a comment some bobo left here a while back. among other nonsenses, one of things he liked less was the fact that ‘my mutant fish had sick bulging eyes’.
at the time i was too busy sort-of laughing at all this silliness but in hindsight i should have suggested he go soak his head once in a while, that is, go have a look at how fish look when they’re at home underwater instead of judging their appearance when they’re lifted out of it for the all-important ‘grip & grin’ shot.
quite simply, when they’re in their environment their eyes bulge out and so do their nostrils. i’m waiting for a confirming reply from an ichthyologist friend but i’m fairly sure that the fact that both of these organs retract when exposed to air has to do with lack of water pressure but then it might also have to do that they don’t want to see or smell us. considering how many ugly-stinky anglers i’ve met throughout my life i can’t really blame them…
please take just a few minutes of your time to read this and sign the petition. it doesn’t matter what part of the world we live in, fish don’t have nationalities and the same concerns are pretty universal. click the image to share your opinion on change.org
- Online Petition by
Dufftown, United Kingdom
1. Wild Salmon numbers are at an all time low, particularly fish entering our rivers in spring. The voluntary agreement above along with Catch and Release by anglers has seen this particular group of fish , at best, “hold their own”! To begin netting at this time of the year again would do irreparable damage to this early running group/cohort collectively known as spring fish.
2. If we have no fish entering our rivers in the early part of the year then many full time jobs will be threatened as revenue from those early anglers is lost. In 2003 “Salmon Angling” was found to be worth £74 Million to the Scottish economy, supporting 2800 full time jobs, mainly in rural areas with extremely fragile economies. A shorter season will see those full time jobs become part time, attracting, not young families, but older people to do a seasonal job.
3. The support industry we have for salmon fishing in Scotland would also suffer; from tackle shops, to tea shops. Petrol stations, hotels, guest houses, B&Bs and not forgetting all their suppliers! Although we have no new figures, to the Scottish Economy, salmon fishing will now be worth around double that of the figure above.
4. We are not talking about a few nets-men and wealthy landowners here. No, we are talking about the jobs of 2800 ordinary people, their families and the longevity of an extraordinarily “Scottish” way of life; a way of life with so much, yet untapped tourism potential. To threaten the livlihoods of many for that of few makes no sense at all.
5. The Scottish Government will only support the netting of wild salmon when a “Harvestable Surplus Occurs” FACT. This is certainly not the case with Spring Salmon, or, some would argue – Summer or Autumn Salmon.
6. Calling a halt this madness will at least give those remaining fish a “chance” to spawn and in doing so producing the next generation, which hopefully, we will manage better than in the past.
More information and reading on the background to this petition and also points for online discussion, can be found here –
– related articles
well conceived, amusing and leaving a belly full of food for thought, here’s a fantabulous fictional ‘interview’ on Presentation vs Imitation, the Age-old debate parts 1-2-3 by Carlos Azpilicueta that i hope you’ll not only enjoy but benefit from.
“In this special article, I moderate an interesting, entertaining talk session on one of the most debated and less resolved issues in the history of fly fishing. Far from trying to solve anything, the participants contribute various original points of view that are bound to give more than one reader and flyfishing enthusiast something to think about.”
Quillan and Rodney are keen fly fishermen and staunch defenders of two different positions and approaches that, although they can complement each other, usually clearly and vehemently define which type of fisherman you are.
Some consider and defend the imitation concept as the key to success in fly fishing. They’re the Imitators (Quillan) and their main endeavor is to fill their fly boxes with all kinds of patterns. They’re usually great fly tyers and are very knowledgeable of everything having to do with fly dressing techniques and materials. Many of them are avid entomologists and some even use aquariums and binocular magnifying glasses to study aquatic macroinvertebrates.
The so-called Presenters (represented by Rodney) heartily defend their approach. The presentation approach gives priority to technical skill in casting and presenting the fly. Besides casting, they also love to read and understand the currents in the stream and everything related to how the angler manages on the stream.
Surely no other debate has filled more pages of fly fishing literature. And, to the satisfaction of many, I’m afraid it will continue to do so for many years to come.
…positions get defined
Mod: Good afternoon, Quillan and Rodney. Since we already know your respective positions, we can dispense with presentations.
Rod: What we really need less of are imitations.
Mod: Sorry. It was just of way of getting started. I certainly didn’t intend to…
Quill: You certainly are touchy, Mr. Presenter.
Mod: I’m touchy?
Quill: No, I don’t mean you. I’m referring to my debating opponent, the expert flycaster.
Rod: Well, that’s precisely where I think the first error lies.
Mod: What do you mean?
Rod: Associating the idea of presentation with only casting.
Quill: Well, I relate my idea of imitation almost exclusively to dressing the artificials.
Rod: And that’s one of the great limitations of the position you defend. Presentation spans a whole series of concepts and approaches that are much more far-reaching than the simple cast: the fisherman’s position in the stream, reading the water, interpreting the insects, adapting the leader, etc. There are a lot of things you have to do before your dry fly is ever seen by a trout. And they’re all part of the concept of presentation. If you do them right, the fly will be successful; otherwise, you won’t have the slightest chance. I like to quote Gary Borger, “Presentation can be defined as the culmination of everything you are and everything you know and understand about the world of fly fishing.”
Quill: Then, no matter what you tie on the end of the tippet, if you do all those things right, the trout will take it, right?
Rod: Just as long as the size is right, and often not even that.
Quill: Your passion for what you do best, casting, besides revealing your clear limitations as a complete fly fisherman, blinds you and, thereby, irresponsibly confines any further development.
Mod: Let’s start focusing the issue and analyzing some of its more important points.
Trout vision curiosities
- The trout devotes almost half of its small brain to using and controlling its vision
- Professor Muntz’ experiments show that trout not only perceive colours but also tones of the same color. The colors they most clearly distinguish are, in this order, red, orange and yellow.
- Trout fry have four types of cones (vision cells responsible for color). This endows them with very good chromatic vision, thus increasing their ability to locate food. When they grow, their retina reverts to a three-cone system, like in human beings.
- Fish stop feeding for a little while just after sundown. They need a few minutes to adapt their visual system to the new light.
- Because the cornea of a trout’s eye sticks out a bit from its head, it’s much more prone to be damaged by careless manipulation or leader tangled around its head.
Rod: Hold on, Mr. Moderator. I’ve just been called irresponsible and limited. Me and several legends in the history of fly fishing, such as Charles Ritz and Marryatt.
Mod: All right. Defend yourself. Briefly, please.
Rod: Charles Ritz spent most of his angling life expounding that technique was 85% while the other 15% was imitation. Marryatt, for many, the greatest fly fisherman in history, used to say, “It isn’t the fly, it’s he who presents it.” And remember. He worked closely with Halford, the epitome of the imitation approach.
Quill: Come on, Rod. Insinuating that you’re to be lumped together with those great names, worthy of all my respect and admiration, is pretentious, to say the least. Your quotes date from a period in which the best imitations, what we would call realistic patterns today, were dressed by the great scholar, Halford. They were crude, floated poorly, hardly used any synthetic materials and didn’t apply a lot of the transcendental scientific criteria that appeared later. With imitations like those, it was logical to think that their presentation was decisive. They had to justify their frequent failures.
Mod: What scientific criteria are you referring to?
Quill: The research on light reflected and transmitted by insects and materials and the important advances in our knowledge of trout vision. One of the weak points of all of Halford’s patterns was the opaqueness of the materials be used: quills, floss, horse hair… Seen from below against the light of the sky, these bodies were inexorably dull and lifeless.
Mod: Do you maintain then that imitation has been gaining in importance in fishing over the years?
Quill: Absolutely. The most realistic imitations of only 10 years ago can’t hold a candle to some of today’s patterns. We’ve got a whole new category today, the clones.
Rod: Your thinking isn’t logical, Quill. Today’s reality isn’t just a shortage of trout. For reasons irrelevant to this debate, a lot of insect species are waning. So lots of the copious hatches we used to know are rare now. Which goes to show that imitation is a lot less important today.
…the steak theory
Rodney: Maybe you think those clone patterns of yours are less prone to drag. If you do, you’re completely mistaken. The fish reacts primarily to the presentation and only to a lesser degree to the fly. Let me tell you something else. Only when the presentation is good does it make sense to consider the imitation. And always in that order. I’ll give you an example. It isn’t mine; it’s Nick Lyons’. The name’s bound to be familiar. You get served a nice, thick steak. And just as you’re about to cut off the first morsel, the steak budges a fraction of an inch to the side. I bet the fright it gives you is enough to kill your appetite. At any rate, I’m sure that steak doesn’t look so succulent any more.
Quillan: That’s a pretty funny example, Rod, but I see it differently. If a thick, dark red, rare steak were to suddenly move on my plate, I’d think someone had kicked the table. So I’d gobble it fast in case somebody’s after it. Now, if it was scrawny, tough and overdone, even if it lay there stone still, I sure wouldn’t even taste it.
Moderator: Hey, you guys are making me hungry.
Quill: Obviously for the first steak, the dancing Daisy one.
…the dry fly myth
Flies declining in English chalk streams
Only streams with such highly alkaline waters and such regular flows and temperatures can support such an enormous quantity of insects and rich aquatic life. Nevertheless many mayfly species and species of other orders have been declining in recent years, causing alarm for English chalk streams. One of the more bizarre theories attempting to explain this decline points to the great amount of unused contraceptive pills poured down the drains. They dissolve in the water and affect the reproductive capacity of many female insects.
Mod: One thing is certain, fellows. Halford’s flies haven’t survived the passage of the years. And they caught thousands of extremely selective trout, feeding on duns and spinners on the surface of the crystal-clear waters of the mythical English chalk streams.
Rod: True. But they can’t have caught so many trout when they ended up disappearing. Walt Dette says that a fly pattern that doesn’t catch trout ends up disappearing no matter how pretty or how well-dressed it is.
Quill: Only a tenth of the hundreds of Halford’s patterns ever proved to be really effective.
Many hours on the stream have convinced me that today’s realistic patterns always work much better than a general pattern. When the insect is available to the trout, of course. I also maintain that the only realistic imitations that function as such are underwater patterns. I’ve got a theory about the dry fly.
Mod: Please be so kind as to share it with us.
Quill: Certainly. For some time now, I’ve been convinced that dry fly fishing has never existed as such.
Mod: Do you realize the transcendence of that statement?
Quill: I certainly do. The dry fly, taken as an imitation that floats like a mayfly dun, for example, is a myth. There is no way you can make an artificial float the way a natural fly floats. Try as you may, it’s physically impossible. Because of the weight of the hook, because of the materials (all absorb more or less water) and because it’s tied to a tippet that unbalances it, falls from above and adds extra weight.
Rod: Put that way, it sounds logical.
Quill: All the innovative patterns that have attempted to achieve this floatability have failed throughout history. What I’m saying is a cinch to prove. Take your best dun imitation and gently place on the water in a glass. Observe it for a few seconds. Do the same with an inverted hook pattern, a single-wing (thorax type), a palmer, a funnel dun, a compara dun, whatever you want. See the huge difference between the way they float and the high-floating, subtle, graceful subimago? Once you place them on the water, they all break through the surface tension to some degree. Note the tail filaments. Those of the natural flies barely touch the water. Those of most artificials are grotesque, indecipherable, semi-submerged appendages. And you placed the imitations on the water gently. Now tie them to a tippet and drop them from a certain height. Dismayingly revealing.
Now try it with one of Halford’s classics. I can’t understand how this fellow could think trout took these imitations thinking they were adult ephemeropteras. Those hooks were quite a bit heavier than today’s too. And the materials he used weren’t as hydrophobic as today’s either. In spite of all this, a beautiful, romantic story was born: the dry fly.
Rod: Sadly enough, I think the leader often makes them more stable. It’s funny. I set out the other day to count all the patterns, current and old, that try to imitate a Baetis Rhodani subimago. I soon had no less than 24 different imitations for this fly. And, except for the possible size variations, it’s undoubtedly one of the best defined in color and physiognomy. Nobody uses many of those imitations anymore. It’s certainly makes you think.
Mod: What does it make you think?
Rod: That there are only two possibilities. Either, like my debating opponent says, it’s absolutely impossible to even come close to properly imitating these insects or, as I’ve been saying, the root of the problem lies elsewhere, in what really makes the difference between the success and failure of any fly. At any rate, I thought you defended the imitation concept above all.
Quill: I do, and well above presentation. But referring almost exclusively to today’s realistic patterns.
Rod: Current realistic, underwater patterns.
Quill: Exactly. Although CDC gives you very good floatability—usually the first two drifts, you’ll get very few drifts with the artificial floating like a dun.
Mod: Then, when you tie on a dry fly or what you think is a dry fly, what are you actually tying on?
Quill: An emerger at some floatation level of all the various possible levels. Just that. Definitely not a dry fly as we’ve just defined it, in any case.
…about magic wands
Rodney: Aside from this interesting “theory”, as you so aptly call it, I think the pattern-buffs, whether they extol exact imitations or not, are actually trying to compensate deficient casting techniques. The worst is that lots of them aren’t even aware that they’re doing it.
I’ve got another theory.
Moderator: Your turn then.
Rod: I call it the magic wand syndrome. Man constantly strives to find utensils to make life easier and save toil and sweat. Even knowing there are no miracle products for losing weight or lightning-fast systems for learning Russian in 6 months, we’re always willing to try out something new, just in case. No matter what…to avoid suffering and pain. Fly fishing has two magic wands. Rods that cast yards and yards almost by themselves. They make unbelievably delicate presentations, even against a headwind. Then you have the infallible flies that no fish can reject.
Quillan: I hope you aren’t insinuating that I go around selling magic wands.
Rod: In a way, you do. What you defend can be bought. That’s why most all fishermen change the fly before changing the cast or the presentation. And that’s why most angling forums, debates and discussions always focus on this or that pattern. It also explains why there’s a lot more literature about fly tying than any other angling-related topic. Fishermen keep trying to replace practice and training with a new rod or a new pattern. So they keep failing. They refuse to accept that the only magic wands in fly fishing are training, study and hours of effort. And, Quillan, you can’t buy those in a store.
Mod: Mmm, interesting.
Quill: And quite wrong. There’s a lot more skill involved in the option I defend than in yours: knowledge of fly-tying materials, manual dexterity, creativity, imagination, an artistic flare and, particularly, knowledge of entomology. Though I’m sure you consider how you handle the butterfly net more important then recognizing exact species of mayfly under the binocular magnifying glass.
Rod: He who fishes better catches more fish than the guy with the better imitations.
…slight point of encounter
Mod: Don’t you guys believe that, in the ultimate analysis, the guy that makes the best presentation with the best imitation will catch the most fish?
Quill: Yeah, but that hardly ever happens.
Rod: You’re right there.
Mod: Hummmph! Please enlighten us.
Quill: The angling styles of the great majority of fly fishermen are much closer to one option than to the other.
Rod: Almost always closer to imitation. Obsessed with changing flies to solve all their problems.
Quill: More and more anglers are focusing almost exclusively on presentation and stock their fly boxes with only a couple of patterns.
Rod: Yeah, but they’re still a small minority.
Quill: It’s funny but usually the guys that catch the most fish know little about casting. I think I know why.
Quill: Because they make the best presentation they know how to make. They get as close as they can to the fish and, with little more than the leader, they drift the fly past the trout’s snout. No technique, no special training. That’s all they do. And once the fish sees the fly, either it looks a lot like what it’s eating or see you later, alligator. And that, Rodney, summarizes everything you’re trying to defend.
Rod: You’re describing a special type of fishing done in certain streams under specific conditions. That kind of fisherman does catch fish in his usual streams but he’s very limited in any kind of river where he can’t get so close.
…dragging isn’t always decisive
Quill: I maintain that a realistic imitation doesn’t need an impeccable presentation; it can even drag a bit.
Rod: Never. The trout, for example, is much more finicky about a poor presentation than about a specific fly pattern. If a trout knows anything, it certainly knows how to tell the difference between something that floats and drifts naturally from something that’s forced.
Quill: What poor presentations do is highlight the deficiencies of a given imitation. Natural insects are continually subject to whimsical eddies and micro currents. They rarely drift in a straight, predictable line.
Rod: True. That’s what makes a proper presentation so difficult. The imitation has to follow the not-so-uniform drift of the natural insect.
Mod: Let’s try to wind up with some last thoughts, OK?
Quill: I’d like to end on this note: the vast difficulty, study and work required to create almost perfect imitations always pays off on the stream. Very few fishermen systematically use this type of fly, but they undoubtedly catch the most fish. Today’s artificial fly, with current knowledge of the art of fly-tying, stands out as much more important than presentation. Never, until very recently, has this been so clear.
Just about anybody knows how to cast and make more or less presentable presentations. But very few can tie patterns that truly imitate natural insects and then use them for fishing. That’s the real source of this controversy.
Mod: Your turn to finish up.
Rod: Fly fishing is about placing a fly on the water without spooking the fish and making it drift naturally. No matter how good your imitation is, it’s always going to be tied to a tippet, which, in turn, is tied to a thicker leader and a much thicker fly line. Between you and the fish, there’s almost always going to be a multitude of currents that are sometimes absolutely indecipherable. You’ll be surrounded by vegetation and obstacles and the wind is rarely going to be your ally. This whole reality interacts with itself and changes with each step you take and each minute that goes by. In the stream, I sincerely prefer to rely on my skill and knowledge more than what I have in my fly box.
Mod: Many thanks to both of you for this interesting debate. Happy fishing until next time.
quite interesting read on Irish pike and their not-so-well-known diadromous capabilities. (referring to all fishes which migrate between the sea and fresh water)
Scientists from Inland Fisheries Ireland, led by Debbi Pedreschi of UCD, have studied the history of pike in Ireland.
” The pike, up to now, was regarded as an introduced alien species. The Irish name ‘gailliasc’, the ‘foreign fish’, seemed to attest to that. No illustrations of this large lake-dweller appear in medieval manuscripts, although the salmon and the eel feature prominently. The first written references to pike appeared in the 16th century, suggesting that this sport fish arrived here around then.
That pike were introduced seemed a plausible theory. So-called ‘diadromous’ species, such as eels salmonids and lampreys, can move between fresh and salt water. When the ice covering this part of the world melted, 8,000 years ago, they were able to cross the sea and enter Irish rivers. Pike, and the other ‘coarse’ fish, would die if they ventured into the ocean. They couldn’t reach Ireland, or so it was thought. “
click the pic for the complete article on the Irish Examiner. enjoy !
a lot of us tend to think that commercial fishing is the big nasty devil that’s ruining and depleting fish stocks around the world but that’s maybe just a convenient half truth.
bring this to our sport-fishing level, reduce the fishery’s scale to say, a smaller or average sized lake or river or stream and depletion and ecosystem destabilisation issues happen at an alarming, easily observable rate and it’s not just about fish. as sport-fishers we’re all aware of size limit regulations and a lot of us also know that they’re bunk. here’s why:
of course there’s always the fact that dead fish can’t take our flies, put up a fight, jump up and down, be the beautiful creatures that they are and even less reproduce.
it’s all about math, each fish removed makes for potentially hundreds of less fish in the future that will in turn not reproduce, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
is it worth it ?
here’s how to do it properly with a very minimal –if any– effect to its health and lifespan.
as sport-fishers, and even for those who keep a fish now and again, the video below might seem about as far removed from our activity as it gets but then maybe not.
not blatantly advertised as such, it appears to have been produced by the dubious Greenpeace group and the numbers and examples are most probably exaggerated but the basic idea remains. simply put, there’s too much of a demand for food and its by-products from the seas and over harvesting produces imbalances. bad ones.
add pollution and other assorted badies to the equation and the stated numbers might be up to par after all. geared towards the EU, the message is Worldwide. geared towards the seas and oceans, the repercussions inland are equally astounding. it’s a big, huge, colossal affair and every area and country is concerned.
please share this with your friends and maybe do a little something about it in your own small way if you believe its worth it.
Ollie Edwards videos don’t usually stay up for long on the public domain so, this is worth watching quickly before it washes downstream !
a little over an hour long and all in honor of Frank Sawyer, there’s tying and fishing with tips and tricks and of course, goofy ‘ole Edwards all along the way. enjoy !
”Because none of the things are yourself, not really. The ideas come from someplace else. It’s like fish,” he says.
What’s like fish? “The ideas,” says Lynch. “You didn’t make the fish. You caught the fish. Now you can cook it in a good way or a bad way, but that’s as far as it goes. The fish came from someplace else. And sometimes …” His eyes take on a faraway look. “Sometimes it talks back to you. Tells you how it wants to be cooked.”
big thanks going out to David Lynch for giving me the opportunity to use a crappy photo i was about to throw out. what strikes me is that we both have completely different thoughts on how fish interact with us, seems like most of mine say “get on with it and let me go ! “ interesting how they get cocky when they find out they’re next stop isn’t going to be a pan…
of ichthyological interest (and apart from the sassing), the pic above shows how fish eyes and olfactory thingies bulge out when in their environment, something we don’t see when a fish is held out of water. maybe the pic isn’t so crappy after all.
～ Joan Rivers
‘funny the things one thinks of when driving home after an afternoon of catch thirteen trout…
little does it know it’ll be going back home in a few seconds without ever having left the water, but then deception is all part of the game i guess.
title quote: the first written reference to fly fishing and fly tying- Claudius Aelianus 170-235 AD
“A ship landing on a whale mistaken for an island in an early thirteeth century bestiary (London, British Library, Harley MS 4751, f. 69r, c. 1230-1240).”
“In the Indian Ocean there are whales which are so large that they seem to be islands. And sometimes because of the soil they have on them plants grow on their backs. Men crossing the sea sometimes land on these whales, which, when they feel the movement of men on them, hurry down into the depths, and so the men are drowned.”
bad, bad fishes ! click the pic for lots more map monsters on BibliOdyssey. enjoy !
by Jeff Kennedy
“Written by professional fly casting instructor, Eoin Fairgrieve, My First Trout is an interactive children’s book about learning to fish for trout. This book has been inspired by Eoin’s work teaching thousands of children to fish, and comprises of sixteen chapters covering all aspects of fly fishing for this prized species of fish. It includes motion graphics, interactive educational tools, and an image gallery. The book is written in an informative and engaging style, and children will learn about water safety, the trout’s anatomy and lifecycle, and the importance of maintaining a healthy riverside environment. Other chapters include information on what the trout eats as well as essential tackle and fly casting techniques. This publication is an ideal reading and reference guide for any child interested in learning to fish for trout, and is particularly suitable for children between the ages of 9-16 years.”
this is the follow up ebook to My First Salmon available for download on your iPad with iBooks and at only 7$ it’s the perfect gift you don’t want to miss giving to our little friends. click the pic to access the iTunes store.