Arizona Fly Fishing Forums  

Go Back   Arizona Fly Fishing Forums > Arizona Fly Fishing > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:47 AM
Litespeed1 Litespeed1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tempe
Posts: 1,204
I fished the walk in during the high flow event you write about. During the event it wasn't bad. The Sunday they dropped the water was one of the best days I have ever experienced fly fishing anywhere.

And to be clear I am all for stocking trout that grow bigger. Just wish they would set their sights a little higher with numbers.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-02-2015, 03:10 PM
Salty Skroob Salty Skroob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 91
Agreed,

I already filled out one angler survey where they asked me to choose between two poor options. I wrote a long diatribe on the back. Got a second in the mail. I should have photographed my answers so I can copy it down again.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-04-2015, 11:04 PM
DBones DBones is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 16
Its just a scientist's way of asking "would your rather catch a few big fish or a bunch of small fish." Don't take it literally. Haven't been up since January. Time to see if the rotenone left me my one 18 incher. I already fish all day for one big one; or a couple of smallies for the fry pan. Cheers!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-05-2015, 03:42 AM
aztip's Avatar
aztip aztip is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty Skroob View Post
Agreed,

I already filled out one angler survey where they asked me to choose between two poor options. I wrote a long diatribe on the back. Got a second in the mail. I should have photographed my answers so I can copy it down again.
You should have seen the ones from Montana State. They had bizarre choices like: "If you could catch twice as many fish, but you had to pay $375 more per trip and the flows were a constant 40,000 CFS, would you still go?" Or "If you could catch bigger fish, but had to pay $825 more per trip and the flows were a constant 3,000 CFS, would you still go?" I'm glad they are gathering data, I'm just not sure how much they can learn from choices so divorced from reality.
__________________
Somebody just back of you while you are fishing is as bad as someone looking over your shoulder while you write a letter to your girl.
---Ernest Hemingway
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-05-2015, 03:47 AM
aztip's Avatar
aztip aztip is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrdorvis View Post
<snip>..... I am in for stocking trout that grow bigger and live longer than the fish lees ferry has now.... comes down to water flows and scuds and worms and cross your fingers
I'm with jrdorvis on this. There has to be a genetic component to the size issue and the time to address it is when the numbers are low, like now.
__________________
Somebody just back of you while you are fishing is as bad as someone looking over your shoulder while you write a letter to your girl.
---Ernest Hemingway
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-05-2015, 10:01 AM
Litespeed1 Litespeed1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tempe
Posts: 1,204
I'm with you guys.

Although I am a bit tired of crossing my fingers hoping the latest idea to fix it doesn't mess it up again and again.....

I wish "THEY" hadn't lowered the river that October years ago to the point where the green line got exposed died and therefore killed the scud food base.

Scuds = Bigger food bigger fish.
Forage fish.......that ain't happening. Browns would get too big.
Worms can work but they are better at staying put under a rock.
Eating Midges all day = average fish. (I tried it....I ate one peanut every 10 minutes for a whole day. I got gaunt and hangry and my head looked out of proportion to my body then a cheeseburger was thrown over my backyard wall so I ran over and ate it and there was a hook in, my neighbor yanked me over the wall grabbed me and hit my head with a rock and then I became stupid and became a policy maker)

That was fun.

I wish one of the survey questions asked was: would you like us to leave the Ferry alone?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-05-2015, 10:14 AM
Litespeed1 Litespeed1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tempe
Posts: 1,204
and another thing....those amazing images of Brookies from out of state posted on this site?

The Ferry had Brookies that big years ago near the ramp.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-05-2015, 02:54 PM
Salty Skroob Salty Skroob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by aztip View Post
You should have seen the ones from Montana State. They had bizarre choices like: "If you could catch twice as many fish, but you had to pay $375 more per trip and the flows were a constant 40,000 CFS, would you still go?" Or "If you could catch bigger fish, but had to pay $825 more per trip and the flows were a constant 3,000 CFS, would you still go?" I'm glad they are gathering data, I'm just not sure how much they can learn from choices so divorced from reality.
This was the one. I'm not crazy about what would cause the cost of one trip to increase by $400. I'm guessing that Lees Ferry Anglers won't be in love with this either as they will have to directly pass it on or absorb it. Either way it can't be good for business.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-05-2015, 04:52 PM
Westy's Avatar
Westy Westy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,268
Stock browns, problem solved.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-05-2015, 11:30 PM
PaysonLazerLiner PaysonLazerLiner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 131
We should all be embarrassed. No check that. We should all be damned angry that a fishery with the virtually unlimited topside potential to be an unbelievably awesome fishery that the Ferry has, has deteriated into the underperformer that it now is. Acknowledging that the Ferry has always had its ups and downs, I believe its current down is largely due to the artificial floods (HFE) that have been orchestrated over the last 3-4 years. The problem, the floods have been carried out during the fall months-a time that is totally contrary to nature, where almost all natural floods occur in the spring. These manmade fall floods flush and scrub the bottom of the river, taking millions of underwater life forms downstream with it. Since this is occurring just before winter, rather than just before summer, the river, along with all of its flora and fauna don't get the benefit of the warmth of summer to recharge. I believe that over the last several years of the current fall flood regime, much of the food source for all those big bows that used to be everywhere in the river have been flushed downstream and have not been able to replenish themselves during the winter. I've been told that the Ferry is one of the most complex water systems to manage because there are so many interested parties with different demands. However, it's obvious the the more we "mangage" the worse our formally fantastic, world class fishery seems to become.
Tightlines
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Logos, Trademarks are property of their owners. Other content Copyright 2006-2015 azflyandtie.com . All Rights Reserved.