ness

I tie a nail knot with a surgeon's loop on the end of the fly line. Attach leaders with a surgeon's loop. I've got a knot tying tool to help with the nail knots. Can't remember what it's called, but I still see them in tackle shops.

I've only broken one rod. Lost my balance and slapped the tip on the ground in front of me. But, something that I've done more times than I'd like to admit: leave a rod on top of, or leaning against the car. Lost one completely (including reel, line, leader and fly, Roaring River); banged up one pretty bad when it slid off onto the road (Baptist Camp); ran over one, destroying the reel: I realized I'd left it on top of the car, stopped and it wasn't there, turned around to go back and ran over it in the parking lot (local lake). Couple other close calls. I just don't put them on the car anymore. Pretty smart, huh?

Ditto on the Battenkills. And, as is getting discussed in another thread, Orvis will stand behind it and fix, repair or replace it if you need. They've been making them for years, and you can buy extra spools, etc. I replaced a spool on one last year that was about 10 years old.

That's one of the good things about Orvis. They stand behind their stuff, and treat you good when you have an issue. That's what you get for their premium pricing. I dropped a Battenkill and broke off the knob several years back. I took it into a local shop, explained what happened, and they gave me a new spool.

I'm too cheap to buy one at that level. I can tell you that I have the Renzetti Traveler, and it's extremely well-made. I've got the pedestal version, and it's plenty heavy plus it has a sticky foam bottom that helps keep it put. Mine's about 10-years old, and I've got no plans to retire it yet, but when I do Renzetti will get a hard look.

Terraserver has them. I'm a map junkie, and I have purchased several from My Topo. They print them on a Tyvek-like material that's tough, tear-resistant and waterproof. The use the USGS data, and look like their topo maps, but you can customize the coverage, and avoid having to purchase multiple maps.

Actually, I've plumped up a bit for the winter, but thanks. Yes, it does work good as a solo. Not so hot as a tandem. It did work great when my babies were smaller: me in the middle one in front and one in back.

Al, Great post. I love the ingenuity and use of battery box, etc to accomplish something other than what it was designed for. Woodman: Al's info is very good re: the keel. I'll just add that 'tracking' is generally not an issue with a well-designed canoe. The front-to-back curve or 'rocker' of a canoe coupled with the curve side-to-side a well-designed craft will strike the right balance between the canoe going the direction you want it to and allowing you to change directions when you want too. Keels are generally added to provide rigidity, especially in very wide, flat-bottomed canoes. They also add material to provide protection from rocks, gravel or reduce wear when the canoe is dragged over stuff. Of course, the wider, flat boats have a lot of initial stability, and give a sense of comfort and allow you to stand up if you want. But, put one of those past the tipping point, and there's no turning back. A rounder-bottomed canoe may feel less stable, but the point of no return is farther up the side. Grizwilson: You and Al have hit on what I think is one of the major advantages of a canoe: the ability to hold multiple fully-rigged rods. Kayaks have their plusses, and you see more and more of them out on the water these days. They're more maneuverable, so if you're the type that zig-zags across streams, or changes your mind frequently requiring frequent u-turns , a kayak may be best. And, like you suggest - getting out of one of those is a tad more challenging the older I get. For me, the storage capacity, comfort and versatility of a solo canoe are ideal for stream fishing.

I hear you on that. For now, I just continuously hike the dang thing up. I figure in about 20 years I'll get to that stage where I just don't give a rat's arse how I look, and my kids will have grown up enough that they're not embarrassed by things, and I'll throw on some suspenders. Big red ones!

Looks like it was 30. You can have your thread back now.

How many times do I gotta post to shake this 'Chesnut Lamprey' designation??

Conehead stripper?

I use the same pack I use when I wet-wade, wade-wade, fish at the park from the shore, whatever. Too much crap to move to another system, but honestly it's not TOO much crap. Just don't want to head out without something I need, and it's all in the pack, or I don't have it at all. If I'm fishing warm water on foot I go to a fanny pack, since I'm not in the water and fishing less technically that I do with trout.

Those would compliment my Harris tweed fishing blazer and rubber knickerbockers nicely. Perhaps I shall have one of the staff investigate further, and what not.

I haven't really found anything I REALLY like. I liked my old Orvis vest, but often wished it was a shorty. When it's hot out, it's a little too warm. But I don't really like the mesh style. I got an Orvis pack with the hydration bladder a few years ago. I thought it looked like the ultimate solution: pack style so it's comfortable and gives lots of freedom for arm movement; carry some water with you; room for a rain jacket and snacks in the back; nice pockets up front. But - I find myself jacking with it a lot. Here's some things I don't like: * There are a ton of zippers on the front, and they've all got a little opening in the ring where the tab joins the zipper. I seem to get my tippet caught in there pretty often. * The pockets zip about halfway down on one side, so if I forget to zip it closed, I can lose a $$$ box of flies pretty easily. It'd be nice if they only opened across the top, then I could leave them open. * The vest is adjustable in all the right places, but there are tag-ends hanging all over the place. It would be nice if there was either a pocket to hide them in, or some other kind of gizmo to tidy things up. * I don't use the bladder like I thought I would. I feel the need to clean it between uses, which for me means removing it, washing it and drying it out completely for a couple days so I don't get mold. * The tube over the shoulder always seems to be in the way. (Come to think of it - I'm just gonna take that thing out). So the search continues...

Some interesting stuff being thrown out here. I think the key to a lot of the issues we encounter could be better enforcement. The regs are about right, I'd say. It's just hard to get attention on these places for a number of reasons. First - there's only a limited number of agents. When I called to report some violations on Crane Creek a while back, she asked 'what county is that', then said they'll send 'the agent' down to check it out. I know it's a stretch to assume there's one agent per county based on that, but the point is - there's limited manpower to cover a very wide area. Add to that the size and remoteness of these locations, and the agents have a pretty difficult time policing it. But here's something all of us can do: Call the Game thief hot line as soon as possible when you see something. And, be prepared to give details like physical descriptions, license number, whatever. Be the squeaky wheel, and keep this front-of-mind for the agents. They'll respond, and though they might not catch anybody red-handed, the increased presence will encourage the bad guys to straighten up, or move somewhere else. The number is 1-800-392-1111. Stick it in your phone. As to fly fishermen looking down their noses at bait fishermen. Welp, I think that's probably overplayed a bit. None of the ffermen I know give a hoot, and most fish by other means as well. I suspect that attitude carries over to the vast majority of people.

Nicely done DADAKOTA. You had me riveted! Great start to the morning.

Are they okay to put in the water, i.e. won't rust? I can see having a lot of fun with that thing when fishing. The shot like you took, or from in a canoe - really anything where you'd like to put the camera down for the shot, especially if it's uneven.

I used Photoshop Elements for several years and just hated it. The photo organizing stuff was a nightmare, it frequently caused my computer to hang, it would 'lose' pictures from it's catalog. Always had something going on that ticked me off. I ended up switching to Adobe Lightroom, and haven't looked back. The interface is much more logical for starters. It's look and feel is completely different than PS. It's excellent at keywording, or metadata browsing/filtering - which has become a much bigger deal as my library has grown (to over 9,000 photos). Exposure adjustments - the most common adjustment you'll make - are a snap. And there are multiple ways to tackle them - sliders, curves, etc. And, if your camera shoots RAW, Lightroom will convert it and open up all the benefits of that (such as being much more forgiving when correcting exposure/white balance problems). What it's not - a full-blown pixel-level photo editor. You won't be able to chop a tree out of a picture, or paste Selma Hayek's body under someone else's head. There's clone stamp, healing brush, sharpening, noise reduction. Basically, the stuff most people need to adjust photos. Adobe offers trial downloads of all their products. Give any of them a try, but I really like Lightroom.

Hmmm.... Gorilla pod. Hadn't thought of using one of those for this. As a matter of fact, I always kinda thought they were a stupid idea. Thanks for the enlightenment. Oh, and nice fish.

I think a lot of the distinction between hatchery and wild trout applies to newly stocked fish. But any wild or stream-bred trout has already beaten huge odds, especially if they are of any size at all. They are conditioned to be more wary, so they're much more likely to know you're there, and you're not going to catch them if they're looking at you. At least in my experience. As for cutts in high mountain streams, they're a different animal for one - much more gullible. But also their habitat is significantly different than a MO trout. It's frozen 4 months out of the year, then they get a month or two of runoff (flooding), then they get to live it up for a month or two before the drought kicks in, then they start it all over again. Their feeding is packed into a tight window, and they're opportunistic feeders. The situation becomes even more exaggerated when you're talking about streams overpopulated with non-native brook trout. Now that is often too easy.

Welp laker, tgard, You've got my head spinning now. I've never heard anything about a stocking as late as 1960 at Crane - and my Googling hasn't turned up anything. Brown trout there? That's a new one to me too. But hell, not everybody that dumps a fish in a stream writes it down somewhere where we can read about it. You can find countless places that say the McCloud rainbows in Crane are pure. I've always felt that angle was a little bit exaggerated. For one reason, not even the rainbows in the McCloud River are pure - so who's to really know? Also, like I mentioned before, not every stocking is official and documented. Who's to say some local didn't dump a bunch of Missouri strains from a hatchery in there to give the stream a little boost when the populations were down? Of course that's speculation, but saying anything with certainty about those fish is too.

Ahhh. The canoe v. kayak v. 'toon debate. Stability of a pontoon is superior, but where do you dump your canoe? Unseen rock, sure - but also in a fast bend. Think about working through one of those in a 'toon... You've got three feet of oar on each side, and it's tough to change direction of a 'toon. And whoever mentioned slow water is right on. It's a real workout to get through the big, slow pools. Also, a bit tougher going upstream. Yes - pontoons hold a lot of weight, but the actual storage space is somewhat limited, and a little harder to access. Plus sides: A little higher fishing platform, more stability in many situations and more comfortable. They're best on bigger water, where you're not dodging obstacles. Also better for big folks. Canoes offer the most versatility. Plenty of storage, speed, maneuverability, ability to take someone along, stealth.

I just eye-ball them. I've been quite happy with the results.

I'll throw in another vote for Smith. They're excellent quality, and they offer prescription/photochromic lenses. Also, I've got a big head (save the comments ) and the frames fit very well. I've got amber prescription photochromic glass Padre model. Some things that make these stand out, and in my opinion, worth the money: - Glass. Man, they are so much clearer than plastic. More durable - don't get the micro-scratches. - Amber really increases contrast. - Photochromic. They lighten or darken depending on the sunlight. They're not real dark at the dark end, and fairly light at the light end. I primarily fish for trout in streams, so I'm in and out of shade a lot, so that's a real plus. - Wide sides cut light coming in. - I've broken the frames twice, and they've been replaced free of charge both times. Same pair have lasted me about 6 years.