Best Trout Fishing State In The Contiguous Us

[Gavin]

Colorado..I'd rank it above Arkansas because the scenery & amenities are a heck of allot better. Unfortunately, the CO stream access laws are all jacked up. I've fished some of the name waters and some creeks out there......RMNP aint bad, but the Gunnison is the only one that I'd care to go back too...Thinking that Utah or the 4 corners area seems to appeal to me more than CO.

[ness]

Ness, totally disagree about your public land point. Montana streams are ALL "public" in that the public has a right to fish them anywhere. All you have to do is legally access the stream and you can go anywhere on it, and the stream doesn't have to be big enough to float or anything like that. There is plenty of public access to nearly every Montana stream, so in reality I don't know of many stream stretches that are inaccessible. On the other hand, I've been very frustrated with all the private water in Colorado and to a lesser extent Wyoming. Geez, about 80% or more of such "famous" Colorado rivers as the Frying Pan and South Platte are totally private.

Well, that kinda flies in the face of what I've heard. I know there's a right to be in the water, but have heard the access is the problem as large sections of stream side land are in private hands, and aggressively protected. Regardless, I can't really claim to be an expert on MT, and repeat that it's a lifetime challenge to find what is your 'best'. It's great that you seem to have found the best, own property there and can exclude the other 49 states from consideration But if I can't get there within the constraints of time I have, 'best' doesn't matter anyway.

As to the 'famous' CO waters, I wouldn't even consider them.

[Al Agnew]

Maybe there are parts of Montana that I haven't been to that have the problem of no access...certainly there are some bridges that have been closed to anglers because of a lack of parking. But in the part of Montana I'm most familiar with, I can access every inch of the Madison, something like 100 miles, every bit of the Gallatin, probably at least 75 miles, all of the Yellowstone from the park down to Big Timber, at least 100 miles, all of the Boulder, all of the Stillwater, plus a huge number of smaller creeks, and all of that is within 2 hours' drive or less from where I am. I'm sure there are some streams where wading access is limited, but almost every floatable stream has public accesses every five to ten miles, either at bridge crossings or on land owned by the Fish and Game, and once you get onto those rivers, you can wade, walk the banks, etc. You can't do that on a lot of floatable streams in several other western states including Colorado, where there are stretches that you can float through but you can't even anchor or get out on a mid-stream rock, let alone wade.

[Al Agnew]

I guess if I had a second choice of western states, it would probably be Oregon or maybe Idaho. Neat thing about those two states is that you have several steelhead opportunities...what little steelhead fishing I've done I know I'd love it.

[ozark trout fisher]

Maybe there are parts of Montana that I haven't been to that have the problem of no access...certainly there are some bridges that have been closed to anglers because of a lack of parking. But in the part of Montana I'm most familiar with, I can access every inch of the Madison, something like 100 miles, every bit of the Gallatin, probably at least 75 miles, all of the Yellowstone from the park down to Big Timber, at least 100 miles, all of the Boulder, all of the Stillwater, plus a huge number of smaller creeks, and all of that is within 2 hours' drive or less from where I am. I'm sure there are some streams where wading access is limited, but almost every floatable stream has public accesses every five to ten miles, either at bridge crossings or on land owned by the Fish and Game, and once you get onto those rivers, you can wade, walk the banks, etc. You can't do that on a lot of floatable streams in several other western states including Colorado, where there are stretches that you can float through but you can't even anchor or get out on a mid-stream rock, let alone wade.

This is consistent with my experiences fishing Montana and Colorado. Montana's stream access law makes all the difference in that state- a good part of the reason why I think it's the best trout fishing state save Alaska. The stream access law opens up so much water- if you can find a bridge crossing you are usually in luck even if the stream is pretty well locked up in private land. Not so in Colorado (or Wyoming). There if the stream is privately held on both sides if you even touch the bottom of the stream you are trespassing-which makes wade fishing illegal on those stretches and float fishing very difficult.

[Greasy B]

I wanted to vote Wyoming because it’s my favorite place to fish but I can’t because the stream access laws. Like Colorado, Wyoming law states that I cannot touch or walk on the stream bed despite the fact that the stream is deemed public. These laws excludes enormous stretches of rivers from the general public; they create a situation much like Europe and United Kingdom where only the gentry has stream access. As an angler/tourist I don’t feel welcome in these states. After several years avoiding Wyoming as a destination I spent a week on a River that flowed mostly through private ranch land. There was a lot of uncertainty about the trip, is there enough water to float without touching the stream bottom? Can I sit in a boat all day without standing and stretching on dry land? How do I take a pee? Will there be ranch hand/ goons following, filming, and threatening us?

After our guide trip the first day it was clear as to how this was going work out, we simple violated the law repeatedly all day every day for a week. Even in areas that had adequate water to float smacking into rocks was impossible to avoid, we had to get out of our boats to pee and back pain problems forced us to get out and stretch now and then. We never did wade fish or loiter on Private land and did no harm other than leaving a few foot prints. There was one stretch where we were eye balled and tailed by someone in a pickup truck but most of the folks seemed to have better things to do than to worry about a couple of schmucks floating down the river banging into rocks and peeing.

I voted Montana because it’s a little better cared for, equally beautiful and trout filled. I feel more welcome, that’s where I’ll spend the majority of my angler/tourist money.

[Outside Bend]

In terms of the "total experience," I voted for Wyoming. Colorado's nice, but stream access laws and intense angling pressure can really impinge on your sense of solitude. Idaho and Montana have incredible fishing, but many of their more famous waters (Rock Creek, the Ruby, Snake, Henry's Fork, etc), are absolutely pounded. While I support lenient stream access laws, they're a two-sided coin. It makes it easier for me to find water to fish, but it also makes it easier for everyone else, too. From a purely fisheries management standpoint, refuge areas on private lands do have some benefit to sportfish population sizes and angling quality.

Wyoming does have extremely conservative stream access laws, and I would like to see them altered to allow anglers access to the state's resources, which are managed by the state. But it's also true Wyoming has an enormous amount of public land- Forest Service, BLM, leases between landowners and the state game and fish agency, and state-owned sections designed to benefit schools. If you have a map, a full tank of gas, and are willing to take some risks on backroads and two-tracks, you can find a whole lot of water most folks never visit, and the state has no lack of big, dumb, wild trout.

But there's still a lot of trouty places I haven't explored enough- the Smokies, British Columbia, the Pacific northwest....

[Al Agnew]

Thing is that having a map and willingness to explore will get you into the same kind of lightly fished waters in every Western state. I've fished streams and lakes in Montana that aren't even that far off the beaten track--a few hours' hiking to get there--that seldom see an angler. So in my opinion, it really is the stream access laws that make all the difference, because in Montana you pretty much KNOW you're in the right wherever you're fishing.

Just for fun and very unscientifically, I counted the number of listed trout streams in the De Lorme Atlases for Montana and Wyoming. Montana had 83, Wyoming 63. That doesn't tell you all the trout streams, nor does it tell you the number of actual miles of trout streams. But I suspect that Montana has quite a bit more miles, given some of the large rivers that flow through Montana. Nor does it give any idea of the quality of fishing in those streams. Quality can be pretty subjective, anyway.

As for crowds, consider this...most of the famous and heavily pounded streams in Colorado aren't all that big...wading size streams like the Frying Pan and South Platte. Put a crowd on streams like that and it's going to feel crowded. Put the same number of people on a big river like the Yellowstone or the Snake and it doesn't feel nearly as crowded. What I've found on the Yellowstone is that if you wish to not let the crowds bother you, plan on concentrating on just a small area of the stream. Most people floating these big rivers are fishing the riffle corners and the area 15 feet from the better banks, and they are continually moving. I can spend a half day easily on the mile of river in front of my place, and fish a lot of water that seldom sees a fly, even though 20 drift boats go past me with anglers flogging the water.

This whole "best state" thing is pretty subjective. Best thing to do is try to fish them all!

[ness]

Yeah, you guys convinced me. The fishing in Colorado sucks because you simply can't do it. Can't touch the stream bed, much less take a pee. I don't know how in the heck I've managed to do it all these years without getting busted.

I haven't fished MT, WY, OR, ID or CA, so I'm not gonna step out there and say one of those are best. I just don't think 'best' can apply if I haven't done it. I'm just not gonna echo something someone else has said.

I'm more of a small stream loner. Don't really have the desire to fish tailwaters or float big water. I don't feel the need to hit water just to say I've been there, and I'm not really looking for lunkers. I don't have the time, at this stage in my life, to travel extensively simply to fish.

I can be in Rocky Mountain National Park in 11 hours. There are dozens of streams and lakes, minimal pressure, spectacular scenery, and all four kinds of trout. There are two subspecies of cutthroats (Greenback and Colorado River) that are indigenous to the Rockies and both rare. They all readily take dry flies. I've seen moose, cougar, elk, bear, big horns and other stuff while fishing there. The pine trees smell really good. I've hopped over the Colorado River at it's upper reaches.

I've fished other areas in CO too. Maybe all this frustration with access is because you guys haven't looked too hard or have focused on the 'name' rivers.

So, I call CO my best because it has exactly what I like, and it's within reach. Maybe in a few years I'll have a new 'best'. I'm not done looking.

[ness]

This whole "best state" thing is pretty subjective. Best thing to do is try to fish them all!

Yeppers!