The Ultimate Brookie Box?

[k-bob]

big spring and big fishing have relatively high alkalinity, so they will have more aquatic bugs and brookies there may be very finnicky. however, most of even the class a PA brookie headwaters streams are low alkalinity, so fewer aquatic bugs and more opportunistic brookies:

http://www.apwc-pa.com/Petition/Appendix%20P%20-%20Class%20A%20Wild%20Trout%20Streams.pdf

with our highly acidic rain, headwaters areas, where water has had less exposure to soils and geology that can buffer acidity, will have fewer aquatic bugs, so fish there feed more opportunistically:

"The ecology of a drainage—from its headwaters to its point of termination—plays a crucial role in its acidity and alkalinity. They can vary greatly as its waters move downstream. At the headwaters, acidity is generally high with pH levels at or below 6.0. This is the result of rain and snow that have not captured surface effluents. This is why you won’t find large numbers of trout in headwater creeks. It is also the reason why brook trout, with their higher tolerance to low pH, are considered one of the ultimate headwater fish."

 

[redietz]

SteveG wrote:

I think their reputation is formed from people fishing for them in less fertile freestoners, especially in the absence of browns.

Exactly right. Fish in infertile headwaters (which is where we usually encounter brook trout, and mostly brook trout) are always easier to catch than fish in limestone streams, or any lower gradient streams, for that matter, regardless of species.

 

[troutbert]

The things about trout behavior and infertility and stream gradient are true.

But, brook trout and brown trout behavior is inherently very different.

Many miles of freestone stream have brookies and browns together, and the brook trout are far more easily caught than the browns.

I read on another forum people saying that in the mountain streams the browns and brookies behave the same and can be caught equally readily. They had a "consensus" going that this was true.

But it is definitely not true, and not close. There are particularly times when conditions are perfect and both can be caught very readily.

But overall, in a stream holding 50/50 browns and brookies, the number of brookies caught will be far higher than the browns. Studies indicate about 5 TIMES higher.

A factor of 5 TIMES higher may sound astonishing and hard to believe. But from what I've seen fishing, I think that's probably about right.

 

[krayfish2]

Ultimate brookie box:

Stick fly
Cigarette butt fly
Glo bug
Greenie weenie
Patriot
Royal Wulff
All other ridiculous patterns

 

[dryflyguy]

I also agree that - on streams that hold both brookies and browns - brookies are still a lot easier to catch.

I find it interesting that troutbert mentioned using a #12 deer hair beetle in one of his prior posts. That's my main fly on brookie streams, along with larger streams, all summer and fall. And I catch many fish on it
Most people tie their beetles with foam now. And for good reasons too. Simpler to tie, more durable, and they float like a cork.
However, I'm convinced that deer hair patterns work better - for whatever reason.
I've been out with many of my buddies - all good fishermen - who use foam beetles. And - especially on low, crystal clear streams - they wouldn't be doing too well.
And I'd come along and catch them on my "old school" crowe style beetle.
This has happened over and over for me

 

[RLeep2]

>>However, I'm convinced that deer hair patterns work better - for whatever reason.>>

I'm convinced it's the "splat" as a function of deer hair being heavier than foam. I primarily fished #10's and presented them about the same way you might present a bass bug, tight to the banks and cover and with enough force that they made a noticeable plop when they hit the water. With this technique, I found that deer hair outfished foam at least 3-1.

Foam though, might be superior for other ways of fishing larger ants and beetles. I've caught a lot of trout that were already working on dinky olives or even trikes by showing them a large ant or beetle. In these situations, a more subdued plop, as with foam, seems to work a little better. For me, anyway....

 

[Doug_R]

I've never met a brook trout that could resist a well placed green weenie! My favorite way to fish them is under a dry fly but I also enjoy fishing them on a long leader for a more stealthy approach. Easy to see in the water and even easier to tie!

 

[ryansheehan]

Doug_R wrote:
I've never met a brook trout that could resist a well placed green weenie! My favorite way to fish them is under a dry fly but I also enjoy fishing them on a long leader for a more stealthy approach. Easy to see in the water and even easier to tie!

That's the only fly kray uses :-D

 

[troutbert]

Doug_R wrote:
I've never met a brook trout that could resist a well placed green weenie! My favorite way to fish them is under a dry fly but I also enjoy fishing them on a long leader for a more stealthy approach. Easy to see in the water and even easier to tie!

During the summer and early fall, when the inchworms are around, especially when the flows are at low and medium levels, a greenie worm pattern is definitely a very effective fly for brookies.

Probably THE most effective fly in those conditions. Much more effective than typical dry flies such as a Royal Wulff, Adams, elk hair caddis.

Which shows once again that what fly you use DOES matter for brookies.

 

[DriftingDunn]

Obviously, what fly you use does matter, but in all of my years of fly fishing I've never once seen a green inch-worm in or on the water.

Am I the only one?

 

[redietz]

DriftingDunn wrote:
Obviously, what fly you use does matter, but in all of my years of fly fishing I've never once seen a green inch-worm in or on the water.

Am I the only one?

Quite possibly. They hang down from trees on threads from trees overhanging water, and eventually drop in. You may not see them on large rivers, but on small streams, they're often everywhere.

You've never fished Clark's Creek, have you?

And don't forget that the larvae of Rhyacophila caddis flies ("green rock worms") are also well represented by green weenies.

 

[IdratherbePhishing]

Although clarks has some green inchworms the word hatch is non existent. There is not inchworms everywhere like you tend to believe. Yea I’m sure fish will eat them but if your solely going to fish this “hatch” you’ll be disappointed because it doesn’t exist. Common misconception

 

[redietz]

I've seen fish lined up under the hemlocks picking off suspended inchworms far to often to agree with you on that.

Of course, with the hemlocks dying off the way they have been, this may no longer be true in the future.

 

[troutbert]

There are many inchworms on hardwood trees.

 

[ryansheehan]

Hatch is not the right word to use with inch worms. I wouldn't ever say there is a good grasshopper hatch yet when they hit the water they get crushed. The second part is inch worms get suspended in the water column quickly. If you're waiting for rising fish to take the inch worm hatch you'll be waiting a long time.

 

[redietz]

troutbert wrote:
There are many inchworms on hardwood trees.

Yes, of course. Most of the trees overhanging Clark's, though, are/were hemlocks. It will be a while before they're replaced by hardwoods.

 

[IdratherbePhishing]

I grew up all but creekside on Clarks and still live super close. A mile at best. I understand what your saying and I have plenty of books that say the same. In fact any book you pickup that has info on clarks talks about inchworms. But in my honest opinion is, it’s not that great. I also understand they would catch fish there, but they have never been all over the place. Just very here and there. And I did not mean to come off saying you or however I did redietZ I apologize for the way it sounds. I wasn’t trying to seem hostile.

 

[MattBoyer]

I'll hafta get irbp's back on this one. We've had this discussion a lot, and I grew up on the opposite end of the creek from him. The green inchworm on Clark's "hatch" has been way overblown. Ironically enough, when it allegedly happens, there are half a dozen real, and quite awesome to fish hatches going on. They are there for sure, but it seems like everybody just echoes "that book" when they have no other advice to add regarding a creek with sporadic, yet incredibly diverse hatches. If I were to disseminate a hatch that should be famous on Clark's, I would throw down a 14 or 16 tan caddis. 8 months of the year, it's cash money in the bank. Also, if you do decide to fish inchworms in Clark's, they definitely don't float.

Boyer

 

[redietz]

No offense taken at anybody who's experiences with Clarks differ from own.

Back in the early 80's, I used to fish the stream several times a week. I didn't read about the inchworms from any book (although I've subsequently seen them written about in several) but simply by watching.

I have to agree with what's been said about several hatches going on at the same time that the inchworms appear -- and they're certainly not a "hatch".

I personally usually fished an ant pattern to trout picking off inchworms, not a green weenie (I'm not sure it had been invented yet.) Watching where there were inchworms was simply a way to mark where the trout would be.

In more recent years, I've watched people clean up with a green weenie in the stream, but then again, I've seen people clean up with a green weenie in streams with no overhanging vegetation.