News:

The Best Fishing Forum In The UK.
Do You Have What It Takes To Be A Member?

Main Menu
Please consider a donation to help with the running costs of this forum.

Fly Fishing Techniques

Started by Traditionalist, October 03, 2011, 08:02:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Traditionalist

Quote from: Alan on October 04, 2011, 01:52:18 PM
Mike, for the last couple of seasons i have been fishing a nine foot 5 weight, 12' leader and one of 2 flies, a dark claret hedgehog or DHE, everywhere and all the time, the only thing that varies is the length of the 4lb tippet, and the size of the fly sometimes,
i have yet to find the limitation this, very rarely blank and usually do pretty well amongst others fishing in different ways, i now think in terms of versatility of tackle and technique rather than using different tackle and specific techniques, i dont have all the stuff to think about or doubt, so my total focus is when and where, which i think more important for fishing success than the myriad ever more complex how's.

I knew a couple of blokes who only basically fished one fly. ( each a different one), and were very successful indeed in terms of catching fish.  As I wrote at the beginning, everybody has to decide for themselves how they want to fish.  I am not trying to persuade anybody to do anything at all, just offering some information based on my own experience and knowledge. If it helps, fine, if somebody thinks it's a load of old tosh, also fine. It doesn't really matter much to me either way and I am not going to argue about it at all. I offer it merely as information.

Just about the only things I object to are bullshit and misinformation. Otherwise I am interested in everything I can possibly find out about fishing, I always have been.

TL
MC

Fishtales

Alan

Isn't that your eyes registering a movement, the reflex controlled part of the brain responding and then your conciousness catching up and directing your head to focus on the spot? It is  a reflex action that our brains are hard-wired to respond to. Our ancestors had to react on movement either to flee a predator or catch prey. Conciousness then took over. If they had waited for the concious part of the brain to catch up with the reflex controlled part they would have died or lost a meal. We don't have to think to breathe as it is a reflex action controlled by the brain. You can consciously hold your breath but, even if you pass out, the reflex part takes over and you start breathing again.

Fishing a loch something registers on my conciousness that there is a fish. It just looks like any other wave, ripple or water movement that I have been watching for possibly hours. It may not even be where I am looking but somewhere on my peripheral vision, we see movement easier then because the image hits the cones in our retina, again all down to our ancestors. I cast into the area and more often than not I get a fish or at least a reaction from one. That was just down to experience because it has happened too many times before.
Don't worry, be happy.
Sandy
Carried it in full, then carry it out empty.
http://www.ftscotland.co.uk/

Looking for a webhost? Try http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=2966019

Traditionalist

#22
Quote from: fishtales on October 05, 2011, 11:05:06 PM
Alan

Isn't that your eyes registering a movement, the reflex controlled part of the brain responding and then your conciousness catching up and directing your head to focus on the spot? It is  a reflex action that our brains are hard-wired to respond to. Our ancestors had to react on movement either to flee a predator or catch prey. Conciousness then took over. If they had waited for the concious part of the brain to catch up with the reflex controlled part they would have died or lost a meal. We don't have to think to breathe as it is a reflex action controlled by the brain. You can consciously hold your breath but, even if you pass out, the reflex part takes over and you start breathing again.

Fishing a loch something registers on my conciousness that there is a fish. It just looks like any other wave, ripple or water movement that I have been watching for possibly hours. It may not even be where I am looking but somewhere on my peripheral vision, we see movement easier then because the image hits the cones in our retina, again all down to our ancestors. I cast into the area and more often than not I get a fish or at least a reaction from one. That was just down to experience because it has happened too many times before.

Reflexes are not controlled by the brain, and do not register directly on the consciousness, although they may do so after the reflex occurs.  The info here is pretty concise and good;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_arc

Reflex "triggers", more correctly referred to as "stimuli",  ( the use of which term has led to it being used for all sorts of things in a "casual" manner, often leading to misunderstandings), function  automatically and involuntarily.

TL
MC

haresear

QuoteIsn't that your eyes registering a movement, the reflex controlled part of the brain responding and then your conciousness catching up and directing your head to focus on the spot? It is  a reflex action that our brains are hard-wired to respond to. Our ancestors had to react on movement either to flee a predator or catch prey. Conciousness then took over. If they had waited for the concious part of the brain to catch up with the reflex controlled part they would have died or lost a meal. We don't have to think to breathe as it is a reflex action controlled by the brain. You can consciously hold your breath but, even if you pass out, the reflex part takes over and you start breathing again.

You are right Sandy. Alan is a bit slow on the uptake at times :)

QuoteAs I wrote at the beginning, everybody has to decide for themselves how they want to fish.  I am not trying to persuade anybody to do anything at all, just offering some information based on my own experience and knowledge. If it helps, fine, if somebody thinks it's a load of old tosh, also fine. It doesn't really matter much to me either way and I am not going to argue about it at all. I offer it merely as information.

Mike, for what it's worth, I generally find a lot of informed information in your posts and applaud your original thinking on many matters. I do agree with much of what you write.
Not all of it of course and I wouldn't to tackle the Clyde with a match rod and fly line for example, as I would find that too limited for my tastes, just as I wouldn't want to limit myself to one or two flies.
It do find it interesting stuff nevertheless.

Alex

Protect the edge.

Traditionalist

Quote from: haresear on October 05, 2011, 11:22:10 PM
You are right Sandy. Alan is a bit slow on the uptake at times :)

Mike, for what it's worth, I generally find a lot of informed information in your posts and applaud your original thinking on many matters. I do agree with much of what you write.
Not all of it of course and I wouldn't to tackle the Clyde with a match rod and fly line for example, as I would find that too limited for my tastes, just as I wouldn't want to limit myself to one or two flies.
It do find it interesting stuff nevertheless.

Alex



If somebody finds something interesting or useful, that is the main object of the exercise, and I am happy to hear it.  I don't expect people to immediately adopt anything at all, not do I expect them to agree with my opinions on various things. It's just information. What people do with it is entirely up to them.

TL
MC

Fishtales

Mike

So it all happens in the spinal column, hard wired outside of the main brain function?  I never knew that. It is still a reaction to an external stimulii, sight, and the conscious part of the brain catching up though :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex#cite_note-1

'For a reflex, reaction time or latency is the time from the onset of a stimulus until the organism responds

In animals, reaction time to visual stimuli is typically 150 to 300 milliseconds.'

Which to me means that we are aware of the movement before we are conscious of it.
Don't worry, be happy.
Sandy
Carried it in full, then carry it out empty.
http://www.ftscotland.co.uk/

Looking for a webhost? Try http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=2966019

Traditionalist

#26
Quote from: fishtales on October 05, 2011, 11:47:22 PM
Mike

So it all happens in the spinal column, hard wired outside of the main brain function?  I never knew that. It is still a reaction to an external stimulii, sight, and the conscious part of the brain catching up though :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex#cite_note-1

'For a reflex, reaction time or latency is the time from the onset of a stimulus until the organism responds

In animals, reaction time to visual stimuli is typically 150 to 300 milliseconds.'

Which to me means that we are aware of the movement before we are conscious of it.

Well, that's the point actually, you are not "aware" of it.  The reflex action is completely automatic and involuntary, you are not conscious of it at all.  You only become aware of it if you notice the reaction caused by the reflex. This takes much longer than the reflex action itself.

Basically the same example again. If something close moves rapidly towards your eye, you will blink.  You can not prevent it ( involuntary), it happens automatically, and you don't even know it has happened until long ( Comparatively) after it has occurred. Indeed, in a lot of cases you may never notice it at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corneal_reflex

TL
MC


Traditionalist

The detection of movement in peripheral vision is something else;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheral_vision

This also explains to some extent why it is as yet impossible to determine what a fish sees. Although one can examine the eye and find the basic requirements for vision, there is no way to know how the brain processes that information.

TL
MC

Fishtales

I already put that link in post #33 :)

The movement in peripheral vision wasn't about the fish it was about why Alan suddenly stopped even before he was conscious of the fish being there and why I cast at 'something' when I'm not even sure if it was there or not.

Keeping two/three threads going with the same theme does tend to confuse the issues a bit :)

Col

It may be interesting to others as it is to me. Talking pish usually means talking about what we think is correct whether it is right or not. Most of the things Mike and I are discussing can be backed up by facts. Anyone not interested doesn't need to read it :)
Don't worry, be happy.
Sandy
Carried it in full, then carry it out empty.
http://www.ftscotland.co.uk/

Looking for a webhost? Try http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=2966019

Fishtales

If I think I am having an intelligent conversation and someone tells me I'm talking pish then I stop talking and move on. If they are interested then they wont say it. My skin is too thick to take offence :)

From what I have read about the studies of colour vision in trout they start off life by being able to see in a broad spectrum of light from infra red to ultra violet. As they grow older, up to two years, the ability to see in the UV range diminishes. Light isn't colour though. Our brain interprets the wavelengths as different colours but there is no way of knowing if trout see those wavelengths in the same way, i.e. as a colour. It may be their brain interprets them as varying degrees of brightness, or greys or even different colours, i.e. blues might be pinks, greens/black or reds/yellow.

'Microspectrophotometric analysis of the visual receptors of "yearling" brown trout, Salmo trutta, revealed three cone types, double cones with visual pigments absorbing maximally at about 600 and 535 nm, and two types of single cone withλmax at about 440 and 355 nm. Two-year-old fish did not possess the u.v. cone cells. Microscopical analysis of the cone mosaic in "yearling" trout showed a square pattern of double cones with a central single cone and corner single cones, but in two-year-old trout the corner cones were absent. It is concluded that u.v. sensitivity is derived from the corner cones of the mosaic, and that it is only present in young trout.'

Studies have also found that it is also possible that they can detect polarised light.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/p4528220088116g7/

What has to be remembered is that nothing is actually a colour. Our brain interprets the light reflected from an object and gives us a colour to 'see' it in. The fish brain may interpret that reflected light differently and so it may not see the object in the same colour.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=r70IEreOL-wC&lpg=PA351&ots=wfYOUZYJx6&dq=colour%20vision%20response%20in%20trout&lr&pg=PA351#v=onepage&q=colour%20vision%20response%20in%20trout&f=false


You're right. It is now starting to sound like pish :) Do we really need to know all this just to go fishing?
Don't worry, be happy.
Sandy
Carried it in full, then carry it out empty.
http://www.ftscotland.co.uk/

Looking for a webhost? Try http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=2966019

Go To Front Page