Because I'm Me And You're Not

Here are a few thoughts on fishing as socialization, the “best” pace for covering a given stretch of water and why, if you’re fishing with me, you need to be at the pick-up point at the mutually agreed time.

First of all, I think everybody fishes in the way that suits them best. There is a social as well as a practical component to the reasoning involved. We’re all different in the things about fishing that make the experience most valuable or satisfying to us as individuals. Generally, when I and a partner or fishing buddy fish the same section of a small to medium size stream together at the same time, trading off pools or runs, it is because of one of four reasons: 1) I'm "hosting" them on a fishery that I know and they do not. 2) They're "hosting" me for the same reason. 3) It's my brother or one of a very small number of close or long time fishing friends and the family connection or duration and quality of the friendship shifts my priority for the outing from exploring water and catching fish to socialization. 4) I'm working with a newcomer to the sport.

Otherwise, I get all the socialization I need in the car between destinations or going to or from the stream.

This doesn't mean I don't like to fish with other folks. I do. It simply means that with the above exceptions, I fish alone while spending the day fishing with you. You fish from bridge A to bridge B and I fish from bridge B to Bridge C, and I'll meet you back at the car parked at bridge B in two, three or four hours (whatever). And you're not allowed to be late (give or take 10 minutes), because we're due at the next creek and the day is only so long. I suppose this rigidity could be annoying to some people, but trust me, it’s better than messing up my schedule if I have other places I’m burning to get to. I’ll “accidentally” leave your cold drink outside the cooler if you start messing with my schedule.

I'm a friendly guy, but I fish frenetically and have a pretty powerful need to see what's around the next bend, a place I've never been before, or not lately anyway. If I'm waiting on somebody who is fadiddling along, I'm in danger of spontaneously combusting. I'm like a dog straining at the terminus of a chain.

There are no value judgments here or any suggestions of a superior or inferior way of doing something. I'm simply explaining who "I" am. And you're you. And so long as you're back at the car when you're supposed to be, it works out fine.

Despite my idiosyncrasies, I like to think I'm a pretty good fishing buddy. I've fished with quite a few good friends and so far as I know, my fishing MO hasn't annoyed any of them to the point they never want to fish with me again.

In regards to the pace at which we fish small streams, there are so many variables that it is impossible to stipulate a pace and declare it to be "the" correct one. To give an example in two similarly-sized streams in very disparate locations, it would make sense to me to cover long sections of the lower half of South Kinzua Creek in Pennsylvania’s Allegheny National Forest where it is broad, shallow and lacks good holding lies at a pretty rapid pace. But if I were on the Tremont Branch of the Little River in Great Smoky Mountain National Park with its endless maze of nice pockets between the boulders, I'm going to take a lot longer to cover the same linear amount of stream.

So, there's that..

There is also the matter of the trout population's hierarchy within a stream that is directly related to how "good" or "strong" the fishery is. When you have a limited amount of time to fish, not every trout in the stream is worth the time it takes to try to catch them. Depending on the stream, the long sections of so-called "infertile" water between sections of quality habitat may have no fish or they may be full of 5" fish or they may have a surprising number of 10-12" inch fish. The first time you fish a place, you can (usually) find these things out, so that the next time you're there, you can optimize your time. In one of his excellent guides to trout fishing, Tom Rosenbauer of the Orvis Company recommends that anglers “skip” obviously infertile water and move on to the next pool. But when he speaks of skipping "infertile" water, an angler of Rosenbauer's experience and obvious thoughtful approach almost certainly isn't saying to only fish the big, slow pools or other obvious locations with a high likelihood of holding fish and skip the rest. The nature and location of "infertile" water, while sometimes obvious, more often than not has to be learned, stream to stream. I think Rosenbauer assumes we will take the time to learn it on the particular stream or stream type we are on rather than take what he has written as a one size fits all axiom.

I once heard a pretty experienced small stream angler say that he tends to cover 66’ feet (why 66’ and not 65’ or 67’”, I don’t know) of stream per minute. On a lot of the smaller streams I frequent, I think this is a very reasonable pace that allows us to cover the maximum distance of a given stream while not skipping any of the better water. Back before the years began to cause some slippage in my higher gears, a one mile/hour pace on small water was pretty close to my usual MO. I've slowed down a bit, but not that much. Chances are pretty good I'll still be at the car tapping my foot when you finally make it to Bridge B

But the general and overarching point is that it really is a matter of preference more than it is fishing efficiency, in my view at least. There are streams where it pays to go fast and others where it pays to go slow. What pays even more is learning to identify one from the other.

See you back at the car. Please be on time..