[Mike L.]

[Mike L.]

i love my spartan.

[Mike L.]

Great Feathers has it.

[Mike L.]

Canada for pike, muskie and walleye in May.

Slovenia (possibly a couple days in Austria too) again this September.

Hopefully a couple trips to the Cape for Stripers.

Hopefully a couple trips to the Rust Belt for steelies this fall.

Other than that, the usual PA springers.

[Mike L.]

I will never hold a steelhead from any river in the Rust Belt in the same regards as a wild fish from the Pacific, regardless of fighting ability.

Fin.

[Mike L.]

I would never claim that the steelhead in the great lakes are not steelhead, but when they dont travel hundreds of miles to spawn and face the hardships of the salt, they arent nearly as special.

[Mike L.]

Summer is the worst time of the year.  The striped bass populations are migratory, and they will be in New England waters all summer.  There are schoolies around all year, but the majority of the fish will be north.

As far as wade fishing the bay goes, opportunities are severly limited.  We just dont have the nice estuaries and salt water flats like they have on Cape Cod or down in the Carolinas.  The only places I can think of to catch stripers from the beach are Point Lookout and surf casting from the various beaches on the eastern shore.  Other than that, there is jetty fishing.

Good luck in your hunts.  If you do find anywhere better, be sure to let us know.  

You can try Stripers Online.  These guys are the best resource for stripers up and down the atlantic but, at the same time, they are very guarded with their information and will go as far as deleting posts tht name specific areas.  

[Mike L.]

You would lure me in with melancholy, yet melodic music and angst-filled lyrics, right?

[Mike L.]

I pretty much think that if a fish isnt of the genus salmo, it is not worth fishing for.

[Mike L.]

Sir –

Let me introduce you to Piclens – it is just glorious for viewing Picassa, Google and other images.   🙂

http://piclens.com/site/firefox/win/

Kendal

Yeah, Im not going to download this freeware.

[Mike L.]

The last time I came out all you showed me was the South Fork.

[Mike L.]

Dang, put them betweem IMG tags so I dont have to click every one.

[Mike L.]

Sorry, but the SF of the Snake isn’t the West’s best dry fly river.

What is?

The one place in that list I really want to go is Kola.

[Mike L.]

http://www.webhost4life.com

[Mike L.]

Wow, I don’t know how to respond to that.

[Mike L.]

We all struggle with the delusions that the way we do things is better than the way others are doing them.

[Mike L.]

It’s ridiculous.

[Mike L.]

This new ‘Ultimate, Extreme, Adventure, Fly Fishing Video Journalism’ is no less ridiculous than any kind of ‘Upstream Dry, Scotch Sipping, Cigar Smoking, Bamboo Toting Fraternity of Fly Fishing ‘.

It’s fishing, it’s not extreme in any way.

[Mike L.]

I dont think we agree, or are saying the same things differently.  

Now that Atlantics have become landlocked in North America, it makes sense that they would evolve into a brown trout analogue (meaning, our version of the brown trout).  I am not saying the landlocks would become browns; they would just evolve to become a similar fish (really, they already have).

The problem is they haven’t evolved at all.  Landlocks are genetically identical to Atlantic Salmon.  Unlike brown trout they are not a seperate species.  This, to me, indicates that the fish is a relative newcomer to this continent.  

The main point I am trying to figure out is this: we know browns evolved in Europe.  We know they co-evolved from an ancestor species of the Atlantic salmon and the brown trout.  We know that ancestor species *did* run to North America in the form of Atlantic salmon.  Why then, if the same ancestor species was visiting both continents, did Europe have conditions ideal to evolve brown trout, while North America did not?  In other words, why don’t we have native brown trout on the Atlantic side of North America?

The ancestor species probably is not the species that made it to north america.  The species that made it to north america was atlantic salmon, not ‘proto-atlantics’ or whatever.  This is my contention.  

Using your logic, the atlantic salmon that made it here would have to devolve into the ancestor species then reevolve back into brown trout.  

EDIT:

Just saw your other post.

[Mike L.]

BD –

That’s because landlocks are revisiting the same biological territory that created brown trout to begin with.  Salmo trutta (browns) and Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon) shared a common ancestor a few million years back.  The proto-Atlantics on the European side of the ocean sometimes got landlocked and became, over millenia, the brown trout.  Those in the ocean and, for reasons I don’t understand, in North America, remained sea-runs and became Atlantic salmon.

I have never been able to pin down a biologist on why we don’t have native browns here.  It’s probably a long enough time frame that the continents were in a somewhat different configuration, but the proto-Atlantics should still have lived in *an* Atlantic ocean with a North America and a Europe on each side.  (In fact, there are browns high up in the mountains in Morocco in N. Africa that are native).

Somehow, conditions in Europe must have been ripe for proto-Atlantics to become stream-residents and evolve, but they weren’t right here.  (Presence of chars which competed?  I don’t know.)

Arguably, though, were humans to go away and quit messing up rivers, the landlocks we now have would eventually evolve into a North American brown-trout equivalent.  They just took a lot longer to take up residence in streams.

Zach

I guess I think this is wrong.

[Author]

Posts