LaFontaine's "bubble" & Hidy's "Hydrofuge"

[narcodog]

I have been told that this subject is discussed in a relatively new book on Caddis. I don't remember the title or author but a friend of mine swears by the book. He has also done some on stream observation and has seen the bubble effect.

[GlassJet]

Andrew,
If you don't have a copy of Caddisflies by Gary LaFontaine, you need a copy. It is, by far one of the most definitive works on caddis ever written.

Mark

Hi Mark,
I haven't, but i will get one. thanks for the heads-up. I will be back.
Andrew.

[Soft-hackle]

Andrew,
You are most welcome, and you will not be disappointed. Gary was quite thorough.

Mark

[GlassJet]

To emerge, the adult, still in its pupal skin, cuts out of the case or shelter using special mandibles. It then rapidly swims to the surface of the water or the bank, using fringed legs. It is assisted in reaching the surface by a bubble of gas secreted between the adult and the skin. This however makes them appear as a silvery bubble that is very conspicuous to fish.

From: The Beginner’s Guide to Caddis...
http://www.amentsoc.org/insects/fact-fi ... caddis.pdf

Brilliant link. Thank you very much for posting that, Wiflyfisher.

Andrew.

[Otter]

Hi
Otter, the air bubble may very well be a trigger the trout look for during a caddis hatch. I'm not saying this is scientific proof, but the idea intrigues me, especially since Vern Hidy mentioned it in his writings.

The information on that link page is interesting, but the photo of the hatching caddis leaves me desiring more. First, it is very difficult to discern if it is a caddis. It looks more like a water boatman.

Mark

Intrigueing it may well be, but until I see real visual proof that it is a regular occurence and that that trout do hone in on these then I remain disinterested.
Like a lot of these theories they are presented very dramatically very much in the buy one get one free style of advertising. But very little real proof to back up the theory. When you read the article a few times you will note the use of the word "Some" as in "Most aquatic insects create or trap bubbles of gas at some time in their lives" and "Some caddisfly larvae capture bubbles of air and hitch rides with the currents. " - and backing it up with "bug tank" (an eight foot, 300 galaquarium recirculated at 4,000 gallons an hour by half a dozen pumps) we’ve had shoals of Brachycentrus bobbing around the current on bubbles they’ve harvested from fizzing air stones. - I'd imagine with the number of air bubbles bubbling up the caddis would find it difficult to avoid the bubbles.
.
Some does not in my book make for a proper basis to build a theory that will give an angler consistent results.


To quote from the link "Bubble encased bugs are extremely visible underwater and trout often swim right past other food items to snare a glittering insect.
Firstly the trout swimming past other food items. If say the food item been taken is a nice sparkly juicy Caddis, is it the Caddis prey image that attracted the trout or was it the sparkly bit. As he did not mention whether the same food item in an unsparkly form was swam past then we can deduce little from his quote. My money is on the Caddis prey image or whatever bugs he was referring to.

"Many times trout will key in on and only feed on sparkling insects. "

Thats a real broad statement, unsubstantiated with any proof, any setting the scene etc..

Its well established in the natural world that predators will hone in on food items showing as being slightly different than the masses - this difference indicates the likelyhood that this item may be injured and an easier target. If this bubble theory holds weight that some food items exibit this then the slight difference between the sparkly and the non sparkly may be important. I would however suggest that because our fly's already exhibit differences to the natural that they already stand out in the crowd and often this makes them targets. I would suggest that pursueing this theory is probably a waste of time and energy and likely will not lead anywhere of any real relevance. .... Magic flies do not exist and never will !!!!!!!!

[Soft-hackle]

otter,
I think you might be missing the point, here. The article might very well be questionable from many aspects. Most articles are, unless they are reporting an event. This article was written, most likely, to get us thinking. We are not trout, and we do not know how they think. That said, I find this an interesting phenomenon which may or may not be significant.

I was most interested in the photo that shows a hatching caddis with air bubble swimming to the surface. Up till now, many people, myself included, questioned that this really happened. Now, to me, there is no question. It does occur. How often; does it make a difference; etc.? These are questions that should be asked because as my friend Hans once pointed out, you try to build as many triggers into your imitation as you can to make the imitation more successful.

It is quite obvious to me, as to many experienced anglers of the fly, there is no magic imitation, although we'd often like to think there is. However, if LaFontaine and Hidy both felt there was some significance to it, I'd be wondering, myself, if there is.

Personally, if anyone wished to pursue this and investigate it deeper, I don't think it would be wasted time. Again, that said, your comments are well taken.

Mark

[Otter]

otter,
I think you might be missing the point, here. The article might very well be questionable from many aspects. Most articles are, unless they are reporting an event. This article was written, most likely, to get us thinking. We are not trout, and we do not know how they think. That said, I find this an interesting phenomenon which may or may not be significant.

I was most interested in the photo that shows a hatching caddis with air bubble swimming to the surface. Up till now, many people, myself included, questioned that this really happened. Now, to me, there is no question. It does occur. How often; does it make a difference; etc.? These are questions that should be asked because as my friend Hans once pointed out, you try to build as many triggers into your imitation as you can to make the imitation more successful.

It is quite obvious to me, as to many experienced anglers of the fly, there is no magic imitation, although we'd often like to think there is. However, if LaFontaine and Hidy both felt there was some significance to it, I'd be wondering, myself, if there is.

Personally, if anyone wished to pursue this and investigate it deeper, I don't think it would be wasted time. Again, that said, your comments are well taken.

Mark

Maybe I've just read and seen too much nonsense and have become a contrary olf sceptic

[William Anderson]

otter,
I think you might be missing the point, here. The article might very well be questionable from many aspects. Most articles are, unless they are reporting an event. This article was written, most likely, to get us thinking.

I think Cutter was hocking a book and dvd wasn't he? Or just promoting a new pattern? Am I mistaken about that? Could be.

Anyway, I like the discussion.

w

[Soft-hackle]

Don't know William, and you could be right. When articles like this are written, they are written, mostly, to get an audience to see the author's point of view and, perhaps, look to them for solutions. I'm not saying this is true of Mr. Cutter, but there is an old adage about fly patterns catching more fly fishermen that fish.

If that photo of the emerging caddis is authentic, it proves what LaFontaine said he saw actually happens. The thing is, we, as fishermen want to believe there IS something special going on that will open the doors to more productive fishing for us. In that respect, I believe otter is pretty much correct. We are looking for the "magic" fly. It is often our own imagination that gives us the most satisfaction.

Mark

[redietz]

I have been told that this subject is discussed in a relatively new book on Caddis. I don't remember the title or author but a friend of mine swears by the book. He has also done some on stream observation and has seen the bubble effect.

Would that book be Caddisflies A guide to Eastern Species for Anglers and Other Naturalists by Thomas Ames, Jr?

There's a tremendous amount of info with lots of photos of both adults and larvae, but darn few photos of pupae (or pharate adults.) One photo he does have of a Glossosoma pupa (on a rock, not in the water) looks remarkably like the photo that Mark suggests looks like a water boatman.

He does mention that the shuck is separated from the pupa by a build up of internal gases which help propel the pupa to the surface, but he doesn't go so far (at least that I can find) as saying there's a shiny bubble involved.