Follow by Email

Thursday, July 5, 2012

TRUCKEE TRIVIA # 13

Question*:
a---Where on the Truckee River is this imaged general area located?
b---What is the specific name for this pool?

*Johnnie da Jeweler you are not allowed on this one...it is you!

9 comments:

  1. the loop off 80. see alot of dead fish

    ReplyDelete
  2. Come on Frank, my chance to get one right for a change...

    ReplyDelete
  3. aaron----Yes; "The Loop", you are correct relative to part "a". What about part "b" of the question?

    Personally; I haven't seen such the last 4-5 times I've been there during the last 6 weeks.

    When/where/approxiamte numbers did you see the dead fish? "Club" fish are known to drift down into the West Loop...maybe they are not as hardy as WILD fish?

    Frank

    ReplyDelete
  4. dont know the name of the pool, I call it the hole under the colorful wall....Dont know the names of too many holes actually, but I sure as hell know where they all are. Ive seen a rainbow in the 20-24inch class, rotting on the bank, and a brown that i taped to 26 inches, same story. Different days, both wild fish. Id be laughin if they were caster fish. Id say it was around April and May... The brown actually maybe me turn around and leave because it was so heartbreaking.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aaron---Yes!...Bingo!..."the hole under the colorful wall..." is indeed Horner's Corner. It is named after Jack Horner who fished the Truckee as a member of the San Francisco Fly Fishing & Casting Club (the "private"section of the Truckee River). He is the originator of the Horner Deer Hair fly which is now more popularly know as the Humpy...in addition to a lesser-known name...the Goofus Bug.

    Well, I'm a bit relieved since you mentioned that you saw "...a lot of dead fish" I was thinking a major fish-kill. The Brown at 26" could feasible have died of natural causes; although I'm not sure about the samller RB.

    By the way..speaking of Brown trout; I got a recent report of a taped, female 27" Brown that was thick and guessimated at 7 pounds...released of course....after eating a #16 Bird's Nest.

    Hey thanks for your participation on my blog.

    Frank

    ReplyDelete
  6. He just looked healthy and young for his size, but you very well may be right (plus what the hell do I know about aging fish!). In fact id rather go with the natural causes; I just see people beating fish up all the time, squeezing them with dry hands, holding little fish up by the leader etc. It is sad, but theres not much we can do aside from educate them. I have been thinking about writing something about handleing fish for the Sierra Sun or other local puplication. Im sure this has been done in the past, but I dont see how it could hurt.
    Congrats on the 27 inches. on a #16 no less.
    I have been seeing some large browns lately, but mostly moving them with the big stuffs.
    Keep up the Trivia, it is very interesting to learn the stories behind each turn of the river.
    If you have time, my "blog" is http://truckeeriverfly.blogspot.com/
    I just put up some pics from the last week.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Aaron----I'm your first official blog follower!

    Why not reciprocate and list my blog on your blog list?

    I know who Joe is. Shall I put it in Truckee Trivia?

    PS...your size-guesstimates are way off; but as you say it is irrelavant.

    Frank

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am officialy a follower. You think I have over estimated or under? I have never weighed a fish or anything so I really dont have a clue. But I show people pics and they say things like oh thats a 5lb fish. Than someone else says maybe 3. If theyre big and brown im happy. I do like the big green/pink guys too

    ReplyDelete
  9. Aaron---"...If theyre big and brown im happy..." I agree fully.

    My history on size/weight of trout dates back to the '80's when Martis Lake was still full of Lahontan Cutthroat. For two years I used a Chatillion scale. Trout that were taped at 20" were weighed; they were as low as 2-1/4 to 3-1/4 pounds.

    My personal experience relative to lenght is the result of numerous events of which...from my perspective...a lot of anglers guess on the high-side (which is the result of our eternally optimistic attitude) and do not carry or have some means of measuring trout and guess at lenghts/weights. Those experiences have made me automatically deduct from an unknown source a minimum of 10% in lenght if there is no relaible measuring device or method.

    The reason why I'm a bit conscious about such is that for several years I had an e-mail-list of close to 400 subcribers to my "Truckee Update". People relied on it for its accuracy. I did not mention size or weight on the newsletter if the source did not have a reliable size and/or weight method to verify.

    Again you are correct; it is irrelavant...unless people hang on what one says as the truth & nothing but the truth as had been the case with my "Truckee Update"

    Frank

    ReplyDelete