I'll go crazy if I tie another Partridge and Orange (or another Pheasant tail this long,long winter) so I decided to mix it up a bit. Did I invent a new fly? Of course not! I just tweaked an old one.
Hook - size 14 to 16 and it's a standard dry fly hook
Thread - Danville 70 denier that's a dark yellow (a weird color that I'm glad that I have)
Thorax - rusty red rabbit
Hackle - Partridge of course
I'm thinking that the red rabbit might be a "trigger" for the trout. We will see!
The Quinapoxet Again
It was about a year ago that the last news article about this dam removal project that I saw hit the newsstands. Now another year goes by and nothing. It seems that this is a project that the "powers" keep dangling out in front of us to prove that they have something to do. IT'S BEEN YEARS!!! Another thing that we hear of is that this dam removal will open up 30 miles of river to migrating trout and salmon. Right now they hang out at the aqueduct because of all that cold, clean Quabbin water and the occasional smelt that gets washed down. Will that change? Just Asking.......
We moved the clocks ahead!!!!! We are almost there!!
Ken
17 comments:
Ditto on the flyes Ken (crazy). As I sit here looking out my window its hard to believe it will hit 60 Friday, and again I reach for the snow shovel instead of the fly rod. But rods,reels,leaders,flyes, and everything else is ready to go I think this is the week to get in the water.
Hi Ken,
A couple of things in regards to the Quinapoxet Dam removal project.
A request for proposal was sent out on 3/8/19 seeking design services for the dam removal project-- which is an encouraging sign. The proposal can be seen here: http://www.mwra.com/02org/html/upcomingbids/currentbidlist.pdf
The Central Mass Chapter of TU (of which I am a board member) have been trying to coordinate restoration / clean-up efforts of some kind in coordination with the dam removal project. It's undoubtedly a slow process, but we're encouraged by our current discussions with the involved agencies. I'd be happy to keep everyone here posted on any progress made and any involvement opportunities. Or you can visit the TU Chapter 148.
Cheers
Gary,
I've been working the Swift BUT would love to do another river, maybe the Ware.
Robert,
Thanks for getting back to me. It took us 4 years to get C/R on the Millers so I know the ordeal. Fill us in at any time.
Ken
Hi Ken - I am also following the Quinnipoxet Dam removal and have fished there for years. I spoke with a Ranger about 4 years ago and it supposedly was going out to bid then. The recent $40K grant is just for the engineering, not the dam removal. That will require additional funding to my knowledge. I will defer to Robert, as he seems to be very plugged in to this project, but in my opinion I don’t expect a big change in the fishing. In my opinion only, it probably opens up more like under 10 miles of habitat. I think it it something like 8 miles to Quinnipoxet resevoir which is a dead stop. Trout Brook is small and only the bottom section seems viable and even that has a lot of barriers. A big issues is the very hot water that comes out of the resevoir. Water levels get very low too. Also, not sure the gravel is suitable to sustained spawning. There are wild Brookies in there, but not very large in size. I really love fishing the small water there and am very excited the project seems to be moving forward. Just not sure it will make a big difference. I’d love to hear other opinions. I am going to give the swift a shot this week to chase some LLS or holdovers. Spring is close. :)
Andrew
Andrew,
All very good points. Another thing to think about is the carrying capacity of Wachusett Res. for additional LL Salmon. Maybe Wachusett can't carry many more. It will be something to watch once the dam comes down!!
Ken
Ken,
really like that soft hackle. I think it would work well as a sulphur (invaria) emerger!
Herm
Herm,
That would be a good choice!!
Ken
Sweet addition to the yellow and partridge Ken... I like it!
I've been very curious about the Quinnie dam destruction. Here's the snag... It's state water resource. Anything with that in the mix is going to take T-I-M-E to accomplish. Snails go fast comparatively. I'm young enough at a month shy of 45 to patiently wait...
I'm not sure about the actual miles of stream that would open. And the point about the distance to the quinnie res is a good one. At the same time, at least relative to spawning, fish would have a much better shot than they currently do given the old, shoddy, way off to the side fish ladder (highly doubt any fish ever actually use or find it).
I think the temps into the res would be a net neutral, given the same flow would enter the reservoir, it just would tumble straight in.
I dont think you end up with trout/salmon going up the river in June/July... But I bet you get some smallies up there which could be interesting.
I'm hoping it shakes out. Feels like a real positive overall.
That said, I'd love to see it come with CR and single hook restrictions from say Oct 1 to December 31 or something. There are plenty of woods for folks to really cause issues in there with poaching. A simple rule like that would be great.
Will,
It will be, in my opinion, an accomplishment to get salmon to run up the Quinnie. The REAL draw for trout and salmon will be the quabbin flow hitting Wachusett and maybe the fish will not go beyond that. Smallies will never do it in my opinion. The dam should come down regardless. Things may get better without it.
Ken
If they want to drastically improve fishing in the quinapoxet. Remove the dam, have a C&R or flyfishing only area, and allow fly fishing and wading almost to the Reservoir. The harm to the water quality would be almost nonexistent, and allowing someone to wade in and fish the runs below where the quabbin dumps in would be a big draw
Nathan,
"allowing someone to wade in and fish the runs below where the quabbin dumps in" That was the case over 40 years ago! You can still wade the Stillwater down to the Railroad Trestle.
Ken
I think the outflow of the Quinapoxet resevoir is something that could be improved to help the river flows. Currently, water only comes over the concrete spillway when the resevoir is filled. When it does, it’s hot, when it’s not, it’s a trickle. That in combination with the Oakdale dam removal would make a difference in my opinion. As far as wading down below, the issue probably is less fisherman then swimmers. The river receives extreme fishing pressure at bridges and stocking points. Unlike other rivers there is little chance for fish to spread out and are frequently easily targeted. I think that bait should be banned. I don’t say this as a fly fisherman, I say it because it too easy in the Quinnie. Anyone who fishes there knows you can have people with 4 bait rods in one pool barely big enough for one person. This leads to unwanted crowns and experiences. In a perfect world, I’d like to see minimum flows from the resevoir (while we are in fantasy land, a bottom release) as well as the dam removed and regraded. I would also manage it as brook trout only and float stock or add many new stocking points. I would not open up fishing in the spillway section unless it was managed. While fun, it’s very unnatural to catch those 16 inch stocker Bows in tiny stream they would not usually be in if they were wild. I think the Quinnipoxet is one of the prettier small streams and hope for some of those long term improvements. Btw, ditto for the Stillwater too. Another river that gets crushed at stocking points.
Andrew,
Bait should be banned on the Quinapoxet if it does have native brook trout and after the dam is removed to protect any LL Salmon fishery that may develop. Maybe fly fishing only to cut down on the hordes that you now have on the Stillwater.
Ken
Ken,
Thought you and your readers might want to know the lowest official point on the Stillwater River that you can wear waders.
That point is "upstream of the Stillwater River confluence with Waushacum Brook."
Waushacum Brook is about a 1/4 mile upstream of the railroad trestle.
It is a pity the state uses such a tiny brook to mark the point where waders are legal.
Wauschacum Brook comes in on the side opposite the street everyone uses to access the lower Stillwater River. So the only way to identify where Wauschacum Brook is, is to look across the Stillwater in this section to where is widens out with an indentation into the Brook.
The only place I have found this information is in footnote 2 of the second table in this report: DCR/DWSP 2011 Public Access Policy Summary Reservoir and Tributary Protection Zones, at https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/10/11/wachusett%20reservoir.pdf
Yet, even though the state has made it tough to find this lowest point to wear waders, I bet a warden would not hesitate to give you a fine and a tongue lashing for wading in the Wachusett Reservoir protection zone if he found you just above the railroad bridge.
charlieinneedham,
Good work!! 35 years ago I spoke with an officer Gullage of the DFW or whatever the ruling body was back then. He said "regulations for wading start at the train trestle" which made sense EXCEPT during the smelt run where locals could march right up the the mouth of the brook and wipe them out.
I don't think officer Gullage was full of it but just wrong or maybe the rules changed.
Wonder what the early LL Salmon fishing would be like a 100 yards below the Stillwater mouth?? (hint, hint)!!!
Ken
Interesting on the washucum brook point. I always figured it was a gray area based on where the stillwaters current sort of stalled out as things widened, so I tended to wade to the end of the grassy point there. Washucum brk is on the opposite side, and would actually create additionally wade friendly water if I interpret this correctly.
That said, the salmon run on the stillwater is awesome. I've ofte suspected Washucum gets some, but Im to focused on archery hunting at that point to mess with it.
I have zero doubt that the Quinne would get a strong run - if the current was straight into the res. They love sniffing "upstream" when it's time to spawn.
Will,
Too bad the the outflow of the quabbin isn't a mile upstream from where it is now. Cold water habitat would be increased on the Quinnie and we would have more spawning habitat. We would also make that upstream mile C&R!
Ken
Post a Comment