Hendrickson/Quill Gordon Wet
We are closing in on the first of the major mayfly hatches of the season ( we are not talking about frenchies or rainbow warriors or gottchas but REAL insects). The first two of the major hatches, especially by size are the Quill Gordons and the Hendricksons. First off, they are very similar in size and color and that is why they get mixed up. The Quill Gordons come first and the Hendricksons come right after. Both have the same color scheme except the QG's are a bit smaller (size 14/16) and have only TWO tails while the Hendricksons are a bit larger (size 14) and have THREE tails. Both have the grey smokey colored wings. Old time body recipes called for a hendrickson body that was pinkish (urine stained belly fur of a vixen fox was the choice material- good luck with that!) color which will vary depending on the river. Go with light brown fur or floss. It works and it's easier! Also remember that the QG emergers from the stream bottom WITHOUT a nymph shuck and flies away quickly. Hendricksons emerge and then dry off on the surface before they fly to the bushes.
QG and Hendrickson Wet
Tail - None
Body - brown uniflex floss
Thorax - natural rabbit
Hackle - blue dun hen
Note: Because of the style of emergence QG wet flies work REALLY well.
Hendrickson Emerger
A mayfly, in this case a Hendrickson, is a beautiful and dainty creature as it rides down the stream drying its sailboat wings but if you happen upon this insect as it's trying to bust out of it's nymphal shuck and break through the surface tension you would see something less dainty and more akin to a human trying to exit a mummy sleeping bag. The insect is stuck in this position until it escapes the exoskeleton prison or is eaten by a trout. This is the most vulnerable stage in a mayfly's life and accounts for most of the "rises" that we see on a stream. It calls for an emerger pattern that will penetrate the surface with it's head and developing wing but still have most of the body below or in the surface film.
2 comments:
Hi Ken,
Thank you for raising awareness about the threat to Red Brook. The proposed development is massive, including a casino (!), shopping center, golf course, and a housing development - all sure to add warm and toxic runoff to Red Brook's aquafer.
Fortunately, TU is not the only group weighing in against the development. The Trustees of Reservations, the Lyman Trust, representatives of the Wampanoag Tribe, the Sea Run Brook Trout Coalition, the Native Fish Coalition, and local Wareham conservationists like Warren Winders have come together to urge Wareham residents to vote against the development at the town meeting on April 5. The Southeastern Mass. Pine Barrens Alliance produced a very effective video in opposition to the development. It can viewed on their website.
Thanks for all of your posts this winter. They are always bright spots in my day.
Warmest wishes,
John Strucker
John,
It's good to see that other environmental groups are stepping up on this. I recall an attack on the Millers Watershed back in the 80's where a well funded company named Recontek tried to put a toxic waste recycling facility near the Millers. They were well funded but local opposition found flaws in their process and in their promise of, you guessed it, great jobs for the community which would not pan out. Local opposition can win out on this as will environmental studies on the impact of this project on LOCAL water. If the everyday person of the Wareham area is made aware of the downside of this project it can be beaten.
Ken
Post a Comment