[Cutthroat]

I have heard that tiny flies are the only way to catch fish in certain waters in the West, but when I have tried to fish some of these waters, I have found that I can stay with larger flies, if they are extremely realistic, rather than the impressionistic patterns that are mass-produced.

Has anyone else tried this with success? It's more fun to tie realistic flies, than tiny ones.

 

[Cutthroat]

At this time of year, virtually any fishable river worth fishing will be lined with guys fishing tiny mide imitations. I've tried that, and it works ok, but oddly, I've also landed lots of finicky fish by floating a very realistic-looking extended body mayfly in about a 16.

Maybe it's just me, but whenever I've been told the fish are hard to trick and are biting only small flies, I've been able to do as well with slightly larger realistic drys and nymphs.

I think you have hit on one of the real issues, though... The small flies are realistic precisely because they are small.... so perhaps the real story is something that looks more like an authentic insect with work better for picky fish (period). I'm just curious, because my personal experience has not been that fish are truly selective for a particular insect, but they just seem to have elevated standards in waters where they see a lot of feather wads drift by.

 

[Cutthroat]

... the current is moving quite fast, even in a slow stream, and a fish doesn't have much time to make a decision whether to bite or not.

Not always, Fishing tailouts at the bottom of riffles in some of the deeper pools, the surface can be quite slow moving, and when you're floating dries, realism can be very important. Elk hair caddis not so good in large pools, but more realistic mayfly immitations often work better there. Rougher/faster water, elk hair caddis is just fine.

 

[Cutthroat]

Many have mentioned presentation.  It all comes down to a drag free drift.  Fish by nature are opportunistic feeders, if it halfway looks like food, and is moving through the water as a natural would, the fish will eat it. 

It is not rocket science.  You are trying to fool an animal with a brain the size of a pea.

This is something else people say a lot, but there are many fish I couldn't catch until I intentionally caused the current to drag my line, or dragged it myself.

 

[Cutthroat]

I'm sure there are some illnesses you could catch, despite the fish.

 

[Cutthroat]

Interesting to learn all the terminology that has been cooked up to describe techniques you learn from experience. I see this all the time, now. I've been fly fishing since I was a kid, and when I got older, I learned what others had decided to call all the different casts I had tried. I think it's funny, but it really does help new people learn to flyfish, to have all these things defined and to be able to show all the nice diagrams of how to achieve them in magazine articles. It seems most technical advances in fly fishing methods have mostly been in just describing how experienced fly fishers solve problems when fly fishing. It's the accumulation of all that knowledge as fly fishing evolves that makes it interesting, I think. It's like an academic pursuit.