V
vern
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- Messages
- 163
Just a feeler question:
What support would a slightly less than casual photo documentation project receive by board partcipants?
The concept is this:
Similar to posting photos of fish and tied flies and different attractive pools, fisherman would take photos of streamside plants that host aquatic insects during the transition (if applicable) from subimago to imago.
The purpose is this:
To provide some body of reference for insect preferential use of streamside vegetation.
The two main reasons for this information are:
1. to better enable selection of plant species for riparian plantings;
2. to better enable a flyfisherman to anticipate insect activity in proximity to certain plant species.
There is no reference body of which I am aware that connects streamside vegetation with the uses by/needs of aquatic insects.
While there is some inconsistent information available on the aquatic food sources used by certain insects - caddis flies, mayflies, craneflies, etc. - the missing information is on the relationships of insects during their terrestrial stage.
Incidentally, for example, I noticed that moths seem to orient themselves when resting near a light to the general light-dark background patterns.
Certain bushes along a stream or river seem to attract caddisflies while others don't.
Maybe it's leaf size, maybe is branch orientation or spacing, maybe there's some chemistry relationship.
But currently throughout Pennsylvania, and every state of which I'm aware, the general practice of species selection for riparian plantings is done by owner preference (aesthetics or eventual board feet value) or available stock through supplying nurseries.
The problem I sense from current riparian buffer plantings is that it seems most nursery offerings are from the marginal sales (excess stock on hand) selections and they end up being the majority offered for planting. Some species are marginal in zone, others are marginal in suitability to flood plain habitat, while others are marginal in suitability of root structure to provide benefit.
I feel it would be of common benefit if some reference for riparian plant species selection could be linked to at least one additional consideration other than the general logic that any tree or shrub is good, because of thermal protection and soil retention.
Perhaps some progress could be made if while fishing a hatch of insects we value highly we would occasionally snap a couple shots of plants that seem most attractive to insects.
What support would a slightly less than casual photo documentation project receive by board partcipants?
The concept is this:
Similar to posting photos of fish and tied flies and different attractive pools, fisherman would take photos of streamside plants that host aquatic insects during the transition (if applicable) from subimago to imago.
The purpose is this:
To provide some body of reference for insect preferential use of streamside vegetation.
The two main reasons for this information are:
1. to better enable selection of plant species for riparian plantings;
2. to better enable a flyfisherman to anticipate insect activity in proximity to certain plant species.
There is no reference body of which I am aware that connects streamside vegetation with the uses by/needs of aquatic insects.
While there is some inconsistent information available on the aquatic food sources used by certain insects - caddis flies, mayflies, craneflies, etc. - the missing information is on the relationships of insects during their terrestrial stage.
Incidentally, for example, I noticed that moths seem to orient themselves when resting near a light to the general light-dark background patterns.
Certain bushes along a stream or river seem to attract caddisflies while others don't.
Maybe it's leaf size, maybe is branch orientation or spacing, maybe there's some chemistry relationship.
But currently throughout Pennsylvania, and every state of which I'm aware, the general practice of species selection for riparian plantings is done by owner preference (aesthetics or eventual board feet value) or available stock through supplying nurseries.
The problem I sense from current riparian buffer plantings is that it seems most nursery offerings are from the marginal sales (excess stock on hand) selections and they end up being the majority offered for planting. Some species are marginal in zone, others are marginal in suitability to flood plain habitat, while others are marginal in suitability of root structure to provide benefit.
I feel it would be of common benefit if some reference for riparian plant species selection could be linked to at least one additional consideration other than the general logic that any tree or shrub is good, because of thermal protection and soil retention.
Perhaps some progress could be made if while fishing a hatch of insects we value highly we would occasionally snap a couple shots of plants that seem most attractive to insects.