# My search for brookies



## YZman

Have given references before. Don't care if YOU wish to ignore. If posted or riparian owner tells you to leave, contact your local DNR office for advice, this is plain old good advice. If there is some ruling that states owner is wrong, let DNR correct situation. Michigan RTL statute states access only to "navigable" streams. No where in any statute or ruling is it stated that ALL streams are navigable until court says otherwise. U.S. law states otherwise, streams connected directly to oceans are opposite, up to riparian to prove non-navigable. I think I'm done debating this thread; futility


----------



## mbirdsley

Trout King said:


> Oh and...for all the "can't use bridges as access" people:
> 
> L. Highway Access to Public Waters Some waters are touched or bordered by public roadways, most of which have been established by public use or by easement. Ownership of the land beneath such roadways remains with the private landowner. The public has merely acquired the right to use the land for roadway purposes, but not the right to pick the fruits, nuts, or crops alongside the roadway. These remain the property of the landowner. The courts have held the public has no right to enter a non-navigable lake or stream from a public roadway any more than to enter the orchards or uplands along such roadway. *However, the Michigan Supreme Court in Cass County Park Trustees v Wendt, 361 Mich. 247; 105 NW2d 138 (1960), ruled that whenever a highway actually and in the natural state of things contiguously borders or ends in navigable public waters, the public has a right of access from the highway by land to the highway by water. The court in so ruling did not differentiate between right-of-way owned in fee, granted by easement, or established by user. In fact, the Cass County Park case, where right-of-way was granted by easement, was not quite as simple as in most cases in that the evidence clearly illustrated that there was also a strip of land between the highway and the water's edge. It was established the strip had been used for public purposes, including the launching of boats, swimming, fishing and parking of automobiles, and that such use had been a constant one. Notwithstanding, the court additionally held that the right of public access to bodies of water bordered or skirted by public roads may be lawfully created by long continued use (prescriptive easement) even across such strip of intervening private property.*


So this is basically saying on a non navigable stream with a public road way crossing it I could still not fish the easement or under the bridge. I could only do that on a navigable water way? Am I reading that right. Don't jump me I'm just trying to make sure.


----------



## Fishman95

mbirdsley said:


> So this is basically saying on a non navigable stream with a public road way crossing it I could still not fish the easement or under the bridge. I could only do that on a navigable water way? Am I reading that right. Don't jump me I'm just trying to make sure.


Yes


----------



## mbirdsley

Fishman95 said:


> Yes


Thank you.


----------



## YZman

> So this is basically saying on a non navigable stream with a public road way crossing it I could still not fish the easement or under the bridge. I could only do that on a navigable water way? Am I reading that right. Don't jump me I'm just trying to make sure.


Valid question.

In my _opinion_, you would be able to fish from bridge. Question of easement below bridge and getting to, interesting....


----------



## Fishman95

YZman said:


> Valid question.
> 
> In my _opinion[/], you would be able to fish from bridge. Question of easement below bridge and getting to, interesting...._


Yes, you should be able to stand on the bridge and fish either way


----------



## mbirdsley

YZman said:


> Valid question.
> 
> In my _opinion_, you would be able to fish from bridge. Question of easement below bridge and getting to, interesting....


Yeah I could see that if i was bound and determined to fish a hole beneath the bridge. Hopefully the fish isn't to big when I try to bring it up.


----------



## toto

YZman said:


> Have given references before. Don't care if YOU wish to ignore. If posted or riparian owner tells you to leave, contact your local DNR office for advice, this is plain old good advice. If there is some ruling that states owner is wrong, let DNR correct situation. Michigan RTL statute states access only to "navigable" streams. No where in any statute or ruling is it stated that ALL streams are navigable until court says otherwise. U.S. law states otherwise, streams connected directly to oceans are opposite, up to riparian to prove non-navigable. I think I'm done debating this thread; futility


I would highly recommend you read the Northwest Ordinance and in particular Article IV, and even more in particular the last sentence or two of art IV. I think you'll find yourself wrong. This document is one of the 4 pillars of the U.S. it says nothing about rivers leading to oceans, in fact, it states about rivers in what is now known as the Midwest and encompasses 5 states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, Also just a little bit of Minnesota. I just so frustrated with guys who just don't want to believe in anything other than something puts a bigger encumberance on themselves than need be. If someone wants to kick you out of a river or stream do to their belief they own it, then by all means leave and take it up with the authorities. One thing I can tell you though, the Public Trust Doctrine has been brought to light in the last 5 years more than it's ever been. If you don't want to fish these streams with this belief, let me know where they are, I'll gladly go and fish them, unless it's one of the 3 already listed.


----------



## toto

Birdsley that would be correct, due to the nature of non navigable streams, you can't go there at all. If it were a navigable stream than you may walk within the right of way to access the stream from the right of way. Look at it this way, assuming there is a right of way, which there will be as there is a public bridge, who paid for that right of way? Yes some government, local, state, or otherwise, and just where did they get the money? Oh yeah, public funds.

Try reading this, please, it may help to explain better than I can:

http://www.smashwords.com/extreader...ur-right-to-fish-michigans-inland-lakes-and-s


----------



## Boardman Brookies

JVoutdoors said:


> Sooo, how is your fishing going this spring Boardman? Any brookies yet?


Pretty good. More browns than brookies. Got the big skunk this afternoon!!


----------



## Boardman Brookies

Do your homework and speak with your CO. I had my local DNR biologist dig up some old stocking records for XXXXX Creek. I found it was stocked 75 years ago. He told me as long as I access it legally I can have at. This is a very tiny creek.


----------



## Fishman95

mbirdsley said:


> Yeah I could see that if i was bound and determined to fish a hole beneath the bridge. Hopefully the fish isn't to big when I try to bring it up.


You just need a reaaaallly long net


----------



## YZman

Boardman Brookies said:


> Do your homework and speak with your CO. I had my local DNR biologist dig up some old stocking records for XXXXX Creek. I found it was stocked 75 years ago. He told me as long as I access it legally I can have at. This is a very tiny creek.


That is utterly incorrect. Reference the statute or court ruling for that. That, of course, would allow the NRC to pick and choose which streams are navigable. Already been decided NRC does not have that judicial or legislative authority.


----------



## Boardman Brookies

YZman said:


> That is utterly incorrect. Reference the statute or court ruling for that. That, of course, would allow the NRC to pick and choose which streams are navigable. Already been decided NRC does not have that judicial or legislative authority.


Wait I thought you were done? Actually it is 100% correct. If the body is currently or was stocked prior it navigable. This was confirmed with my local DNR biologist AND CO. Feel free to call them.


----------



## Robert Holmes

Boardman Brookies said:


> Do your homework and speak with your CO. I had my local DNR biologist dig up some old stocking records for XXXXX Creek. I found it was stocked 75 years ago. He told me as long as I access it legally I can have at. This is a very tiny creek.


Until recently many XXXXXX creeks were stocked with hatchery fish. Probably because Mr. XXXX had a piece of property that the creek ran through and he happened to work for the DNR or there could have been other reasons. I happen to know of several private lakes and streams that have been stocked on a frequent basis until recently. There has been a couple of court battles over this in which the public won and public access was granted on private lakes.


----------



## Trout King

Robert Holmes said:


> Until recently many XXXXXX creeks were stocked with hatchery fish. Probably because Mr. XXXX had a piece of property that the creek ran through and he happened to work for the DNR or there could have been other reasons. I happen to know of several private lakes and streams that have been stocked on a frequent basis until recently. There has been a couple of court battles over this in which the public won and public access was granted on private lakes.


Yes, that is how is should be per law when it comes to state planted fish. The public pays for them, why should a few people that happen to own property near the water be able to deny access to a publicly funded resource?


----------



## toto

YZ, wasn't it you who said earlier we shouldn't believe what people are saying on here? At least about this subject. I can tell by your latest response, you didn't read the link I posted did you? What part of public funds and the public use did you not understand? Again, 100% incorrect. Tell ya what, if you have court records to back up your claim, why not post a link to it, I'd love to see it.


----------



## Robert Holmes

Some property owners think that they own bottom lands on a lake or river that is truly public land yet they do not pay property taxes on these bottom lands. If they own 400 feet of frontage and had to pay property taxes on the bottom lands their assessed value could really take a jump.


----------



## Pinefarm2015

The Clam River is the best known brookie river within an hour drive of your place. The old MDNR fly only section on the Clam was between Blue and Lachance roads. That classification was changed about 15 years back, as migratory fish and drift boats became all the rage and fewer and fewer fishermen targeted resident trout, via wading. It's all private, so it's a long wade. But the forum cops don't have to worry , most fishermen won't bother with it because it's such a long wade. Most guys won't go nowadays if they can't boat in.

https://books.google.com/books?id=xKkOCv1fU0wC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=clam+river+blue+lachance+road&source=bl&ots=P4cQMT9aU5&sig=at2Qrxdx7hdDs1BJjIsCRCpDeGk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTx-3gm9bMAhUkyoMKHcZ-AJ0Q6AEIHjAB#v=onepage&q=clam%20river%20blue%20lachance%20road&f=false


----------



## Fishman95

Pinefarm2015 said:


> The Clam River is the best known brookie river within an hour drive of your place. The old MDNR fly only section on the Clam was between Blue and Lachance roads. That classification was changed about 15 years back, as migratory fish and drift boats became all the rage and fewer and fewer fishermen targeted resident trout, via wading. It's all private, so it's a long wade. But the forum cops don't have to worry , most fishermen won't bother with it because it's such a long wade. Most guys won't go nowadays if they can't boat in.
> 
> https://books.google.com/books?id=xKkOCv1fU0wC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=clam+river+blue+lachance+road&source=bl&ots=P4cQMT9aU5&sig=at2Qrxdx7hdDs1BJjIsCRCpDeGk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTx-3gm9bMAhUkyoMKHcZ-AJ0Q6AEIHjAB#v=onepage&q=clam%20river%20blue%20lachance%20road&f=false


I might have to plan my trip so that I can stop there on my way to Baldwin. It's over an hour from my cottage but only 30 minutes out of my way since I live on the east side of the state


----------



## TROUT NINJA

Pinefarm2015 said:


> The Clam River is the best known brookie river within an hour drive of your place. The old MDNR fly only section on the Clam was between Blue and Lachance roads. That classification was changed about 15 years back, as migratory fish and drift boats became all the rage and fewer and fewer fishermen targeted resident trout, via wading. It's all private, so it's a long wade. But the forum cops don't have to worry , most fishermen won't bother with it because it's such a long wade. Most guys won't go nowadays if they can't boat in.
> 
> https://books.google.com/books?id=xKkOCv1fU0wC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=clam+river+blue+lachance+road&source=bl&ots=P4cQMT9aU5&sig=at2Qrxdx7hdDs1BJjIsCRCpDeGk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTx-3gm9bMAhUkyoMKHcZ-AJ0Q6AEIHjAB#v=onepage&q=clam%20river%20blue%20lachance%20road&f=false[/QUOTE
> 
> This probably should have been sent in a PM I'm not the forum police but just saying


----------



## Pinefarm2015

Fishman95 said:


> I might have to plan my trip so that I can stop there on my way to Baldwin. It's over an hour from my cottage but only 30 minutes out of my way since I live on the east side of the state


I always found it to be a very gin clear river, with more shallow structure than the more common pocket/run water. There's lots of overhanging/downed trees, so it's not the easiest river to fish.
The Black River is also great, but it's several hour north.


----------



## Pinefarm2015

Why? The Clam was fly only water and it's in the most common Michigan trout books out there.
http://www.amazon.com/Flyfishers-Guide-Michigan-Guidebooks/dp/1932098461

Dave Richie, who was the outdoor writer for the Detroit News wrote about the Clam all the time. It's no secret...
https://davericheyoutdoors.wordpress.com/2010/06/04/top-trout-streams-to-try/

Anyone who has fished trout for any amount of time has a favorite stream. Call it a home stream if you will but anglers often continue to fish the same spot every time. This summer, consider expanding your choices and try a new trout stream.



Many anglers like an occasional change of pace, and my advice is to try something new and different. If river trout fishing is your game, any of these spots are good bet. They are among the best trout streams in the state.


1.Platte River: This Benzie County stream is one of the finest in the nation. Fish from above the river mouth on Lake Michigan up to the Veterans Memorial Park on highway US-31 east of Honor. Some very good hatches occur on the river, particularly downstream from the lower US-31 bridge. Steelhead runs offer great sport in April and October through December, and the river produces some excellent salmon action in the fall. It is a gentle and easy stream to wade, and the water is as clear as a piece of fine crystal. Anglers who succeed on this river wade only while fishing to avoid spooking fish in the ultra-clear water.


2. Betsie River is another Benzie County stream, and try fishing it from the old Homestead Dam near Benzonia downstream to Betsie Bay at Frankfort and Elberta. Some stretches of the upper river offer good insect hatches during summer months. The best steelhead action comes in March, April, October and November. Good salmon fishing can be had during September and October. Good trout fishing also can be found from Grace Road downstream to the lower River Road bridge during the summer months.


3. AuSable River offers superb fly-fishing water from Grayling downstream to Kellogg and Wakeley bridges, and anglers come from around the world to sample this hallowed water. Excellent insect hatches come off from May through October. Look for big trout in the big water from Mio and McKinley downstream to Oscoda. The North Branch near Lovells is good for brookies, and the South Branch near Roscommon produces big browns. The best sport comes in midweek. Fish light, long and small in late summer and grasshopper patterns tempt August trout.


4. Manistee River from Frederic downstream through the CCC Bridge and on to Sharon (about 50 miles) is noted worldwide by trout fishermen. Some wonderful fly fishing can be found above Mesick and the Hodenpyle Dam, and below Hodenpyle and down to the Red Bridge. Deep holes hold some lunker brown trout, and fly fishing with big streamer patterns after dark can produce superb action. Fish from Tippy Dam near Wellston downstream past Bear Creek and down to Manistee. Look for gravel bars in spring and fall for spawning salmon and steelhead.


5. Sturgeon River between Wolverine and Indian River in Cheboygan County is an under-rated stream. It holds good spring and fall steelhead from Burt Lake, and midsummer months produce wall-hanger brown trout. The largest I've seen was 13 1/2 pounds. The river is swift and has some caddis and stone fly hatches, and fair to good numbers of small trout. One can catch brook, brown and rainbow trout from this river. Night fishing with big deer-hair mouse patterns can be very effective when they are cast quartering across and downstream after dark. The current is deceptively fast here, and watch for underwater clay ledges.


6. Black River in Cheboygan County is noted as one of the finest native brook trout streams in the state. The headwater areas are best for brookies, and anglers can try fishing near Tin Shanty Bridge. Some of the water is difficult to fish with a fly rod but a short spinning rod will work. Many anglers prefer to wade slowly upstream, and pitch nymphs and small dry flies in tight quarters. Most of the brookies will measure 9-10 inches but the river periodically produces trout up to 16 inches. Fish in shadowed areas and under overhanging banks for bigger fish.


7. Clam River in Wexford and Missaukee counties offers another excellent chance for brookies from one of the state's finest brook trout rivers. The water from LaChance Road downstream to Blue Road offers perhaps the finest chance at a nice brook trout. This stream flows mostly through private property and access is difficult in many locations. The river has a soft bottom in some areas and can be difficult to wade. A canoe offers much easier access to some of the best spots. It also holds some sizable brown trout that hit best after dark.


8. Pere Marquette River from Baldwin downstream to Ludington offers great opportunities during the summer months. A popular area is from highway M-37 Bridge downstream to Gleason's Landing (seven miles). The river offers excellent fly hatches during the summer months, and anglers can catch steelhead during spring and fall and salmon in the fall. Mind you, this may be the state's best salmon-steelhead river but the fishing pressure can be heavy at times. Lower river stretches can be waded but be cautious when wading through soft-bottomed areas.


9. Middle Branch Ontonagon River in Ontonagon County offers good summer fly fishing between Agate and Bond falls. Agate Falls blocks any further upstream migration for Lake Superior's brown trout and steelhead. Portions of the upper stream between the two waterfalls and all of the lower stretch is easily wadable. It offers a scenic place to fish with an excellent chance to catch a nice trout. I've had some superb fly fishing between the two waterfalls during July and into early August. The river upstream from Bond Falls Flowage holds some brook trout.


10. Two Hearted River in northern Luce County was immortalized by Ernest Hemingway to lead anglers away from the Fox River at Seney. The Two Heart (as locals call it) has its upper stretches in Luce County near Pine Stump Junction, and it produces brook trout. The lower reaches from the Reed & Green Bridge down to Lake Superior has good native trout fishing as well as salmon and steelhead. The river has tannic-acid stained water, and it can make wading difficult in some locations. The river is as beautiful as its name implies.


----------



## toto

Kzoo, since this thread has gone off topic from the OP, would you do me a favor and give me your reasoning as to why there should be flies only water? Thank you.


----------



## Fishman95

toto said:


> Kzoo, since this thread has gone off topic from the OP, would you do me a favor and give me your reasoning as to why there should be flies only water? Thank you.


Let's not, please
Let's keep this thread brook trout specific

Thanks, 
OP


----------



## lancenelson

The Clam is a great river. Just don't enter on Karl's property. He'll rip you a new one and tell you the stream is non-navigable!


----------



## Fishman95

lancenelson said:


> The Clam is a great river. Just don't enter on Karl Jorgenson's property. He'll rip you a new one and tell you the stream is non-navigable!


If you could pm me where his property is, it would be appreciated so I can avoid it


----------



## toto

I'd love to except it seemed to have segued over to that somewhere. Anyways, I would love to fish the Clam sometime, as well as a few others.


----------



## Pinefarm2015

lancenelson said:


> The Clam is a great river. Just don't enter on Karl's property. He'll rip you a new one and tell you the stream is non-navigable!


Don't enter on any private land. Nobody has a right to walk thru someone's land to get to a river.

The Clam River is a river, not a creek. Creek's are often where the navigability questions arise and most small creeks are not navigable. The Clam River was adjudicated as navigable from the confluence of the headwaters in 1888. The section of water I mentioned was the well known flies only section for years, for pete's sake. Claiming that water is non-navigable, when all the trout books suggest even taking a canoe down it, is just a landowner being silly. That said, the Clam is small enough that I can't see any reason to have to be on any banks, as few hazards should exist.


----------



## TROUT NINJA

Guys I really wasn't trying to be a baby but the OP did say pm's appreciated but anyway while I'm at it I'll give u my report from last weekend I do have to say though I have done plenty of fishing on many different rivers and creeks around the state so I hear ya I enjoy the adventure of exploring new water almost as much as hooking fish but back to the report I picked out a bridge crossing on the CLAM RIVER! believe it or not lol and around my 3rd cast I hooked and landed my pb brookie 14" unfortunately he pulled a tricky move right as I was about to take a pic so bummer no pick but like I said didn't mean to be a drama queen jeesh...


----------



## lancenelson

I


Pinefarm2015 said:


> Don't enter on any private land. Nobody has a right to walk thru someone's land to get to a river.
> 
> The Clam River is a river, not a creek. Creek's are often where the navigability questions arise and most small creeks are not navigable. The Clam River was adjudicated as navigable from the confluence of the headwaters in 1888. The section of water I mentioned was the well known flies only section for years, for pete's sake. Claiming that water is non-navigable, when all the trout books suggest even taking a canoe down it, is just a landowner being silly. That said, the Clam is small enough that I can't see any reason to have to be on any banks, as few hazards should exist.



I misspoke myself. I have never entered a river from someone's property, ever. My incident happened while I was wading upstream through a section of river that was on his property.


----------



## toto

Bob, that is an absolutely correct statement. As for navigability, yes it may seem as though it isn't, but again, it needs to be adjudicated by the courts, at least to be an absolute. I'm sure there is no question that some waters may in fact be non nav, however until one of two things happens it's open. 1) needs to be decided by the courts that they are not capable at any time to float logs, or now a canoe, and 2) or someone somewhere needs to come up with a more clear definition of navigability. I know I've seen the 41 Cubic feet and one foot depth etc, but that can be argued easily by using the time of year, think spring, when one could float a log, or canoe, or even a float boat, and the argument is moot. After all the jibberish, in the above scenario, find a place up, or down stream that is a legal entrance point and have at it. If he tries to stop you, don't argue just go back to your car or truck and call the RAP line, or the DNR local CO. I'm sure they will be glad to come out and straighten the situation out.


----------



## Pinefarm2015

toto said:


> Bob, that is an absolutely correct statement. As for navigability, yes it may seem as though it isn't, but again, it needs to be adjudicated by the courts, at least to be an absolute. I'm sure there is no question that some waters may in fact be non nav, however until one of two things happens it's open. 1) needs to be decided by the courts that they are not capable at any time to float logs, or now a canoe, and 2) or someone somewhere needs to come up with a more clear definition of navigability. I know I've seen the 41 Cubic feet and one foot depth etc, but that can be argued easily by using the time of year, think spring, when one could float a log, or canoe, or even a float boat, and the argument is moot. After all the jibberish, in the above scenario, find a place up, or down stream that is a legal entrance point and have at it. If he tries to stop you, don't argue just go back to your car or truck and call the RAP line, or the DNR local CO. I'm sure they will be glad to come out and straighten the situation out.


I can't imagine there's a "river" in the state that has not clearly been adjudicated as navigable, back in the 19th century, during the timber mill days. Again, drawing the clear distinction between a river and a creek. If it's a river, it's got to be navigable.

But just because a river is navigable doesn't mean access is legal everywhere. Whether or not a bridge is considered legal access is something I'd call a local CO about. It seems there's a landowner on the Clam who doesn't want people walking in at the bridge. To avoid conflict, I'd call the Cadillac DNR office, as I'm sure they're familiar with the individual.

That said, the sad part is the landowner is probably sick of people leaving trash, worm containers, beer bottles and pissing next to their truck while wadering up. The actions of some slobs, be it involving hunting or fishing, usually is what ruins access for the rest of us.


----------



## toto

Pinefarm2015 said:


> I can't imagine there's a "river" in the state that has not clearly been adjudicated as navigable, back in the 19th century, during the timber mill days. Again, drawing the clear distinction between a river and a creek. If it's a river, it's got to be navigable.
> 
> But just because a river is navigable doesn't mean access is legal everywhere. Whether or not a bridge is considered legal access is something I'd call a local CO about. It seems there's a landowner on the Clam who doesn't want people walking in at the bridge. To avoid conflict, I'd call the Cadillac DNR office, as I'm sure they're familiar with the individual.
> 
> That said, the sad part is the landowner is probably sick of people leaving trash, worm containers, beer bottles and pissing next to their truck while wadering up. The actions of some slobs, be it involving hunting or fishing, usually is what ruins access for the rest of us.


Absolutely, but I would say there are people who are slobs in all walks of life. That said, from everything I've read, it's okay to enter a NAVIGABLE bridge from the right of way. It's been argued both ways on here for a while but the only thing I've read you CAN'T do is pick berries, nuts, or the like within that right of way, seems weird but whatever. In some cases you may be correct in asking a CO, but I caution that that isn't always the right answer either.


----------



## jpconner50

-Axiom- said:


> How far are you willing to travel?


 About 15 years ago I stood in one spot on the Little Manistee and caught a Brown, Rainbow and a Brook without moving my feet! Probably never happen again in my lifetime. Upper parts of the White river above White Cloud has\had them. Also have caught a few just below M37 on Little M! Good luck, most beautiful fish in the world!


----------



## DLHirst

jpconner50 said:


> About 15 years ago I stood in one spot on the Little Manistee and caught a Brown, Rainbow and a Brook without moving my feet! Probably never happen again in my lifetime. Upper parts of the White river above White Cloud has\had them. Also have caught a few just below M37 on Little M! Good luck, most beautiful fish in the world!


Well done. My son and I call that a hat trick. I have done it on the Holy Waters and the South branch where it dumps into the main stream. Fun days!


----------



## Boardman Brookies

DLHirst said:


> Well done. My son and I call that a hat trick. I have done it on the Holy Waters and the South branch where it dumps into the main stream. Fun days!


Hat Trick, I like that. I refer to it as the Grand Slam. I fish a few Manistee feeders where it happens from time to time. It seems like thr rainbow is always the more rare of the three to catch.


----------



## DLHirst

For the grand slam, you gotta throw in a creek chub or a sucker!


----------



## Boardman Brookies

DLHirst said:


> For the grand slam, you gotta throw in a creek chub or a sucker!


Or one of these rare gems:


----------



## Fishman95

DLHirst said:


> For the grand slam, you gotta throw in a creek chub or a sucker!


Or a splake


----------



## Fishman95

Boardman Brookies said:


> Or one of these rare gems:
> 
> View attachment 215524


That's a grand slam in and of itself


----------



## Boardman Brookies

Fishman95 said:


> That's a grand slam in and of itself


First and only Tiger ever


----------



## flyguy808

One of the beauties I pulled out of the Boardman last Saturday. Of the 7 I landed, this was one of the smaller ones but the colors were great!


----------



## Boardman Brookies

Beautiful brookie. I hammered them tonight. Lost count, but they were all that size or smaller. Still fun!


----------



## hockeymania2

I call it the Trifecta. Got a Trifecta tonight on an unmentionable in NW MI. Great night to get out fishing some dry flies
Here's one of the orange bellied brookies I pulled; small, but eager to hit the dry.


----------



## Fishman95

Beautiful fish, guys


----------



## -Axiom-

Too bad the browns are eating them before they get a chance to grow.


----------



## Fishman95

Success! Thanks everyone for your tips and advice. My girlfriend and I got 6 this morning. 2 on a brook trout rapala countdown. 4 on a #14 Adams dry fly. 9.5" was the biggest.





































My gf caught her first two trout ever. We did end up keeping one.


----------



## Boardman Brookies

Awesome. A size 14 adams is just about the perfect fly for any Michigan water.


----------



## -Axiom-

Boardman Brookies said:


> Awesome. A size 14 adams is just about the perfect fly for any Michigan water.



And there is an Adams fly festival coming soon in Kingsley.


----------



## Martin Looker

Went to the U.P. for 10 days and had several meals of brookies.


----------

