No misquote, just good ole fashion inference. "...nymphing rivers with such a long and storied fly fishing history seems odd imo..." Besides eggs are not nymphs, in the insect world the egg happens before the larval stage and in a complete metamorphosis it is then before the larval and pupal/nymph stage. In this case though the egg pattern in question is most likely matching the salmon egg hatch (you know matching a hatch in fly fishing, you know actually throwing something at fish that they actually are attempting to eat, doesn't get more traditional than that, so not throwing egg patterns in these hallowed water is by far more odd than throwing them). Do you think if those who first fished the the OP rivers would have know about the effectiveness of vertical presentations that they would have not used it because it worked well? Is it possible that they stuck with swinging because there were more fish and they didn't have to do anything else? I imagine that if they were faced with the same numbers of fish and the option of the techniques, that these storied characters would laugh at all the people who fall back on tradition/respect for the fish/yada yada for not actually using what works.
flyfishmt, the more people are up in arms about your approach, the more likely it is that it works.
flyfishmt, the more people are up in arms about your approach, the more likely it is that it works.
If I were to make an inference regarding what steelhead flyfishing pioneers thought, I'd guess that they would view modern bobber/ shot nymphing as gear fishing. The reason would be that in those streams that they succesfully lobbied to become FF only like the stilly and N. Umpqua it is disallowed.
flyfishmt,
So you understand what the deal is, IRA loves nymphing. Some, like Mr. Bellows and me, don't view it as flyfishing. It's an ongoing discussion/ argument. Mis-interperatation and hurt feelings are the norm in this argument.
If you want to use nymphing techniques, apparently yarnies work well.
Go Sox,
cds