Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by flyfishmt, Nov 10, 2013.
You can blame all the worlds problems on me , I was once a Gillnetter....
This has now gone "over the line"...you mean allowed?
what really is the difference in swinging a spoon and swinging a brightly/mutli colored fly? really nothing, accept the reel, so get over your selves. besides the fish cant see your wonderful backhand, and they cant see your apparel.
So have toothbrushes, but you can't for a second claim that there haven't been technological advancements in them, can you? Fly rods have also been around for years, but I'm guessing your not hand planning your own bamboo. Indicators have advanced beyond "bobbers" in fly fishing, as have rods, reels, lines, waders, etc... All of which are designed to advance the sport, and yes I'll concede, make it easier (Which I believe everyone here will also have to concede). It just continues to be hilarious to me, and therefore worth my time to keep baiting the swingers into defending the notions that "only nymphers get offended" and "indicators aren't fly fishing".
Yeah Klickrolf I've been told now that it was over the line (by people not directly involved) and I then even admitted it, but you must have just posted this without actually continuing to read the thread. If you had you would have known that the person I was addressing it to was not offended and also made a joke about it. For the sake of not having to deal with this again, (Accept (or is it except? Affect/Effect? I'm sure you know, please also correct my punctuation) of course that you have decided to re copy it) I changed the original post to one more cryptic so people would have to work a little harder to be offended by it.
Now just in case you were also kidding and your understanding of over the line was a joke about how I used the word aloud (Was that really an accident, or did I really mean to use the word aloud? Guess you don't know me very well.) versus allowed, then good one Klickrolf, good one!
Hey Klickrolf, how do you feel about yarnies, I don't think I caught your stance.
A, no? Although I will argue that a center pin reel and rod could be used as a fly rod and reel, or just about any reel and rod for that matter, just probably not that effectively. That's why we have rods and reels specifically designed for a specific job. Now if you add too much shot, then it will be the weight of the split and not the line carrying the flies out. There is a line, so when you try it, don't cross it or you will become a gear fisherman.
So an indicator attached to a leader automatically makes it not flyfishing? Why is that the line? Again, please just focus on the indicator. Are there other possible changes in the future that will also make it not flyfishing? Are you okay with shooting heads and T lines being called fly fishing? If so why? Which would be easier to cast, a shooting head/T line with a weighted fly, or a DT/FT with an indicator and double nymph rig? I don't actually know, because I haven't casted any of the T lines. Is a dry dropper ok to be called fly fishing? When my friend and I noticed that steelhead would sometimes take our indicators and we created indicator flies, was that flyfishing? We were after all fishing technically fishing dry flies. Is a straight attachment to a hook the defining line of flyfishing?
Just to set the record strait Charles, I just did not want to be part of any conversation that equated fishing with the oppression of an ethnic minority. Peace Bro.
Hmm, you had to dig deep for that one didn't you. Actually seen a few guys trying the above described method. They cast using the weight of the line, and then they were able to mend better than they could with mono, and then when the bobber was in the right spot, they could allow the reel to free spool for 200 ft. attaining a perfect drift. Again more gray area.
Have you caught a fish on the swing before? I'm assuming you are like Johnny in my little story and have not. In your eyes, if you consider yourself fly fishing...more power to you. In the eyes of others you are not. Why is it bothering you so bad, and why are you defending it "to the death"? You are saying it is not, but obviously it is bothering you.
I think the purist swingers are hung up on gear to counter their hypocrisy...being that they are gearfishermen too. if your fishing for steel with a fly rod, you are probably gear fishing regardless of your presentation. Any brain dead human can throw a line 45 degrees down stream and just sit there like a dead plant waiting for a tug.
Only a brain dead human would throw their line 45 degrees downstream and sit like a dead plant waiting for a tug. Putting a few hundred fish under my belt before starting to fish steelhead with a fly rod has its advantages. You learn where fish are and how to get your tips down and bring 'em across slow in different waters that fish are likely to be in. Just casting and hoping has never been part of my MO. Anyone can cast and swing or huck a bobber and wait.
Do you just cast your corkie and yarn out hoping for a grab?
Just spent 4 days in Maupin and almost everyone had a bobber attached. Reports were for dead slow fishing. Group in our hotel caught 1 fish between 4 people in a weeks fishing. Another guy has been there almost 3 weeks with 1 fish. Most of the water I saw people fishing in was "unlikely" water. Anyone can do that. I only swung for about 5 hours with 2 fish to show. I'd fish thru most of a run hoping but knew each time where I was going to get my grab. Same for my girlfriend. Had her set up with float/jig and put her in the likely water where she hooked 3 for about 12 hours fishing. None of our time on the water was of the brain dead fishing you'd think are involved with swinging... or even her float fishing. There was a purpose. There's fishing and there's casting.
It's like the whole art v. indecentsy (sp?) deal. It's hard to define but you know it when you see it. Bobbers and shot make it gear pretty quick.
I hope to be fishing a dry line or at worst a type 3 later this week. If I felt I had to break out t-14, I would and I wouldn't mind if someone told me that I was hucking gear.
It's alright sisters, it's all right brothers.
Go Red Sox,
My favorite analogy has to do with reading.
Take a book by Michael Crichton and one by William Faulkner.
You have some people who will only read one, and some people who will only read the other. Then there are others who will read both, depending on how they are feeling, etc.
If given a choice, I'll read Faulkner, and here's why. Faulkner challenges you. Faulkner makes you work for it. There have been times, reading a novel by Faulkner, when I have had to reread the same page over and over again because there is so much going on. It's hard. But at the end, you've accomplished something. A book like that changes you, even if it's in some small imperceptible way.
Now Crichton, on the other hand. Let's face it, Crichton is easy. Sure, there are the same words, the same chapters, and reading something by Crichton might be fun and exciting. But when you finish a book by Crichton, there's nothing special about that. You haven't accomplished anything overly remarkable. And it doesn't stay with you.
Faulkner haunts you, long after you've finished reading him.
There's nothing wrong with reading Crichton, but you sure as hell wouldn't call it literature.