Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I see somewhere people accused of sitting with a paternoster and devon or fly set up and fixing it to the bottom and staying in the same lie all day ??

    Comment


    • #62
      I said I wasn't going to reply, but my mood changed.

      "You seem to be suggesting that heavy Czech nymphing is the only effective way to fish nymphs these days and tungsten the only way to go"

      No I said that if you don't appreciate the advantage of tungsten you are missing out. I mentioned several times that I fish other methods

      "...that I would prefer to use a float rod. etc. etc. None of which I said"

      you did however say,

      "These heavy nymphs would fish better off a 14' rod a fixed spool reel", which I think is rubbish, because.....tungsten flies are not heavy enough to cast on a spinning rod.

      "However when you suggest it catches trout and grayling whether they are feeding or NOT then one has to take a step back. Seems unlikely a trout or grayling would take any nymph if it didn,t think it was an item of food, otherwise why take it into its mouth and yes we know salmon do exactly that, as far as we know, stupid as they are."

      What you have said is illogical. Just because you are not eating doe not mean you do not think something is food. If you were sat at a table and not eating a sweet that I put 5 feet away, that does not mean that you don't think it is food does it? I might mean you are not hungry enough to go around the other side to get the sweet. If I put it on your side of the table, you might think it is more worth it. If I dangled it right in front of your mouth you may just snatch it despite the fact you were not feeding.

      "If your trout and grayling fishing consists of just heavy Czech nymphing and salmon fishing with a sinking line bouncing along the bottom then I suggest you may be the one with a somewhat blinkered approach and may well be missing out."

      But how could it consist of just czech nymphing when I told you I spent a long time mastering the Sawyer method? I read a book once called 'the trout and the fly' by Clark and Goddard, and they spend one section discussing how to fish deeper and deeper with the sawyer method. They were casting further and further upstream to allow it to sink and using enormously long (like 20ft) leaders in order that they could still indicate the bite. As you will undoubtably know, grayling take a nymph in such a fast way that they never mover the line like a rainbow does. However had these two chaps had tungsten nymphs they could have fished it on the normal tackle. You may have heard of the grasshopper method of fishing? It is an old border method you only see written about in older books, which uses heavily leaded green woollen flies fished right under you...czech style...I agree there is nothing new under the sun except the equipment. You hit on something you didn't understand yourself, which you explained earlier without knowing it. The true czech style needs you to wade in and get the nymphs right under your rod, correct this is severely limiting. The 'indicator' however means you have something else to hang the nymphs off and can fish it wherever you can cast it. You can also fish it on a 6'6 rod on the little brooks I like to fish, or on a 9'+ rod on the main river. I think most people would find a 14' float rod quite restrictive on the border streams that the Wye and Usk deForesters have not visited yet. I'm afraid your comments about the indicator show your complete and utter misunderstanding of it, whether or not you have tried it. Personally it is not my favorite way to fish, but it is the most productive of all the methods I have tried and yields by far the biggest proportion of large fish. I fish just like Sawyer and Kite some days, I didn't say their method was weird, I said I was weird in that I spent a whole season doing nothing else. I would hope that makes me at least proficient at it, and if I ever fished at Netheravon I am sure I would not have the heart to fish the czech nymph style, I still would use tungsten though.

      Now, going back to the start of this,

      "Every method has its time and place depending on the conditions you face on the day..."

      So SF is not so wrong to have some tungsten tubes then? I'm glad I talked you round.

      I don't really know anything about salmon fishing. I know enough to enjoy my day however. You, and indeed most people on here have caught more Salmon than me. Lets ignore the fact that the rivers are not so full of fish as when you started, that's the past and I am unlikely to see that in my lifetime. Now what I hate on forums in general is 'celebrity' fishermen handing out advice that is clearly illogical, like 'tungsten flies are too heavy' or 'a float rod would be better'. When you challenge them on logic everyone comes back with, 'what would you know' comments, because this person is a great fisherman. That's why I waded in with my 2 cents, and why I replied a second time. How about this reply to SF,

      "I don't really like the idea of heavy tubes in general, i think you are much better with the weight in the line if possible, because the fly will fish more naturally. However, I note from what you have said that there are certain circumstances where a very fast sinking fly are needed, and in this circumstance nothing (that is not radioactive, and can be shaped like a tube) sinks faster than tungsten. I however would rather leave that spot and fish somewhere else, where I can fish with the sink tip, and I feel that in the long run I would catch more fish by moving on."

      That would have been good advice. What you said was something quite distant from good advice, and had I been new to the forum and fishing I might have been very confused by it. I don't really believe that the 'old timers' should be revered just for being old timers. We know everyone who fished in the past had a massive advantage of numbers of fish. For many 'great' fisherman the massive advantage of time has been in their favour, like the aristocrats with no need to work, or the post war early retirees who never worked past 45 with public service pensions. I pick and choose whose advice I take, mainly those that deal in facts.


      Comment


      • bollinger's Avatar
        bollinger commented
        Editing a comment
        I don't think I better reply to this too strongly in the interest of harmony. So much here has been quoted out of context and picked over almost al.la Rigsby. No one ever said'tungsten flies are TOO heavy, no one suggested using 14' rods on small tributary streams though a 14 rod where useable would present the nymphs better. They can of course be cast on a float rod and would merely replace the weights used to cock the float and be better trotted and controlled over long distances to any area of the stream you wish. Many of the Czech nymphs are too heavy to be properly cast, overhead or otherwise. which is why they are fished at short range and just swept out a rod length or so away.
        You dismiss those who have long experience as old timers, aristocrates and retired public servants- and suggest their success was due to there just being more fish. Bloody extraordinary.!! You pick and choose whose advice you take yet have little experience it seems to judge who might be right.
        Obviously in my sixty years plus of fishing, possibly much of it before you were born I suspect, for ALL types of fish, I have learnt nothing of any use to you. Well so be it. Ahhh the arrogance of youth yet it was always so was it not.

    • #63
      The Indicator is a float and as such could be fished off a match rod with a fixed spool reel or even a centrepin, tenkara shows how easy it is to cast flies with no weight or even flyline.
      So if you are fishing an indicator with a nymph or nymphs under you are floatfishing .... with a centerpin and a flyrod

      ​As for the weighted tubes and flies for salmon. Its another method for the armoury and in some way compensates the fly only man or river / beat for not being able to choose the 'best' method on the day for catching a fish

      I prefer the light fly and sinking line with a variable leader length, most of the time. Sometimes you need to get the fly down and fishing quickly, then the weighted fly comes into the reckoning ...

      Comment


      • #64
        SF, re tenkara, they are not trying to shoot line. Its hard to get them to go when they weigh such a tiny amount. In a way you are float fishing, but you are using the flyline to avoid adding extra weight, the whole terminal setup is much lighter and more sensitive as a result. I always compared it to trotting, but it is much more effective as the flyline allows you to control how it fishes. I love to watch the old centrepin whirl as someone trots for grayling, but I am yet to see anyone catch them by the dozen that way.

        As for judging whose advice to take it is as easy as this,

        Is is a fact or opinion. If it is an opinion, like 'I think black and yellow flies do well in the spring', then I listen and take it as an opinion. I add it to the list of opinions and see if there is a consensus. This is where old timers are of interest.

        If it is put forward as a fact, I think to myself 'does this sound true'. Does it obey the laws of physics, is it statistically significant, has this person got something to gain, is this entrenched opinion, are they following the crowd, are they trying to keep something to themselves, would this person even have tried this. If I doubt it I ask difficult questions, and when I get an angry response I start to doubt it more.

        I have fished spots where it is hard to get the fly down no matter how I mend the line, and considered the sink rate 7ips etc that I first mentioned. Statistics always seem to make people mad when they don't fit what they believe.

        I don't think any of the quotes are out of context btw. But you did eventually get around to agreeing that there might be a place for heavy tubes, so the forum wins in the end.

        Comment


        • #65
          There you go again. Where was there an angry response and although there is I am sure a place for a heavy tube where was that agreed????

          As for this " I love to watch the old centrepin whirl as someone trots for grayling, but I am yet to see anyone catch them by the dozen that way." you amaze, no astound me !!!!!!.
          In view of that perhaps we should leave it there

          Comment


          • #66
            Originally posted by stealth_fox View Post
            Which flourescent floss is it Gwelsher?
            It's some that a Polish pal sent me. Comes in a rope and you take out the strands.

            Comment


            • #67
              does it have a colour or is it 'just the right' colour

              i tied some with some flourescent green butts (glo brite No.12), they look good

              Comment

              Working...
              X