Fishing - line choice for beginner

FishingBanter (http://www.fishingbanter.com/index.php)

- Fly Fishing (http://www.fishingbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - line choice for beginner (http://www.fishingbanter.com/showthread.php?t=4070)

line choice for beginner

"George Adams" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
From: "Mike Connor"

These tests, including 36 hours mandatory classroom instruction, six
hours
casting instruction ( extra if you want to flyfish, the basic tests are
only
for spincasting), a valid and current first aid certificate, and a
current
police report, followed by the practical and theoretical tests, are a
legal
requirement before one may obtain a licence.

WoW! That's more than I had to do to get a concealed carry handgun permit
in
the gun unfriendly People's Republic of Massachusetts.

Is there any logic at all in imposing these requirements for a fishing
license,
or is it all emotional issues by the greens? (You Nader folks paying
attention
to this?)

George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only
dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

Well George, some of this stuff is very difficult to explain. First of all,
for people here it is quite normal, because that is how it is. They don´t
tend to get overly upset about it. They are obliged to do it, if they want
to go fishing, and so they simply do it. There is some protest, about some
things, especially the fact that juveniles can not fish, ( basically a
matter of national law, which prohibits juveniles from killing vertebrate
animals, and which can vary somewhat from Federal State to Federal State),
but people generally are quite powerless to do anything about it, and so it
is merely accepted.

Doubtless, if anybody tried to impose something similar in America, at least
in one fell swoop, then there would be a massive hue and cry! What you
consider a "right" ( not sure it actually is one though ), is a privilege
here. And it can be removed at any time.

There are some very positive aspects about a mandatory examination. It
ensures that those who wish to fish learn to do so properly. Quite
independent of manufacturers, various blurb, advertising, bull**** etc etc.
They learn a very great deal about fish, ecology, etc etc etc.They learn to
cast properly. The tests are standardised to a considerable extent, and so
everybody who passes the test is equally competent at first. There are no
excuses for misbehaving on the water, maltreating fish, generally buggering
about, or causing other problems. Most of which offences would in any case
result in you losing your licence for life!

Clubs control and regulate their own waters, including stocking, various
ecological and other projects, and anybody who wishes to, ( of course this
costs time and money) can qualify for supervising or carrying out these
things. This is fascinating. In America, and many other places, this sort
of thing is done by the authorities, and many anglers will never see what is
done, or know why. They simply have no say in the matter.

There are also some negative aspects. Catch and release is illegal ( is
classed as cruelty to animals) and would cost you your licence and a heavy
fine if you were caught doing it. Some restrictions seem petty. Clubs can
make rules which restrict fishing even more ( and many do) but they can not
rescind any Federal or national regulations.

If you want to try something very very difficult, then try to get a permit
for a handgun ( or any other gun!) here. It is quite impossible for a normal
citizen.

Things are different here, that is not to say they are bad, just different.
This is a free country, just as yours is, but the freedoms and restrictions
are different.

TL
MC

line choice for beginner

"Mike Connor" wrote in message
...

...Things are different here...

It should be noted that most of Europe is much more densely populated than
most of North America.....and has been for a long time. By and large
there's a lot less outdoor recreational resource per capita to go around.
Naturally, access has to be rationed somehow. I'm not saying that this is
behind the rather draconian measures (by our standards here in the US) taken
by the Germans and, presumably, other Europeans but it certainly is a
factor.

Additionally, ownership and access to land and water as well as the animals
that dwell on and in them has, for the most part, been tightly controlled
for centuries throughout Europe. Anyone familiar with the legend of Robin
Hood will remember that killing the King's deer was a capital offense. More
or less the same sort of restrictions held sway on most of the continent for
over a millennium. Again, not the only consideration, but an important
precedent for highly restricted public use.

Meanwhile, as Mike and others have pointed out, the Greens have certainly
been instrumental in creating some of the resource use policies in effect in
Germany today, but I suspect they would have been nowhere near as successful
were the Germans not still suffering from a collective Nazi hangover. That
said, it is also interesting that the Germans (irrespective of the
conclusions they've arrived at and what may or may not change in the future)
have at least confronted THE issue.....the one that NOBODY here wants to
deal with.....the one that frequently manifests itself in the utterly
laughable so-called C&R vs C&K "debate" because, non-issue that it is, it
nevertheless always skirts perilously close to the precipice.

Wolfgang
who reminds his readers of the wisdom of the dictum to be careful what one
asks for. :)

line choice for beginner

"Wolfgang" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
snip
deal with.....the one that frequently manifests itself in the utterly
laughable so-called C&R vs C&K "debate" because, non-issue that it is, it
nevertheless always skirts perilously close to the precipice.

Wolfgang
who reminds his readers of the wisdom of the dictum to be careful what one
asks for. :)

That is a correct and insightful analysis.

TL
MC

line choice for beginner

One point which has yet failed to come up here, is the fact that is is not
possible to mend a WF line, once the head is outside the rod rings.The same
applies to a shooting head.

Even though one may not cast more than thirty feet of flyline very often,
one may drift a lot further, and mending is an essential technique on moving
water.

For this reason alone, I would not use a WF line.

TL
MC

line choice for beginner

Mike Connor wrote:

Sorry, perhaps I did not make that clear enough. There is no difference
between DT and WF lines of the same rating. A WF line one rating higher
than the DT is of course heavier than the DT.

snip

In other words, the rod-loading characteristics of a DT and a WF line
(of "standard" tapers, whatever those are) at short range will be
exactly the same, and any argument or rule-of-thumb one should go "up
one weight" when using a WF line is bogus, at least for short range.

I used to use DT lines for ordinary trout fishing, but over the past
couple of years I've switched to WF lines. One reason is that the
economy of the DT lines isn't a big issue when I compare it to all my
other fishing expenses. A more important reason is that I sometimes want
to cast long distances. In fact, I frequently want to cast long
distances when fishing lakes and when fishing larger rivers where I
often can't wade very close to good lies. Sometimes, especially when the
fishing is very hot -- to the point of getting boring -- I just like to
cast a lot of line for the hell of it, and because I'm tired of wading,
and because it's more challenging.

A WF line is ideal, IMO, because it works well at all ranges. It's
exactly the same as a DT at short range, it shoots better than a DT at
long range, and the mid-range isn't messed up by some bulky
line/running-line connection. It's better than a shooting head, for my
purposes, because I really dislike that transition through the guides of
the line/running-line connection. I suppose that connection could be
made as smooth a silk, with enough time and effort, but I can't be
bothered for the puny extra $30/year or so (at the most) that my WF
lines cost me.

The only disadvantage besides price, as far as I can tell, is that a WF
won't roll cast AT LONG DISTANCES as well as a DT. Very little of my
fishing involves long-distance roll casting. Furthermore, while a WF
doesn't long-distance roll cost as well as a DT, it does roll cast
better than a shooting head.

Finally, to the specific subject of this thread, I think a WF line would
be the best choice for a beginner. After he's learned the basics of
casting at short range, which will be EXACTLY THE SAME as with a DT
line, he can move on to hauling and double hauling and shooting.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

line choice for beginner

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 20:04:19 +0200, "Mike Connor"
wrote:

"George Adams" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
*snippage*

Things are different here, that is not to say they are bad, just different.
This is a free country, just as yours is, but the freedoms and restrictions
are different.

TL
MC

When did the currents laws get enacted?

g.c.

line choice for beginner

"George Cleveland" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 20:04:19 +0200, "Mike Connor"
wrote:

"George Adams" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
*snippage*

Things are different here, that is not to say they are bad, just
different.
This is a free country, just as yours is, but the freedoms and
restrictions
are different.

TL
MC

When did the currents laws get enacted?

g.c.

Most after the war. ( the second world war) Some are quite recent. The laws
are not really the problem, it is the thinking and the power behind them
which is the problem.

Greens and others ( although I agree with some of their agenda, I just don´t
like extremists of any colour), don´t actually need to be in power, they
just need a few key positions, and they can force through whatever they
want. Fishery officers have more actual power than elected politicians.
They may be fruitcakes, but they are not stupid! :)

TL
MC

line choice for beginner

In article , Mike Connor
wrote:

One point which has yet failed to come up here, is the fact that is is not
possible to mend a WF line, once the head is outside the rod rings.The same
applies to a shooting head.

Even though one may not cast more than thirty feet of flyline very often,
one may drift a lot further, and mending is an essential technique on moving
water.

For this reason alone, I would not use a WF line.

TL
MC

Mike,
I would have to disagree with this. When I was a US Pacific
Northwestern denzion and mostly salmon and steelhead fished, the
resident line on my eight weight was a Teeny Nymph (I want to say an
800) although very fast sinking it is certainly possible to do a quick
but useful large mend at the begining of the drift. You are certainly
correct in saying a mend as such on a traditional floating line to get
that last bit of drift is not possible but don't rule it out all
together.

Allen

line choice for beginner

"rw" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
ink.net...
SNIP --
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

I would disagree with some points,( indeed I already have), and I have
already stated why, but otherwise, that is a reasonably fair synopsis. You
don´t care much about the extra expense, or the known disadvantages, as you
seem to have more advantages for your type of fishing, and you know what
the things are for and how they work.Of course you are not a beginner, and
apparently not gnawing on a hunger rag either. This can colour one´s
perceptions ! :)

Objectivity can be very subjective! :)

TL
MC