bootfoot wader question
 

what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake

Try them on. They are the best thing for wading the flats in cold weather
but the mud will suck them off your feet if you buy them in the right size.
For streams, I'm planning on stocking foot and wading boots this year. More
versatile and most likely safer as well.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
When the dawn came up like thunder

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm

"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if any real
walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose they
are ok.

yfitp
wayno

snakefiddler wrote:

what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring
comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420
denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about
the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and

anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input
would be appreciated.

Bootfoot waders imo are easier to get into and some say they have an
easier time keeping their feet warm in them. However those are trade
offs in that you can generally get a better fit using stocking foot
waders and separate wading boots. Especially if you think you might do
any extended walking in the waders.

I assume the three forks 420 denier's are from the mail order mega
store. I would suggest you save up a few more then look at the low end
simms, orvis, dan bailey's etc breathables.

On 2/2/05 9:09 AM, in article , "snakefiddler"
wrote:

what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

Like wayne (as opposed to Wayne), I started out with bootfoot waders,
although it probably wasn't as many years ago as it was for the barrister
from tons, me being a youngster and all, and comparatively new to angling
with the fly. It was indeed those same 3forks cheapos that I got, and they
were fine for three or four seasons. As others have mentioned, they are
indeed easier to get into, but if you are walking any distance, or in fact
if you plan on being on your feet for any length of time, they are not so
good. No foot support, and any hike will bring blisters up faster than...
well, fast. When I moved up from the 3forks, I got low end breathables and
a good pair of sturdy boots and am very happy with the combo. Much more
comfortable in nearly all weather, and much better for hikes, which I would
imagine might come in handy on those mountain streams in tons. My two
centavos, and YMMV of course.

Bill

Wayne Harrison wrote:
"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards. Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp
, but only in men's sizes. The other problem with bootfoot waders is
drying them after a dunking.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

"Tim J." wrote in message
...
Wayne Harrison wrote:
"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards.


Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp


hmm, they look great timmy, but you must have forgotten that i'm living on a
student budget :-)

snake


, but only in men's sizes. The other problem with bootfoot waders is
drying them after a dunking.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

"Tim J." wrote in message
...
Wayne Harrison wrote:
"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards.


Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp


hmm, they look great timmy, but you must have forgotten that i'm living on a
student budget :-)

snake


, but only in men's sizes. The other problem with bootfoot waders is
drying them after a dunking.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

The knock on bootfoot waders is that you do not have as much ankle support.
They are much looser in fit. You do not have shoe laces to tighten and bind
the shoe to your foot. However, when it comes to neoprene, they are much
easier to put on and off than stockingfoot waders. . Breathable stocking
foot waders are easier to take off, so there is not much of an advantage
there.
If you are not in difficult wading, deep, sticky muck, rocks that roll under
your feet, etc, then bootfoot are ok.



"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake

snakefiddler wrote:
"Tim J." wrote in message
...
Wayne Harrison wrote:
"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor,
and anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive*
;-) input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards.

Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp

hmm, they look great timmy, but you must have forgotten that i'm
living on a student budget :-)

If you haven't learned by now, I forget NOTHING! It's time to put down
your bongos and go get a real job. There is no way to sustain fly
fishing habits on a student's budget. ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake
I only use the bootfoots when getting in and out of a driftboat to fish
shoals. Stocking foot for everything else.

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake

DON"T get the bootfoot waders! What you have will suffice for now. You
won't fish enough before the water warm up to wet wading. Just continue to
use your neos until the water warms up enough to wet wade.

Or go with a pair of these: http://tinyurl.com/43u4c the $98.00 stocking
foot hippers.

I have a pair of the original version, before they were offered in the
neo-booty. Mine are just nylon all the way down to the tip of the toes. I
just put on a pair of neo booties over them to take up the space in my
wading boots. They are great, as they are light-weight and and will keep
your legs warm with thermals or fleece under them.

Caution: You don't want to step in a hole over your hip waders though, as
you will freeze your ball......well you get my drift. They are easy to
empty of water, should you go in over them, as all you have to do is lie on
your back and lift your legs above your head.

Mark --also, you hike too much for bootfoot waders.--

snakefiddler wrote:
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake


a waste of money. too cumbersome and heavy for nc rock-hopping and
clambering about. save up and buy some low end breathables instead.
orvis makes a clearwater endura stockingfoot that sells for $129. you'll
be more comfortable and get more productive use out of the breathables.

jeff

"Mark H. Bowen" wrote in message
. ..

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420
denier's, but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering
about the comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability
factor, and anything else i may not know to ask about. any
*constructive* ;-) input would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake

DON"T get the bootfoot waders! What you have will suffice for now. You
won't fish enough before the water warm up to wet wading. Just continue
to use your neos until the water warms up enough to wet wade.

well, you know my fishing "habits" as well, if not better thatn anyone.
based on previous responses, i came to the conclusion that bootfoot waders
might not be a good idea. as *you*, i frequently do a lot of hiking when i
fish, particularly in the warmer weather. and while i enjoy wet wading so,
so much, there are times i get into water with a lot of "stuuf" in it, and
was thinking it might be a good idea to have something for those occasions.


i'll think about hipsters. i do like to wade in deep(ish) water, though.
and what about the hiking factor with those booted hipsters?
(hmmm, the web site seems to have dissapeared)


t put on a pair of neo booties over them to take up the space in my wading
boots. They are great, as they are light-weight and and will keep your
legs warm with thermals or fleece under them.

Caution: You don't want to step in a hole over your hip waders though, as
you will freeze your ball......

;-)


well you get my drift. They are easy to
empty of water, should you go in over them, as all you have to do is lie
on your back and lift your legs above your head.

i'm gonna kick your ass for that one, op.......


Mark --also, you hike too much for bootfoot waders.--

yeah, i got that impression ;-)

i did some searching today, and i found what seem to be a pretty sweet pair
of women's flyweights from l.l. bean- in a stocking foot.

aside from not really wanting a bootfoot, i am very nearly in love with the
wading boots i have. they are my first pair (sentimental value), they feel
absolutely wonderful on my feet, and i would feel as if i was betraying an
old friend should i slip my pods into anything else- i have developed a sort
of relationship with them. (go ahead, ya'll can laugh if you want g)
plus, they were given to me by a good friend.....

thanks mark, good to have input from someone who knows how i fish

snake

snakefiddler wrote:
i did some searching today, and i found what seem to be a pretty
sweet pair
of women's flyweights from l.l. bean- in a stocking foot.

snake

I was just about to post the link to LL Bean. IMHO, they have the best
customer service out there. If, for whatever reason, you don't like
them, return them for a full refund. They come with a real lifetime
warranty.

brians

"brians" wrote in message
...
snakefiddler wrote:
i did some searching today, and i found what seem to be a pretty sweet
pair
of women's flyweights from l.l. bean- in a stocking foot.

snake

I was just about to post the link to LL Bean. IMHO, they have the best
customer service out there. If, for whatever reason, you don't like them,
return them for a full refund. They come with a real lifetime warranty.

brians


thanks for that recommendation, brian

snakefiddler

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
well you get my drift. They are easy to
empty of water, should you go in over them, as all you have to do is lie
on your back and lift your legs above your head.

i'm gonna kick your ass for that one, op.......

You've become tainted by the Kenny virus! No innuendo to be taken from my
statement. I have had to empty out mu hip waders on numerous occasions and
the best way to do it is on my back with my legs in the air. I was speakin'
in general, above.


i did some searching today, and i found what seem to be a pretty sweet
pair of women's flyweights from l.l. bean- in a stocking foot.

If I were you, I would take Jeff's suggestion and get a pair of light-weight
breathable. The cost wouldn't be much greater than the pair of hippers that
I suggested. I didn't see the LL Bean waders that you talked about, but I
bet they'd do just fine.

Mark
thanks mark, good to have input from someone who knows how i fish

"bearsbuddy" wrote in message
...

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
well you get my drift. They are easy to
empty of water, should you go in over them, as all you have to do is lie
on your back and lift your legs above your head.

i'm gonna kick your ass for that one, op......


You've become tainted by the Kenny virus! No innuendo to be taken from
my
statement.

i know, op- i was just playin with ya.
still friends? ;-}


I have had to empty out mu hip waders on numerous occasions and
the best way to do it is on my back with my legs in the air.

thanks for the visual -
dammit SEG

I was speakin' in general, above.


i did some searching today, and i found what seem to be a pretty sweet
pair of women's flyweights from l.l. bean- in a stocking foot.



If I were you, I would take Jeff's suggestion and get a pair of
light-weight breathable. The cost wouldn't be much greater than the pair
of hippers that I suggested.

yeah, 49 bucks - fits my budget

snake


I didn't see the LL Bean waders that you talked about, but I bet they'd do
just fine.

Mark
thanks mark, good to have input from someone who knows how i fish

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake


Personally, I buy lots more pairs of boots than I do waders. The boots wear
out quicker. I look at bootfoot waders as a TV/VCR combination. One breaks
and you're liable to be out of both.

John

snakefiddler wrote:
"Tim J." wrote in message
...

Wayne Harrison wrote:

"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the

comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards.



Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp



hmm, they look great timmy, but you must have forgotten that i'm living on a
student budget :-)

snake



, but only in men's sizes. The other problem with bootfoot waders is
drying them after a dunking.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj



student budget or not, I would be careful about buying the three forks
denier waders. I had a pair that kind of desintegrated after 2 seasons.
of course, I was not careful about storage after fishing, but still.

the best "budget" waders I have are a pair of orvis bootfoot hippers
that are going on their fifth season,purchased on sale at the local fly
shop for less than $40.

of course hippers have limits, but the point is be careful about "bargains".

snakefiddler wrote:
"Tim J." wrote in message
...

Wayne Harrison wrote:

"snakefiddler" wrote

i'm wondering about the

comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-)
input would be appreciated.

when i first started, i used bootfoots. they were miserable if
any real walking was involved, and hiking was damn near suicidal.

but, if you are just going from the car to the stream, i suppose
they are ok.

I'll second that. I still use bootfoot hippers (no comments, Reid)
sometimes, but I won't use them if I have to walk more than a few
hundred yards.



Orvis just came out with these: http://tinyurl.com/5f8xp



hmm, they look great timmy, but you must have forgotten that i'm living on a
student budget :-)

snake



, but only in men's sizes. The other problem with bootfoot waders is
drying them after a dunking.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj



student budget or not, I would be careful about buying the three forks
denier waders. I had a pair that kind of desintegrated after 2 seasons.
of course, I was not careful about storage after fishing, but still.

the best "budget" waders I have are a pair of orvis bootfoot hippers
that are going on their fifth season,purchased on sale at the local fly
shop for less than $40.

of course hippers have limits, but the point is be careful about "bargains".

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, snakefiddler wrote:

what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,

I had a pair once. Seams leaked after two trips.

Mu

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, snakefiddler wrote:

what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,

I had a pair once. Seams leaked after two trips.

Mu

Nah, snake. You don't want boot foots for the kind of streams you fish and
the kind of fishing you do. No dexterity, too slippery, too cumbersome.

Here's what you do. Get the stocking foot breathables with plenty of room in
the seat. And don't worry about how they look, when one foot is down in the
hole and you're trying to stick your other foot on top of the rock that is
over your head your figure will show off nicely enough, thank you very much.

You will need wading boots with plenty of room for your stocking foot..if
they are snug, they are too small. You want to have room for foot wiggle,
just as in good hiking boots or your feet will get cold due to your
circulation being cut off. Get wading boots with a 'thin' insert or
cushion. You stocking foot wader will provide plenty of padding for the
soles of your feet.

Then when it gets too warm for waders, you put a Dr. watshisname cushioned
insert in your wading boots and this will take up the slack left by not
having the stocking foot.

That way you can use the same boots for cold and warm weather.

john


"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake

"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake


Here's my experience, in a nutshell.

First, I fished from shore. Then I realized that, for every yard I could
walk deeper into the water, it increased my casting distance 2 yards out
into the deeps. So then I got some mudboots. Mid-calf. It was less than a
month before I realized I needed to get farther out. So then I got some hip
waders (bootfoot). That lasted until the end of a single season. I realized
that I was constantly pushing the boundary and soaking my legs, and needed
some honest waders. So I got some mid-belly ones, stockingfoot (as I wanted
to be able to wear them in cool and cold water and needed to be able to
accomodate different arrangements of socks). Those got stolen, so my next
purchase was some stockingfoot armpit-depth waders. Which I love. But those
mudboots and bootfoot hipwaders live forever in my closet.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with your question, but you asked for my
experience.

Hey, wasn't there a thread about a year ago about some Simms waders for sale
on EBay from some high-maintenance woman who was dumping her suitor, and his
gifts? Too bad you didn't get in on those....

--riverman

Hey, wasn't there a thread about a year ago about some Simms waders for
sale
on EBay from some high-maintenance woman who was dumping her suitor, and
his gifts? Too bad you didn't get in on those....


http://tinyurl.com/6mt7l

I told you so!!!!!
:-)

--riverman

riverman wrote:
I realized
that I was constantly pushing the boundary and soaking my legs, and needed
some honest waders.

--riverman


it's funny about hip boots, I think I get a leg or both legs wet to some
degree every time I wear them :)

I think it's from (a) getting engrossed in fishing and forgetting and
(b) the psychology of calling them "hip" boots, for really they only
keep you dry to just below your crotch, whereas my "hip" is closer
to my belt line.

The only exception to getting my legs wet is when fishing real
small brookie streams where I'm essentially rock-hopping. Of course,
in those cases I probably could get by without them altogether....

Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

eric


On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 19:26:02 +0100, "riverman"
wrote:


"snakefiddler" wrote in message
...
what has been ya'll's experience with bootfoot waders? with spring comin
(soon i hope) i am thinking of getting a pair of three forks 420 denier's,
but they only come in a bootfoot for women. so, i'm wondering about the
comfort level of the boot, as well as the maneuverability factor, and
anything else i may not know to ask about. any *constructive* ;-) input
would be appreciated.

thanks-
snake


Here's my experience, in a nutshell.

First, I fished from shore. Then I realized that, for every yard I could
walk deeper into the water, it increased my casting distance 2 yards out
into the deeps. So then I got some mudboots. Mid-calf. It was less than a
month before I realized I needed to get farther out. So then I got some hip
waders (bootfoot). That lasted until the end of a single season. I realized
that I was constantly pushing the boundary and soaking my legs, and needed
some honest waders. So I got some mid-belly ones, stockingfoot (as I wanted
to be able to wear them in cool and cold water and needed to be able to
accomodate different arrangements of socks). Those got stolen, so my next
purchase was some stockingfoot armpit-depth waders. Which I love. But those
mudboots and bootfoot hipwaders live forever in my closet.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with your question, but you asked for my
experience.

Hey, wasn't there a thread about a year ago about some Simms waders for sale
on EBay from some high-maintenance woman who was dumping her suitor, and his
gifts? Too bad you didn't get in on those....

--riverman

Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?

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

"rw" wrote in message
m...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

--riverman

I always thought it was funny that, here in the West anyway, many
waders get as far from shore as they can and can and cast out into the
river til hell wouldn't have it. And the floaters in the river hammer
the shore where the waders would be standing. I think it;s a case of
the grass being greener elsewhere.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman"
wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
om...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

--riverman

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman" wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
om...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

Hmmm...."I don't think so, Tim"

That extra yard of backcast is the same yard when it's in front of you...

/daytripper (sorry ;-)

"riverman" wrote in message
...

Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you
get another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees.
So your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

It may help a mediocre caster in a few situations but that is not
neccessarily true. The length of the total cast is not dependent upon the
length of one's backcast.

"daytripper" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman" wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
. com...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you
get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

Hmmm...."I don't think so, Tim"

That extra yard of backcast is the same yard when it's in front of you...

/daytripper (sorry ;-)


That's correct. And you are delivering that extra yard of backcast from a
position further out in the river.
Look at it this way. If there are trees right against the bank, you have to
be standing 5 yards from shore to reach 10 yards into the river. If you step
another yard further out, you are 6 yards out, and you can reach 12 yards
from shore. 1 yard further out = 2 yards gain.

--riverman (sorry :-)

"Wayne Knight" wrote in message
...

"riverman" wrote in message
...

Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you
get another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the
trees. So your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you
wade.

It may help a mediocre caster in a few situations but that is not
neccessarily true. The length of the total cast is not dependent upon the
length of one's backcast.



Thats true, but having a good clear backcast doesn't hurt. Anyway, at the
time I was a medicre caster, and changing from mudboots to hip waders did
enable me to cover water that was more than a foot deep. It didn't help me
catch any more fish, bit at least I could spook more.

--riverman

Please don't step on the fish.

Big Dale

On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:53:57 -0500, daytripper
wrote:

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman" wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
. com...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

Hmmm...."I don't think so, Tim"

That extra yard of backcast is the same yard when it's in front of you...

Myron measures casting distance as distance from shore. If you are 80' from
shore you can make 90' casts with a 9' rod and only 1' of line. g
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com/ - photo galleries
http://www.chocphoto.com/roff

"Charlie Choc" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:53:57 -0500, daytripper

wrote:

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman" wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
.com...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you
get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees. So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

Hmmm...."I don't think so, Tim"

That extra yard of backcast is the same yard when it's in front of you...

Myron measures casting distance as distance from shore. If you are 80'
from
shore you can make 90' casts with a 9' rod and only 1' of line. g
--

Yuk yuk and no I don't. Here is the original statement:
"Then I realized that, for every yard I could walk deeper into the water, it
increased my casting distance 2 yards out into the deeps."

So tell me, Mr Whitman, how you would have phrased it?

--riverman

"riverman" wrote in message
...

"Charlie Choc" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:53:57 -0500, daytripper

wrote:

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:55:07 +0100, "riverman" wrote:


"rw" wrote in message
g.com...
Eric wrote:
Hi..

I don't understand how you get 2 yards casting distance for every
yard
you walk out from shore.

More room for the backcast?



Yep. You gain a yard of distance because you are a yard deeper. And you
get
another yard of line out because you're a yard further from the trees.
So
your casts reach 2 yards farther out for every yard deeper you wade.

Hmmm...."I don't think so, Tim"

That extra yard of backcast is the same yard when it's in front of you...

Myron measures casting distance as distance from shore. If you are 80'
from
shore you can make 90' casts with a 9' rod and only 1' of line. g
--

Yuk yuk and no I don't. Here is the original statement:
"Then I realized that, for every yard I could walk deeper into the water,
it increased my casting distance 2 yards out into the deeps."


Perhaps the phrase I should have used was 'casting reach'?

--riverman

"riverman" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Yuk yuk and no I don't. Here is the original statement:
"Then I realized that, for every yard I could walk deeper into the water,
it
increased my casting distance 2 yards out into the deeps."

So tell me, Mr Whitman, how you would have phrased it?

--riverman




Not exactly Mr.Whitman, but...........

When you wade out to where you can cast,
you may find that your boots are stuck fast,
or worse still, quite grim,
you are over the brim,
and dry feet are a thing of the past!

To cast a very long line, you will see,
wherever you happen to be,
to avoid the hibiscus
walk on the meniscus!
But we still wont believe you´re J.C.!

Laurels too can be quite a bad pain,
your roll casting you must then train,
of snags you´ll be free,
even in old NC,
and this saves quite remarkable strain!

There are some who have mastered the art,
even though now classed as "old fart"
from the trees you´ll be freed,
just do a "half-reid",
This is not the end, it´s a start!

Now where there´s a will there´s a way,
and some may advise you to Spey,
no need for rancour,
just set a good anchor,
and your fly will be well on its way!

When your target is at ninety feet,
there is no recourse in deceit,
if you stay on the bank,
you just have to rank,
up with those who can manage the feat!

You may heave and haul and lose sweat,
you may curse and bluster, and fret,
but to cast from the banks,
will bring you no thanks
to reach ninety you´ll have to get wet!

TL
MC