in defense of Tim

In article , rw56
says...
Tim has a point of view about C&R. It's a pretty extreme point of view,
and not one I share wholeheartedly by any means, but it has a logical
consistency, even if he does undermine his case with some bogus
factoids. It's made me think about what I'm doing.

At least 95% of the fishing I do is C&R. I might conceivably catch 30 to
50 fish in a day if I worked at it (on a really good day), but that
"score" wouldn't reflect the quality of the fishing, and I'm not
interested in it. I like the memory of one or two good fish hooked and
landed in a perfect spot, maybe with a difficult presentation, where I
could actually foresee the whole thing playing out ahead of time. That
is trout fishing Nirvana to me.

Think about it, C&R ROFF fishermen. Don't count fish. Quit and be
satisfied once you feel good about the outing. Enjoy the scenery. Take
some photos. That's a point where Tim is correct, I believe, but he
doesn't express it in those terms.

Funny thing is, no one disagrees with this aspect. Odd thing is, if
I'm fishing to keep fish, I'll keep fishing until I limit out.
I've had 50+ C&K fishing day, but I doubt if I've ever had more
than a 15 fish C&R day. If I'm fishing just to fish, I don't count
fish. I just enjoy fishing. If it's too easy, I'll try for the perfect
presentation or try to get the fly into a difficult location or even
just sit and watch the scenery.

If he'd just get out of the ethical/moral BS, I doubt many of us
would disagree. I still hope to fish with Timmy someday.....and
I'm much nicer on usenet than I am in person. ;-)
- Ken

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:48:03 -0700, wrote:

If he'd just get out of the ethical/moral BS, I doubt many of us
would disagree. I still hope to fish with Timmy someday.....and
I'm much nicer on usenet than I am in person. ;-)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Evil Ken says just the opposite....... ummm,
and he is.

I once broke the point off on a Goddard Caddis but continued to fish
it. I would set the "hook" on every rise and experience that first
pull or resistance before the fish was off and away. I fished that
fly for an hour, very satisfied in the 0 fish landed results.

Dave

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:48:03 -0700, wrote:

If he'd just get out of the ethical/moral BS, I doubt many of us
would disagree. I still hope to fish with Timmy someday.....and
I'm much nicer on usenet than I am in person. ;-)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Evil Ken says just the opposite....... ummm,
and he is.

I once broke the point off on a Goddard Caddis but continued to fish
it. I would set the "hook" on every rise and experience that first
pull or resistance before the fish was off and away. I fished that
fly for an hour, very satisfied in the 0 fish landed results.

Dave








One hook maker used to offer TAG, or touch and go hooks, with an eye at
each end.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:48:03 -0700, wrote:

If he'd just get out of the ethical/moral BS, I doubt many of us
would disagree. I still hope to fish with Timmy someday.....and
I'm much nicer on usenet than I am in person. ;-)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Evil Ken says just the opposite....... ummm,
and he is.

I once broke the point off on a Goddard Caddis but continued to fish
it. I would set the "hook" on every rise and experience that first
pull or resistance before the fish was off and away. I fished that
fly for an hour, very satisfied in the 0 fish landed results.

Dave

I always wanted to try that when the river was closed. I figure that if I
don't have any "hooks" I'm not fishing. I wonder if I could ever sell that
arguement to a game warden? I haven't taken the risk yet.

Chas
remove fly fish to e mail directly