Dual nymphs

On Sat, 3 May 2008 12:51:34 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:

How much money?
Bring your wallet out to the Deschutes, Clearwater, Snake, or a any of a
dozen or so other large Pacific Northwest steelhead rivers anytime between
late August and mid November and I'll show you plenty of good steelhead
fishermen doing just that.

What kind of rods? You're telling me that these steelheaders can have
60 feet of line at their feet, and without one false cast get their
lure out 60 feet? No spey rods. No multi-rollcasts. Just take that
rod and without a falsecast toss it 60 feet. I'd pay good money for
someone to show me how to do that with a 5 weight which is my normal
nymphing rod.

Remember, this entire conversation began when I said that there is no
need to false cast when your rig goes downstream from you, all you
need is a circle cast. That's, maybe, twenty feet of line. Richard
asked why would anyone nymphing use a false cast. RW and I replied to
get more distance.

When steelheading with Peter, I've used an 8 weight, or a 10 ft Sage 7
weight. I could probably pick up thirty feet of line from downstream
and cast it back upstream an additional 30 feet using a circle cast
and no false casting. But it would be a nasty cast with a nymphing
rod (4 - 6 weight).

Dave

Dave LaCourse wrote:

Remember, this entire conversation began when I said that there is no
need to false cast when your rig goes downstream from you, all you
need is a circle cast. That's, maybe, twenty feet of line. Richard
asked why would anyone nymphing use a false cast. RW and I replied to
get more distance.

The point isn't that someone might sometimes cast a lot of line without
false casting.

The point is that there are MANY occasions in typical trout fishing when
you will want to false cast a nymph rig. Rdean seems to think that false
casting a nymph right is NEVER appropriate.

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

rw wrote:
Dave LaCourse wrote:

Remember, this entire conversation began when I said that there is no
need to false cast when your rig goes downstream from you, all you
need is a circle cast. That's, maybe, twenty feet of line. Richard
asked why would anyone nymphing use a false cast. RW and I replied to
get more distance.


The point isn't that someone might sometimes cast a lot of line without
false casting.

The point is that there are MANY occasions in typical trout fishing when
you will want to false cast a nymph rig. Rdean seems to think that false
casting a nymph right is NEVER appropriate.


nymph "rig"

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

On Sat, 03 May 2008 13:35:02 -0700, rw
wrote:

nymph "rig"

Net nanny! seg

On Sat, 03 May 2008 13:31:33 -0700, rw
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote:

Remember, this entire conversation began when I said that there is no
need to false cast when your rig goes downstream from you, all you
need is a circle cast. That's, maybe, twenty feet of line. Richard
asked why would anyone nymphing use a false cast. RW and I replied to
get more distance.

The point isn't that someone might sometimes cast a lot of line without
false casting.

The point is that there are MANY occasions in typical trout fishing when
you will want to false cast a nymph rig. Rdean seems to think that false
casting a nymph right is NEVER appropriate.

Totally agree. And if you are casting a multi-fly set up, even with a
lot of weight, slowing down your cast will help (erase?) any foul-ups
of the rig.

Dave
(who hasn't agreed with RW in a loooooong time. About anything!)

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 May 2008 12:51:34 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:

How much money?
Bring your wallet out to the Deschutes, Clearwater, Snake, or a any of a
dozen or so other large Pacific Northwest steelhead rivers anytime between
late August and mid November and I'll show you plenty of good steelhead
fishermen doing just that.

What kind of rods?

I'm not talking about Spey rods. The good spey casters often can put out 90'
+ (never saw a spey caster false cast). No, I' talking about single handed
6-8wt rods of from 9-10'.

You're telling me that these steelheaders can have
60 feet of line at their feet, and without one false cast get their
lure out 60 feet? No spey rods. No multi-rollcasts. Just take that
rod and without a falsecast toss it 60 feet. I'd pay good money for
someone to show me how to do that with a 5 weight which is my normal
nymphing rod.

Now you are changing the parameters - You originally stated "Well, if you
can pull 60 feet of line off your reel and cast it 60
feet without using a false cast, good luck. I'd pay money to see that one."
That is the statement I responded to.
That statement does not include a requirement for the caster to have the
line at his feet. It does not preclude a backcast. It does not require the
line to be rigged with weighted flies and/or split shot and/or an indicator.
I consider myself at best an average caster ( at least among the PNW
steelheading fraternity), yet, absent all your post hoc restrictions, I
would be glad to demonstrate picking up 60' of line with my 5wt and shooting
it right back out - bring your wallet.
However, I seriously doubt that anyone can nymph effectively with 60' of
line out - nymphing is best done at relatively short range to maintain good
drift control, so why even bring up casting such distances in regard to
nymphing?

Bob Weinberger La Grande, OR






** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sat, 3 May 2008 14:53:39 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:

I consider myself at best an average caster ( at least among the PNW
steelheading fraternity), yet, absent all your post hoc restrictions, I
would be glad to demonstrate picking up 60' of line with my 5wt and shooting
it right back out - bring your wallet.

No great feat that. I've done it with Peter steelheading in Ontario
with an 8 and 7 weight. But how do you originally get the line out
that far. Does not that require a false cast or two. Or, are you
letting line out on the downstream drift. At sometime during that
entire process, a falsecast seems inevitable.

However, I seriously doubt that anyone can nymph effectively with 60' of
line out - nymphing is best done at relatively short range to maintain good
drift control, so why even bring up casting such distances in regard to
nymphing?

High stick nymphing is less than 20 feet (as practiced by me with or
without an indicator). However, there are more than a few occasions
when I will cast 40, even 60 feet with a single nymph, piece of shot,
and a strike indicator, and catch fish *consistently*. Some of the
biggest landlocks I have taken on the Rapid River where by long-line
nymphing. There are more than a few holes on this river that require
a long cast if you are to fish them effectively. One spot in
particular requires a good 50-60 foot cast across two different speed
currents which means I am only going to get a few feet of drag free
drift no matter how hard I mend. But, the saving grace is that if I
do not get a take in those first few moments, there is a chance that I
will get one on the swing, and sometimes even on the retrieve. On
occasion I have felt the take without seeing it.

Dave

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 3 May 2008 14:53:39 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:

No great feat that. I've done it with Peter steelheading in Ontario
with an 8 and 7 weight. But how do you originally get the line out
that far. Does not that require a false cast or two. Or, are you
letting line out on the downstream drift. At sometime during that
entire process, a falsecast seems inevitable.

No, no false casts required or even used. You need to understand that the
type of steelheading I'm referring to uses a wet fly swing, a "greased
line" presentation, or a "waking fly" presentation. None of these involve
casting back upstream, and all result in the line ending up directly
downstream of the caster at the end of the presentation (which wouldn't fit
the classic conception of a drift). To completly cover the water using one
of these methods the most common technique is a cast, swing, step
downstream, cast again, repeat routine. Upon starting at the top of the run,
before proceeding downstream for the cast, swing, step routine, the caster
makes a short cast (no false cast required), strips out a few feet of line
at the end of the swing, picks up the line and shoots out a slightly longer
cast. This is repeated from the same spot to cover the water until the cast
length is at the maximum that the caster feels comfortable with. Then a step
downstream & start of the css routine.

However, I seriously doubt that anyone can nymph effectively with 60' of
line out - nymphing is best done at relatively short range to maintain
good
drift control, so why even bring up casting such distances in regard to
nymphing?

High stick nymphing is less than 20 feet (as practiced by me with or
without an indicator). However, there are more than a few occasions
when I will cast 40, even 60 feet with a single nymph, piece of shot,
and a strike indicator, and catch fish *consistently*. Some of the
biggest landlocks I have taken on the Rapid River where by long-line
nymphing. There are more than a few holes on this river that require
a long cast if you are to fish them effectively. One spot in
particular requires a good 50-60 foot cast across two different speed
currents which means I am only going to get a few feet of drag free
drift no matter how hard I mend. But, the saving grace is that if I
do not get a take in those first few moments, there is a chance that I
will get one on the swing, and sometimes even on the retrieve. On
occasion I have felt the take without seeing it.

Dave

Although you may have a "nymph rig" on, I submit that the longer range
fishing you describe above (or at least 95% of it) is not nymphing as the
meaning of the term is generally accepted to be, but rather wet fly fishing.
At 50-60' especially with cross currents, you can't be sure that you get ANY
drag free drift, so you are essentially wetfly fishing with nymphs instead
of classic wet flys.
Even for those longer casts, a person rigged up as you describe is far
better off using water loading rather than false casting to get the line out
and reach the distance. The open looped slow line speed techniques
required to false cast such rigs without tangles are not all that good for
distance casting, and are next to impossible to execute effectively in the
presence of wind.

Bob Weinberger La Grande,OR.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sat, 3 May 2008 17:05:16 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:

Even for those longer casts, a person rigged up as you describe is far
better off using water loading rather than false casting to get the line out
and reach the distance. The open looped slow line speed techniques
required to false cast such rigs without tangles are not all that good for
distance casting, and are next to impossible to execute effectively in the
presence of wind.

While I agree with the water loading, there are situations where I can
not load the rod that way. One specific spot is a 50+ foot cast
across a couple of currents, and the entire distance the fly travels
is 25 feet and that is directly in front of me (and only half that
distance is drag free). There is no way to water load the rod. The
fly has to be retrieved (sometimes getting hits) before casting again.

I disagree with your assertion that such fishing is not nymphing. For
the first few seconds there is a drag free drift until the current
overtcomes my mends. Most of the takes at this spot are soon after
the fly hits the water, ie during its drag free short journey. After
that, your description of swinging a wet fly would apply.

The only way to fish the spot is exactly as I have described, and you
can only reach it from one spot on the river. I call the spot "Flat
Top". It has three feeding lines that are fished with a conventional
upstream nymph cast of 20 feet, keeping as much line off of the water
as possible, and when the fly gets downstream, a circle cast without
false casting will bring the fly upstream to one of the three feeding
lines. However, knowing that there is that little honey spot fifty or
so feet away, is just too much to ignore, especially since some of my
biggest landlocks (25 inchers) have come from that spot.

It is also possible to fish this spot with a dry. You only get a few
seconds of drag free drift, but it always seems to be enough.

Oh, yeah, forgot to tell you: My casting is horrible. It looks
terrible and clumsy. But sometimes the homliest girl at the dance is
the best dancer. d;o)

Dave

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2008 17:05:16 -0700, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:


Even for those longer casts, a person rigged up as you describe is far
better off using water loading rather than false casting to get the line out
and reach the distance. The open looped slow line speed techniques
required to false cast such rigs without tangles are not all that good for
distance casting, and are next to impossible to execute effectively in the
presence of wind.


While I agree with the water loading, there are situations where I can
not load the rod that way. One specific spot is a 50+ foot cast
across a couple of currents, and the entire distance the fly travels
is 25 feet and that is directly in front of me (and only half that
distance is drag free). There is no way to water load the rod. The
fly has to be retrieved (sometimes getting hits) before casting again.

I disagree with your assertion that such fishing is not nymphing.

Really.

I run into this situation a lot: I have to make a pretty long cast
across the current to reach the seam on the other side. I can't wade
into a better position -- water's too deep and/or current's too strong.
It's not an ideal situation, but it's all I have available.

The only approach is to rig a heavily weighted nymph, false cast once or
twice to get the distance, and then mend big upstream to get a few
seconds of drift. I've caught a few fish that way. If I don't hook up I
fish the swing.

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