line choice for beginner

"Allen Epps" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
et...
SNIP
A bit off topic for the subject but I was intrigued by the idea of
required instruction prior to taking up fishing. Driving, sure (in
fact, most in the US ought to go back for a refresher! ) Hunting, makes
good sense as you're dealing with potentially lethal mistakes, but
fishing? Is it conservation that they want to teach or is it a safety
issue? I fish with Frank Reid regularly so no one is more aware of the
dangers of fishing than me (and I've pulled some pretty stupid stuff
myself I just don't share it!) but I can't think of any classroom or
on-the-water course that would have saved me.

Happy Easter

Allen
Catonsville, MD

Basically it is a combination of a number of things. Conservation, safety,
legal aspects, and of course it has political grounds. "Greens" and other
similar groups are very powerful here, and this tends to make things like
angling and hunting extremely restrictive. Germany is also basically very
bureacratic per se.

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. It would take far too long to
go into all the background here. If you do a search on google, some time
ago ( couple of years maybe?) there was considerable discussion on here
about it.

Before anybody gets their knickers in a terrible twist, as I live here, I am
subject to the laws here, as is everybody else. Whether I am principally for
or against them, either generally or specifically, is quite another matter.

TL
MC

In article , Mike Connor
wrote:

"Allen Epps" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
et...
SNIP
A bit off topic for the subject but I was intrigued by the idea of
required instruction prior to taking up fishing. Driving, sure (in
fact, most in the US ought to go back for a refresher! ) Hunting, makes
good sense as you're dealing with potentially lethal mistakes, but
fishing? Is it conservation that they want to teach or is it a safety
issue? I fish with Frank Reid regularly so no one is more aware of the
dangers of fishing than me (and I've pulled some pretty stupid stuff
myself I just don't share it!) but I can't think of any classroom or
on-the-water course that would have saved me.

Happy Easter

Allen
Catonsville, MD

Basically it is a combination of a number of things. Conservation, safety,
legal aspects, and of course it has political grounds. "Greens" and other
similar groups are very powerful here, and this tends to make things like
angling and hunting extremely restrictive. Germany is also basically very
bureacratic per se.

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. It would take far too long to
go into all the background here. If you do a search on google, some time
ago ( couple of years maybe?) there was considerable discussion on here
about it.

Before anybody gets their knickers in a terrible twist, as I live here, I am
subject to the laws here, as is everybody else. Whether I am principally for
or against them, either generally or specifically, is quite another matter.

TL
MC

Mike,
Wow, hard to believe that things can go that wrong with something as
important to my "life liberty and pursuit of happiness" as basic as
fishing. I've heard similar horror stories about the Green's in
Australia from a liasion officer. Thanks for the info.

Allen

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

"Allen Epps" wrote in message
et...
In article , Mike Connor
wrote:

snipped

With regard to the "thousands" of people I have taught to cast. This
sounds
ridiculous of course, but is a fact. Where I live, people are obliged to
take a number of tests before they can go fishing. For a long time I
instructed large numbers of people wishing to do this. Often up to a
hundred or more at a time, and several times a year. Normally, most
could
cast well enough to pass the test after two Saturday mornings
instruction,
and a couple of days practicing on their own.

TL
MC

Mike,

A bit off topic for the subject but I was intrigued by the idea of
required instruction prior to taking up fishing. Driving, sure (in
fact, most in the US ought to go back for a refresher! ) Hunting, makes
good sense as you're dealing with potentially lethal mistakes, but
fishing? Is it conservation that they want to teach or is it a safety
issue? I fish with Frank Reid regularly so no one is more aware of the
dangers of fishing than me (and I've pulled some pretty stupid stuff
myself I just don't share it!) but I can't think of any classroom or
on-the-water course that would have saved me.

Happy Easter

Allen
Catonsville, MD

Hi Allen,
Mike and I had a little bit of recollection a few years ago as I recall
about fishing in Germany. As you were in the military, as me, certain
"rules", at the time were made much easier for US military personnel.
Certainly the standard Germany bureaucratic things happen, but as I recall,
I had to only show a US license, from any state, spend a long time waiting
in an office, a military ID, then get a license. . .with a small fee.
Of course, most areas after that were pay as you go, and stocked trout, but
kinda neat, if flyfishing was allowed. ( generally couldn't catch and
release) Residents have to go through a much more regulated process to get
a license. . .uhhh . . .with money. BestWishes,
DaveMohnsen
Denver

In article . net,
DaveMohnsen wrote:

"Allen Epps" wrote in message
et...
In article , Mike Connor
wrote:

snipped

With regard to the "thousands" of people I have taught to cast. This
sounds
ridiculous of course, but is a fact. Where I live, people are obliged to
take a number of tests before they can go fishing. For a long time I
instructed large numbers of people wishing to do this. Often up to a
hundred or more at a time, and several times a year. Normally, most
could
cast well enough to pass the test after two Saturday mornings
instruction,
and a couple of days practicing on their own.

TL
MC

Mike,

A bit off topic for the subject but I was intrigued by the idea of
required instruction prior to taking up fishing. Driving, sure (in
fact, most in the US ought to go back for a refresher! ) Hunting, makes
good sense as you're dealing with potentially lethal mistakes, but
fishing? Is it conservation that they want to teach or is it a safety
issue? I fish with Frank Reid regularly so no one is more aware of the
dangers of fishing than me (and I've pulled some pretty stupid stuff
myself I just don't share it!) but I can't think of any classroom or
on-the-water course that would have saved me.

Happy Easter

Allen
Catonsville, MD

Hi Allen,
Mike and I had a little bit of recollection a few years ago as I recall
about fishing in Germany. As you were in the military, as me, certain
"rules", at the time were made much easier for US military personnel.
Certainly the standard Germany bureaucratic things happen, but as I recall,
I had to only show a US license, from any state, spend a long time waiting
in an office, a military ID, then get a license. . .with a small fee.
Of course, most areas after that were pay as you go, and stocked trout, but
kinda neat, if flyfishing was allowed. ( generally couldn't catch and
release) Residents have to go through a much more regulated process to get
a license. . .uhhh . . .with money. BestWishes,
DaveMohnsen
Denver

Dave,
I was lucky enough to make a half dozen trips to Alaska (Yakitat) with
my grandfather before he passed away. There was always the same group
of four German gentleman there fishing at the same time as us (late
June for Sockeyes and Kings) . Only one spoke any English and he spoke
about how much different the fishing was but we really didn't talk
about regulations more just the type and environment. One of the other
gents was the tyer of the group and he and I would set our vices up on
the porch rail outside our rooms and tie after dinner. I recall a
couple of the hundreds of fish we caught but more sharing a common
interest without little means to communicate. I was always popular
though since I brought beer from Seattle as the only beer they had
available was "both kinds, Bud and Bud light"
When I was in Aviano for the Kosovo debacle I saw lot of very large
rainbows in the river near where we were staying and one of the other
guys looked into fishing but it seemed much as you said, money and
paperwork and we really didn't have much time to do any anyway.

Thanks for the info.

Allen

"DaveMohnsen" schrieb im
Newsbeitrag ink.net...

"Allen Epps" wrote in message
et...
In article , Mike Connor
wrote:

snipped

With regard to the "thousands" of people I have taught to cast. This
sounds
ridiculous of course, but is a fact. Where I live, people are obliged
to
take a number of tests before they can go fishing. For a long time I
instructed large numbers of people wishing to do this. Often up to a
hundred or more at a time, and several times a year. Normally, most
could
cast well enough to pass the test after two Saturday mornings
instruction,
and a couple of days practicing on their own.

TL
MC

Mike,

A bit off topic for the subject but I was intrigued by the idea of
required instruction prior to taking up fishing. Driving, sure (in
fact, most in the US ought to go back for a refresher! ) Hunting, makes
good sense as you're dealing with potentially lethal mistakes, but
fishing? Is it conservation that they want to teach or is it a safety
issue? I fish with Frank Reid regularly so no one is more aware of the
dangers of fishing than me (and I've pulled some pretty stupid stuff
myself I just don't share it!) but I can't think of any classroom or
on-the-water course that would have saved me.

Happy Easter

Allen
Catonsville, MD

Hi Allen,
Mike and I had a little bit of recollection a few years ago as I recall
about fishing in Germany. As you were in the military, as me, certain
"rules", at the time were made much easier for US military personnel.
Certainly the standard Germany bureaucratic things happen, but as I
recall,
I had to only show a US license, from any state, spend a long time waiting
in an office, a military ID, then get a license. . .with a small fee.
Of course, most areas after that were pay as you go, and stocked trout,
but
kinda neat, if flyfishing was allowed. ( generally couldn't catch and
release) Residents have to go through a much more regulated process to
get
a license. . .uhhh . . .with money. BestWishes,
DaveMohnsen
Denver



It is not actually all that expensive to get a licence. Most clubs charge
about thirty dollars for the complete course. Registered and examined
instructors give their time free. ( Although some try to make money
flogging gear, or "sponsoring" tackle shops!).

The licence itself is also cheap enough, although this varies from State to
State. In some places it must be renewed ( for a fee) yearly, in others at
three year intervals, and in still others it is for life. German fishery law
is governed federally, but national law overrides it.

As a foreigner, you can get a licence relatively easily, but you will still
have problems finding somewhere to fish, as most clubs, ( who have the best
water) will not allow anybody to fish who has not passed the test, even if
they have a licence! Catch 22.

You can fish put and takes, and private water for a fee, as long as you have
a licence.

For more info, have a look here;

http://www.cybertrout.com/germany.htm

http://www.users.odn.de/~odn03061/

TL
MC

Mike Connor wrote:

Usually, people are advised to use a WF line one rating up from the rod
rating. For a long time, most rods had two ratings marked on the butt i.e
#6/#7 or similar.
This was usually a manufacturers recommendation that the rod would cast a
DT#6 or a WF#7. This is because a WF line of the same rating as the DT
would be too light to load the rod at short range, Many beginners still
have difficulty even when using a WF one rating higher, as this also does
not load the rod well at short range. If you have trouble loading the rod,
then use a DT one rating up.

This got my attention and prompts a question. I'm not trying to irritate
or criticize you, Mike. I'm genuinely curious.

If, as you say (and I believe), "there is no difference in the tapers at
this distance [30 feet], (on standard lines)," why is a WF "lighter"
than a DT and more difficult to load the rod?

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

"rw" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
ink.net...
SNIP
This got my attention and prompts a question. I'm not trying to irritate
or criticize you, Mike. I'm genuinely curious.

If, as you say (and I believe), "there is no difference in the tapers at
this distance [30 feet], (on standard lines)," why is a WF "lighter"
than a DT and more difficult to load the rod?

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

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.

Often, beginners are told that a WF will load the rod more easily. This is
of course only true if a heavier WF is used! And applies equally well to any
other line. Beginners are not told this of course! Presumably because
they would then see through the marketing ploy, or because those advising
them don´t know any better! It is not necessarily malicious.

AFTM In grains In grams In ounces
3 100 +/- 6 6.48 0.228
4 120 +/- 6 7.78 0.274
5 140 +/- 6 9.07 0.32
6 160 +/- 8 10.42 0.366
7 185 +/- 8 11.99 0.422
8 210 +/- 8 13.61 0.48
9 240 +/- 10 15.55 0.55
10 280 +/- 10 18.14 0.64
11 330 +/- 12 21.38 0.75
12 380 +/- 12 24.62 0.86

From the table, which applies to the first thirty feet of flyline,
(excluding the level tip if present), it can be seen that 30 feet of #6 DT
weighs ca. 160 grains.
30 feet of #6 WF weighs exactly the same, ca. 160 grains.

If you use a WF one rating higher, then that is a WF#7 which weighs 185
grains. This means that the heavier WF will load the rod sooner, and more
easily at short range.

Of course, so will a DT#7 which also weighs 185 grains.

The tapers may vary slightly, but this is basically immaterial, it is the
weight that counts. This table applies to all standard flylines, regardless
of any other characteristics they may have.

30 feet of #6 flyline. whether DT WF ST BT, etc etc weighs ca. 160 grains.

I find it rather surprising that you and others seem to think that I am
easily irritated by criticism etc. This is not the case. I just like to try
and keep to the facts, that´s all. If I am wrong about something, ( which
has been known to occur!), and somebody points this out, then I accept it.
It would be quite pointless doing otherwise.

While opinions may differ, and some may interpret facts in some other way,
one can not change the basic facts.

TL
MC

the +/- after the grain weight is the allowed manufacturing tolerance.

TL
MC

Mike Connor wrote:

AFTM In grains In grams In ounces
3 100 +/- 6 6.48 0.228
4 120 +/- 6 7.78 0.274
5 140 +/- 6 9.07 0.32
6 160 +/- 8 10.42 0.366
7 185 +/- 8 11.99 0.422
8 210 +/- 8 13.61 0.48
9 240 +/- 10 15.55 0.55
10 280 +/- 10 18.14 0.64
11 330 +/- 12 21.38 0.75
12 380 +/- 12 24.62 0.86


From what I understand, some of the new lines out there are really now
outside the above limits. IE. a line sold as a 5 weight is really about
a 5 and a 1/2 weight or even slightly more. (Maybe someone in the
business can comment)

When the line manufacturers start deviating from a "standard" it makes
it difficult for the public to make a reasonable decision. Add to this
all the new specialty lines out there, and the decision is even harder.

Willi