Question:

Putting all that together, I gather that I haven’t broken a rod while casting because I use a roll cast or retrieve enough of a wet line to avoid that overload on the lift, and I’m never over bending the rod while casting.  The fatal errors come in the heat of battle. The more I think about it, I see what you mean about casting being the heaviest force on the rod. Thanks for your help, Chas

Response:

The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod.

If it’s done right the rod is already fully loaded and you are just accelerating the line and, more importantly, the tip of the line. — Charlie…

Response:

The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. If it’s done right the rod is already fully loaded and you are just accelerating the line and, more importantly, the tip of the line. — Charlie…

Charlie, Your analysis of hauling to increase line speed and thus increasing casting distance is correct.  If it was a matter of loading the rod as rw says the caster would only have to apply more power to accomplish this. Ernie

Response:

rw, If the haul is done correctly the rod is fully loaded and any additional speed must be imparted to the line by foreword movement of your arm and by pulling "hauling" the line through the guides. Ernie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod.

Response:

Charlie, Your analysis of hauling to increase line speed and thus increasing casting distance is correct.  If it was a matter of loading the rod as rw says the caster would only have to apply more power to accomplish this. Ernie

I’m not saying that the *point* of hauling is to load the rod. I’m saying only that one *effect* of hauling is additional loading of the rod. It has to have that effect — there’s no way around it. Hauling accelerates the line, which generates a force on the rod tip. (F=ma) Consider three cases: 1. After loading the rod on the forward cast (with no hauling), you accidently lose your grip on the line with your noncasting hand. The acceleration of the line vanishes, the force on the rod tip vanishes, the rod straightens without appreciably affecting the line, and the line falls on the water in a bloody mess. 2. You make a normal forward cast without hauling, just holding the line tight. A force is applied to the line by the rod tip, causing acceleration of the line. An equal and opposite force is applied to the rod top, causing loading of the rod. 3. You make a forward cast while hauling. The action of the noncasting hand, pulling on the line, causes an *additional* acceleration of the line. This additional acceleration causes an *additional* force on the rod tip, resulting in additional loading of the rod. If you ignore things like friction, you could replace the effect (on the rod) of hauling by a transient additional stress in the line, and the rod would have no way of "knowing" the difference. It would simply load more. (The line would behave very differently, though.) These three cases are really just points in a continuum. Whether you consider this additional rod loading to be significant is your business, but it’s nonetheless real. This is just elementary physics. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Whether you consider this additional rod loading to be significant is your business, but it’s nonetheless real. This is just elementary physics.

It also ignores the fact that the line is not attached to the tip of the rod and that the rod is very nearly, if not fully, loaded. There may be some additional loading, but what makes the haul work is the additional acceleration applied directly to the line. This is just elementary geometry<g. — Charlie…

Response:

http://www.mikeconnor.de You didn’t comment on my second reason.  Does this make sense to you?      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul. Thanks Chas

This is also correct.    The amount of linespeed any particular rod may generate in a flyline by direct action is limited by various things, one of which is the strength and speed of the caster. ( assuming once again perfect technique). If you haul, you do not increase the loading, as you do not use direct rod action, but your line hand, and you do not require any more strength and speed to obtain similar results to someone who does not haul. However, a powerful person with good technique will always cast better ( assuming distance casting here of course), than a weaker person, simply because he has more power per se. TL MC

Response:

– "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up. I’ve been mean to a few rods at times, putting a #10 line in a #8 rod and casting Pike flies for instance, but I’ve never managed to break one casting.  Is this because most of my fishing has been with Graphite or Glass? I have to dig back into some old Physics books to get the details, but I remember stress and strain curves for various materials showing a linear relationship until a limit was released, and then additional stress produced excessive strain until the material failed.  Certainly with an old shoe or a fish on the line and a stout leader it’s easy enough to pass the elastic limit, but does that happen in casting as well? Thanks Chas

If you ask most people at what point a rod is stressed the most, then many of them will tell you that it is in playing a fish.  This is not the case. The basic maximum stress condition for a rod, when used correctly, is when casting. Most modern rods can stand a great deal more stress in this respect than is generally realised.  What they can not stand is shock loading under stress. If you jerk a rod when it is already loaded with a "dead weight", either played out fish, old shoe etc etc then it is highly likely to break. Solid glass fibre rods were probably the most robust rods to date.  Carbon fibre suffers from one or two disadvantages here. Even a slight nick in the surface of a blank can cause sudden massive failure, sometimes the blank will simply shatter without warning. More rods are broken by various extraneous factors than by casting.  The failure might indeed occur when casting, but is usually the result of some other fault. Car doors, falling down on the rod, excessive heat, leaning a rod on a stone and nicking it, ramming the tip into a tree, etc etc. Constantly overloading a rod by casting full lines etc, which are way over the rated weight will usually cause a blank failure as well of course. Most rods broken while actually fishing, do so for a number of reasons, the main one directly fishing related, is getting snagged, putting a good bend in the rod, and then jerking it.  This will quite easily snap a carbon fibre blank, or shatter it . The sudden extreme shock loading under stress is more than the rod can handle. The second most common reason is trying to lift a long line, especially a sunken one, without first roll-casting the line to the surface. Attempting to do this will break most rods. The sudden massive loading is once again more than they can stand. The third most common reason is attempting to land a fish by holding the rod almost vertically, and allowing it to bend over ninety degrees from the vertical. The fish plunges, and the rod simply snaps at the tip. No major exertions are required here by the way, doing the same thing while threading a line through the rings  will also snap a rod tip quite easily. What often happens here, is that the rod is bent, and then the blank "rolls" suddenly changing the stress patterns in the blank walls, and causing it to break. Occasionally rods are broken when fighting very large fish, but this is again an error on the part of the angler. It should normally be impossible for a fish to break a rod, given sufficient angling skill, and correct tackle.. Holding a rod in the fingers and bending it, is also very dangerous. Especially with fine tips. Assuming a rod in good condition, no nicks etc. And also assuming correctly matched line, and reasonable casting, and correct use, then the likelihood of breaking a rod is actually very low indeed. TL MC

Response:

"Mike Connor" wrote This is not a matter of taking sides I hope. Otherwise I will simply retire from the discussion. This is a technical discussion and nothing more.

Of course, my sloppy wording betrayed me. Apart from that, you are perfectly correct. Although the rod loading generated by hauling is inconsequential, irrespective of the current loading state of the rod.  When the rod is already optimally loaded, and as you say at its stiffest, the added loading generated by hauling is so small as to be insignificant. This is just as well, as if hauling did in fact appreciably increase rod loading, then an already optimally loaded rod would simply fold up under the added strain.

You didn’t comment on my second reason.  Does this make sense to you?      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.

Thanks Chas

Response:

If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up.

I’ve been mean to a few rods at times, putting a #10 line in a #8 rod and casting Pike flies for instance, but I’ve never managed to break one casting.  Is this because most of my fishing has been with Graphite or Glass? I have to dig back into some old Physics books to get the details, but I remember stress and strain curves for various materials showing a linear relationship until a limit was released, and then additional stress produced excessive strain until the material failed.  Certainly with an old shoe or a fish on the line and a stout leader it’s easy enough to pass the elastic limit, but does that happen in casting as well? Thanks Chas

Response:

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip.

Your finger is playing the role of the rod tip in that case. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text —— Original Message —– Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2000 6:33 AM This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. The point is, that when you haul, the line moves, and the rod does not, or only slightly. Thread your rod up with a line. Lay the line out and point the rod straight down the line.  Grasp the line at the butt, and pull sharply. The rod has not been loaded in any way, but the line will spring towards you. The direct pull moves the mass directly. Do the same thing holding the rod at an angle to the line, The same thing occurs, with a relatively small proportion of the applied force bending the rod tip slightly, if at all. Progressively increase the angle until the rod is at right angles to the line. At this point the maximum possible rod loading, under these circumstances, will occur when you pull on the line, nevertheless, the majority of the energy involved still goes towards moving the line, the tip will barely move. It is quite immaterial how hard, how long, or how fast you pull. The energy is transferred directly to the line. The rod is barely affected. The angle of the rod changes the vector, and the rod loads a little, due to friction mainly, but the majority of the energy involved goes into moving the line. If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up. This is not the case. The result of hauling is dramatically increased linespeed, because of the direct application of force to the line.  You dont have to believe me, just try it. This is also incidentally why striking a fish with a pull on the line is better than doing it with the rod. The force applied is transferred more or less directly, with very little loss, to the hook point. The rod does not move much,  and  is not loaded appreciably. Only the line moves. If you strike with the rod, you must first load it, before you can apply any force at all, and because of the mechanical disadvantage involved, the force you transfer will be minimal, and indirect. The principles are the same in both cases. In one case you are transferring energy to accelerate a mass using the short end of a flexible lever, and in the other case you are doing it by giving a direct pull.  The lever is in the second case quite immaterial, and may be ignored. TL MC Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de

Response:

This is not a matter of taking sides I hope. Otherwise I will simply retire from the discussion. This is a technical discussion and nothing more. Apart from that, you are perfectly correct. Although the rod loading generated by hauling is inconsequential, irrespective of the current loading state of the rod.  When the rod is already optimally loaded, and as you say at its stiffest, the added loading generated by hauling is so small as to be insignificant. This is just as well, as if hauling did in fact appreciably increase rod loading, then an already optimally loaded rod would simply fold up under the added strain. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – RW,     I have to side with Mike here, for a couple reasons.  If the haul is done right, it happens when the rod is fully loaded.  At that point it’s at it’s stiffest, and the flex isn’t increased much by the added force.  The reaction force is actually the force you apply with your line hand when you haul the line in.      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.      Also, there is direct pull on the line, the guides are like pulleys.  If you consider an 18 inch haul, and watch the effect on the rod tip, I bet it’s drawn back less than 4 inches.  The other 14 inches were directly applied to the line. Chas

Response:

This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored.

I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip.

Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull.

Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip.

I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity

I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

One other point.  Inertia is the direct measurement of a mass.  The only way to change inertia is to change the mass. One may not "break" inertia.  One may overcome it, ( move the mass) by applying force. Newtons laws explain this relatively simply. The first law states that:  " A body will remain at rest, or continue to move steadily in a straight line without acceleration unless it is acted on by an unopposed force. The second law states: "The acceleration of a body depends directly on the force acting on it but inversely upon its mass" The third law states: "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" Force is a measure of the rate at which momentum is changed. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically.

Response:

I sure hope you’re not breaking your wrist with this arm cast, which would be very bad form, you know. JR – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm

Response:

So, In your estimation, does your wrist have a fast action or slow action and how does it affect your distance?

Well, it’s not a limp wrist I’ll tell you that much And while it *is* acting as the rod tip, it’s not loading in the same sense as a fly rod is it? Isn’t most of the line action due to acceleration because I’m pulling on it (and not wrist flip caused by the pulling)? –Steve

Response:

RW,     I have to side with Mike here, for a couple reasons.  If the haul is done right, it happens when the rod is fully loaded.  At that point it’s at it’s stiffest, and the flex isn’t increased much by the added force.  The reaction force is actually the force you apply with your line hand when you haul the line in.      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.      Also, there is direct pull on the line, the guides are like pulleys.  If you consider an 18 inch haul, and watch the effect on the rod tip, I bet it’s drawn back less than 4 inches.  The other 14 inches were directly applied to the line. Chas

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force gener ated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

So, In your estimation, does your wrist have a fast action or slow action and how does it affect your distance? Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm –Steve

Response:

Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity A very short haul of a couple of inches is sufficient to increase line speed drastically, and thus increase its momentum, allowing the mass to be thrown a greater distance. The harder(force), longer ( distance) and faster( time) the haul, the greater the resulting line momentum, independent of the rod.  The same effect may be observed without using a rod at all. Shortening line decreases the mass, and therefore reduces momentum.  As far as hauling is concerned this is more or less negligible. Shortening the line by even a couple of feet, does not reduce its mass by much. If you overload the rod, the haul will still be effective, but due to the rod already being overloaded, additional strain, even slight, due to shock loading might damage it. Otherwise the length of line ( total mass ) is irrelevant when hauling. The effect is the same with or without a rod, and with any length of line. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line? I suppose the way to test it out would be to overline a rod and cast a sufficient length of line to overload the rod.  Would hauling be effective? According to the simple haul/loading spring idea,  the haul would (perhaps) be ineffective, though the shortening of the line (derived from the haul) would still prevail?

Response:

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out.

I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm –Steve

Response:

From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line? I suppose the way to test it out would be to overline a rod and cast a sufficient length of line to overload the rod.  Would hauling be effective? According to the simple haul/loading spring idea,  the haul would (perhaps) be ineffective, though the shortening of the line (derived from the haul) would still prevail?

Response:

From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line?

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. Imagine what would happen if the end of the line were attached to a springy tree branch when you hauled. (An all too frequent occurence in my case.) The rod would bend even if you didn’t move it forward. By hauling, you cause an increase in the force exerted by the rod tip on the line. When you haul in the normal, more felicitous case, more or less the same thing happens, but the resistance of the tree branch is replaced by the inertia of the line. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Question:

Freezing cold and heavy snowfall. My feet were slowly going numb, and my fingers had long since turned blue with the cold. The old trick of plunging them into the freezing water to increase the circulation, and thus warm them up, had worked as usual, but the effects had long since worn off and I was really cold now. Neoprene gloves with fold back finger and thumb were little use, and so I removed them.Visibility was low because of the fairly dense snowfall, and the footing was treacherous over the rocks. Memories of my last fall in this spot on a day trip the previous  year, when I crashed heavily onto a rock with my right knee, and had to more or less crawl to the car being unable to walk, came to mind, and made me even more careful than usual.  Without the cushioning of the 5mm neoprene my kneecap would surely have been badly damaged, as it was it brought tears to my eyes, and my knee was swollen and all the colours of the rainbow for weeks. Digging my ski pole in carefully at every step I kept moving, staying at the waters edge, and only wading when absolutely necessary, to negotiate large boulders and the like. falling into this water would likely prove fatal very quickly, should I be stupid or careless enough to do so. The wind had dropped somewhat, to about a howling gale, and the rapidly swirling snow flakes stuck to my clothing and covered my head and shoulders, freezing to my spectacles and forcing me to shake my head occasionally to stop too large a build-up. Clammy cold damp reached through my neoprenes and made me shiver occasionally.  Very heavy overcast coupled with the snowstorm had turned the day very dark. I had started to fish just before  dawn, and had made my way slowly along three miles or so of the rocky coastline stopping to cast every ten feet or so, using main force to try and reach out as far as possible into the murk, lingering a little longer at some places which had proved successful in the past. Result ? nothing. Checking the watch on the lanyard in my top pocket, told me it was eleven thirty, and I had told my wife I would probably be back to the chalet for lunch, she had declined to accompany me, and decided to stay in the chalet with a good book instead.  Sensible person my wife. Just another hundred meters or so I thought, and then I will turn for home,  the group of large rocks at the headland is usually the best place anyway, as the sea-bed dips away into a deep channel quite close to shore. Takes come as the fly comes up over the lip of the channel where a large band of weed lines the shore, mostly cod, but occasionally a good seatrout, the lip of the channel is only about sixty feet from shore, and a good flat powerful cast should reach it, even in this wind.  Overwintering seatrout are often large, in excellent condition, and sometimes fight like fury, many maintain they taste better than any other fish bar none. Largish cod are not to be sniffed at either though, they fight much more doggedly than a seatrout, but are still exciting, and a five or even ten pounder on light gear is an experience not soon forgotten. Several such fish had fallen to my rod at this spot the previous year under similar conditions. Conventional gear was useless, and I had long since taken the fly reel and line off the rod, in fact within the first twenty minutes, and was using a casting float and fixed spool reel. Even with this rig it was hardly possible to cast more than fifty feet or so into the teeth of the wind. A slow sinking sliding float of thirty grams, a nine foot leader, and a shrimp fly had brought nothing as yet, not as much as a nibble.  I decided to change flies, and put on a much darker version of the shrimp fly, with a touch of red in the tail. The normally peaceful Baltic was crashing into the shore with unusual force, white horses whirling and dancing on the wave tops as far as it was possible to see, and although the water cleared quickly after every breaker, allowing one to see the bottom fairly well close in, I fancied something with a darker silhouette might do the trick, although my hopes of catching anything at all had diminished considerably. As usual I dangled the fly in the water in front of me, waiting for a break in the surf, allowing the float to settle slowly and then moving it to check the action of the fly more or less at my feet.  A small crab appeared as if from nowhere on the blank patch of sand,and seemed to want to grab the fly, scuttling after it and attempting to settle on it, and fascinated by this, I pulled the fly along slowly, just to see if the crab would be able to grab it.  Intent on this, I failed to notice the next breaker coming in and temporarily lost sight of the crab and fly, as the breaker stirred up sand colouring the water. A sudden jerk and my float shooting away along the shore at a rate of knots very nearly frightened me to death, the rod was almost jerked from my hand, and the drag on my reel started to whine unpleasantly, and I was absolutely flabbergasted. I did not strike or anything at all, in fact for quite a while I just stood there with the rod pointing straight along the shore, while the line cut into my index finger almost to the bone and the drag continued to whine. After what seemed like an age I finally had enough presence of mind to take my finger away from the line, and hit the fighting drag lever on the reel, the drag which was giving off what I hoped was just steam, slowed to a rather more leisurely rate, and eventually stopped. Everything went slack, and rather annoyed with myself. but still more surprised than anything else, I started to reel in.  Must have been one hell of a fish that, I thought, reeling in at moderate speed, you bloody idiot, fancy losing a fish like that, I cursed myself, and then everything went tight again ! Bloody hell, hung up as well !   Then the "snag" started moving again. After about ten minutes of pumping, a few peculiarly powerful long, and some short dogged runs, which were most unlike any fight I had experienced before, and during which all sorts of ideas of monster seatrout and salmon went through my mind, and more pumping, I finally saw the fish, a large cod foul hooked in the dorsal fin !  Too large to risk beaching it, I unslung my net and landed it knee deep in the surf, in considerable danger of being swept off my feet by the breakers. I despatched the fish, which coughed up a fair number of small crabs, and after weighing it laid it on a large rock behind me. Just over eleven pounds showed on my scale which is fairly accurate.  Oh well, I thought, not exactly the fine English art of fly angling, but a nice fish anyway, and inspected my leader and fly for signs of chafing or other damage.  Getting ready for another Herculean cast into the teeth of the wind, I suddenly thought better of it, and just swung the float and fly about ten feet from shore, letting the fly be pulled along by the float and tumbling in the surf.  Bang !  it had not gone three yards when the float shot away again, and after a much shorter battle a nice plump six pound cod  joined its mate on the rock behind me.  Six casts and six fish followed in fairly quick succession. Sweating now, all thoughts of cold forgotten, I decided on "just one more cast" before packing up.  I had over forty pounds of fish to clean and pack back to the chalet, and that was more than enough for our freezer requirements for this year. The sky had lightened up somewhat, and the snow had stopped falling, visibility was steadily increasing, and although the wind had dropped somewhat the spray was still lashing in with force, occasionally giving me a good soaking, my face was numb, and all attempts to dry my hands on the towel from my bag failed miserably as it was already soaking wet.  Plunging my hands into the icy water one more time, and hoping for the best, I changed my chafed leader with no little difficulty, tied on a new fly of the same type and size, a rather brown "Baltic woolly", with a touch of red in the tail, a type of woolly bugger which is a very good shrimp imitation, and might just conceivably be mistaken for a crab, and decided to try reaching the lip of the channel. A forceful whirling side cast using all the power of the thirteen foot one and a half pound test carp rod, keeping the trajectory as flat as possible, ended abruptly, as the float struck the water about thirty feet out, my numb fingers had caused me to mistimed the release.  Relatively slight tangles formed as the wind caught the line and blew it off the reel spool.  This was soon sorted and I took up tension on the line prior to retrieving fairly fast for another try.  Wham !  an almighty jerk on the end of the line bent the rod well over, and the drag started whining immediately as the fish headed straight for the deep water channel.  Just as well, if it dived for the weeds  it would be gone.  This was no foul hooked cod, but obviously a decent seatrout, and as if to confirm my observations it leapt from the water about a hundred  feet away, coming down with a large splash which could be heard even over the sound of wind and waves.  A very nice fish indeed, which must be kept out of the weeds at all costs. I loosened the drag lever somewhat, seatrout often come off if forced too hard, and  settled down to the fight. Several long screaming runs followed by spectacular leaps followed, with the fish coming ever closer to the weed bank lining the shore. The trick at this location is to tire the fish out as much as possible in the clear water beyond the weed banks, before bringing it in. This is however often much easier said than done. This was a very powerful fish, and was still showing little sign of tiring, I loosened the drag a little more, hoping that the hookhold would not fail due to the prolonged fight, and awaited developments. Several more runs and leaps followed.and then head shaking and short deep bursts of speed toward the bottom … read more »

Response:

Mike, you are clearly an ignoramus when it comes to cod. Cod fillet (those gorgeous, toothsome white flakes) battered and deep fried in beef dripping, with chips, is one of the great Epicurean experiences of the world. It is a meal redolent of the the cool open air after the cinema or pub. It evokes memories of young love; of soft-sweatered pulchritude and youthful vigour. Ah, the smell of it; the tang of malt vinegar and coarse salt…

Stop it, you’re making me hungry! I knew that cod tasted good. I knew that the flesh was white and flaky. I just thought that they were a little ugly and lived in deep and really cold water. (I mean, you have to admit that they don’t have the sleek predatory good looks of a spotted bass, or the colors of a spawning rainbow, and I didn’t think fish were supposed to have beards…) Besides, the inland US doesn’t have much cod, but have you ever hooked into a bigmouth bass? That’s a ride you won’t soon forget. "My father said to be strong, ‘that a good man could  never do wrong’ in a dream I had last night in America"                             -Los Lobos

Response:

Stop it Tony, you unleash guttural powers you don’t want to know about. Is it hereby concluded that you’ll take care of lunch at the Flyfair? Drooling on my keyboard, Herman Mike, you are clearly an ignoramus when it comes to cod. Cod fillet (those gorgeous, toothsome white flakes) battered and deep fried in beef dripping, with chips, is one of the great Epicurean experiences of the world. It is a meal redolent of the the cool open air after the cinema or pub. It evokes memories of young love; of soft-sweatered pulchritude and youthful vigour. Ah, the smell of it; the tang of malt vinegar and coarse salt… Suggest you read: ‘Cod – The Biography of the Fish that Changed the World’, by Mark Kurlansky and published (1997) in the US by Walker Publishing Co. Inc. ISBN 0-224-05104-0. It’s a very interesting book, though perhaps a rather surprising ‘best seller’. Tight Lines, Tony Deacon

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Stop it Tony, you unleash guttural powers you don’t want to know about. Is it hereby concluded that you’ll take care of lunch at the Flyfair? Drooling on my keyboard, Herman

I’ll stand you and Mike Connor a lunch Herman, but sadly I don’t think it will be cod. My car is only a little one and I fear my other passengers might object if I came over loaded up with cod, potatoes and deep fryer, etc.! By a strange coincidence, they were talking about cod on BBC Radio 4 today. The price has rocketed as stocks have declined. There was even an interview with Mark Kurlansky (who wrote the book) over in New York. We are very lucky as we have an excellent fish n’ chip shop in Tunbridge Wells, our nearest big town. It regularly wins the prize for the best in the south east of England. My wife just e-mailed to ask: ‘What’s for dinner tonight?’ Problem solved! I’m looking forward to Fly Fair. Tight Lines, Tony Deacon

Response:

Herman’s post on Cod is a new one for me. How about in the US, on the Pacific Coast, are folks fishing the shallows at nite for young Cod? Id like to try that. Anyone know more per the PNW coast? Dave

There’s a fish they catch here in Northern California (not on the fly) called a "ling cod". It’s about the scariest looking thing I’ve ever seen. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ something bogus to avoid spam)

Response:

There’s a fish they catch here in Northern California (not on the fly) called a "ling cod". It’s about the scariest looking thing I’ve ever seen.

It’s related to the scorpionfishes and rock cod.  Like the rock cod, the ling is not a cod. If I remember correctly it doesn’t suffer from decompression as you haul it up from the depths of the ocean.  It fights you all the way.  Cab grow to 5 feet. http://www.psmfc.org/habitat/edu_lingcod_fact.html Mu

Response:

By "Cod," do you mean _Gadus morhua_? Big ugly thing with pasty white flesh and three dorsal fins? I always thought that they were a fish for deep and frigid water, but it wouldn’t be the first time today that I was wrong about something.

Mike, you are clearly an ignoramus when it comes to cod. Cod fillet (those gorgeous, toothsome white flakes) battered and deep fried in beef dripping, with chips, is one of the great Epicurean experiences of the world. It is a meal redolent of the the cool open air after the cinema or pub. It evokes memories of young love; of soft-sweatered pulchritude and youthful vigour. Ah, the smell of it; the tang of malt vinegar and coarse salt… Suggest you read: ‘Cod – The Biography of the Fish that Changed the World’, by Mark Kurlansky and published (1997) in the US by Walker Publishing Co. Inc. ISBN 0-224-05104-0. It’s a very interesting book, though perhaps a rather surprising ‘best seller’. Tight Lines, Tony Deacon

Response:

[snipped excellent report] … Brrrr … Thanks, Steve — "Experience must be the teacher in this game – not only your own  but the other man’s" – Dick Wigram http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/SIEACCIDENTALLYSPLATTEREDBACKONEDAY

Response:

Mike, I’ll call/mail you as soon as I can arrange some days off! And, judging from your post, I’ll pack my old carp rod as well.. Cheers, Herman – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I go fairly regularly Herman, any time you fancy a trip ( couple of days if you like ), just drop me a mail and we can arrange it.  I can be at a number of good places on the Danish coast within three hours from where I live, so can also do day-trips etc without any problem.  At this time of year, and earlier, a good seatrout is not a common occurrence, but it does happen. Cod are mostly caught, depending on weather etc, some big ones.  The herring will be in soon, and both cod and seatrout hunt these shoals, and you can have excellent sport then. You can catch plenty of herring on the fly as well if you are so inclined.  The trip report is perfectly true by the way, but I must admit that it was my best trip this year. I caught quite a lot less on other trips, in fact actually blanking once, and though this is rare, it does happen.  I know a few people who have fished for two years or more without catching one single seatrout. I must be lucky, I have caught quite a few, some large ones as well. TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de An even bigger wonder is that one doesn’t even care any more. True or

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Cod are mostly caught, depending on weather etc, some big ones.

By "Cod," do you mean _Gadus morhua_? Big ugly thing with pasty white flesh and three dorsal fins? I always thought that they were a fish for deep and frigid water, but it wouldn’t be the first time today that I was wrong about something. "My father said to be strong, ‘that a good man could  never do wrong’ in a dream I had last night in America"                             -Los Lobos

Response:

Not sure about the latin, but big, ugly and, don’t forget, _tasty_ sort of describes it. The big boys and girls are normally caught in deep water, but the kids play and hunt in the shallows, especially at night. Feeding on shrimps, crabs and other edible critters, they can turn an otherwise fishless seatrout fishing night into a ball. Those kids are already big strong fish, by the way.. and did I mention _very_ good to eat yet? <g Herman By "Cod," do you mean _Gadus morhua_? Big ugly thing with pasty white flesh and three dorsal fins? I always thought that they were a fish for deep and frigid water, but it wouldn’t be the first time today that I was wrong about something. "My father said to be strong, ‘that a good man could  never do wrong’ in a dream I had last night in America"                             -Los Lobos

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Herman’s post on Cod is a new one for me. How about in the US, on the Pacific Coast, are folks fishing the shallows at nite for young Cod? Id like to try that. Anyone know more per the PNW coast? Dave – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Not sure about the latin, but big, ugly and, don’t forget, _tasty_ sort of describes it. The big boys and girls are normally caught in deep water, but the kids play and hunt in the shallows, especially at night. Feeding on shrimps, crabs and other edible critters, they can turn an otherwise fishless seatrout fishing night into a ball. Those kids are already big strong fish, by the way.. and did I mention _very_ good to eat yet? <g Herman By "Cod," do you mean _Gadus morhua_? Big ugly thing with pasty white flesh and three dorsal fins? I always thought that they were a fish for deep and frigid water, but it wouldn’t be the first time today that I was wrong about something. "My father said to be strong, ‘that a good man could  never do wrong’ in a dream I had last night in America"                             -Los Lobos — Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

Correct.  In the Baltic and some other places ( English North sea and similar), these fish come in close to forage, especially on crustaceans and herring. Fairly large fish may be caught in relatively shallow water. They will even "rise" to flies fished on the surface,especially at twilight, at night , or on heavily overcast days.  My best fish to date from the shore was thirty one pounds, but I got that one on a pirk, not on a fly. My best fly caught fish was about twenty pounds, but I don’t know exactly as it was not weighed.  These fish are game fighters, excellent to eat, (especially smoked with my secret recipe ! ), and although completely unlike trout can be very attractive indeed. Their markings and behaviour depend to a considerable extent on the areas they frequent. TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de

Response:

Looking forward to hearing from you Herman. You can stay at my place no problem.  Definitely bring the carp rod. I have enough other gear for you to use if you need anything else. TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de

Response:

Not sure about the latin, but big, ugly and, don’t forget, _tasty_ sort of describes it.

Flaky white flesh, pretty durned good smoked? That’s the very one. Cod are definitely yummy. If only there were enough that they weren’t a special order here. The closest that we have in the inland US are Burbot, and they’re just not the same. Of course, we do have the various black basses, so we’re all happy "My father said to be strong, ‘that a good man could  never do wrong’ in a dream I had last night in America"                             -Los Lobos

Response:

Freezing cold and heavy snowfall. My feet were slowly going numb, and my fingers had long since turned blue with the cold. The old trick of plunging them into the freezing water to increase the circulation, and thus warm them up, had worked as usual, but the effects had long since worn off and I was really cold now. Neoprene gloves with fold back finger and thumb were little use, and so I removed them.Visibility was low because of the fairly dense snowfall, and the footing was treacherous over the rocks.

(great report snipped)         the wonder of very well written prose is that one has substantial difficulty in separating truth from fiction.  well done, pommy. wayno

Response:

An even bigger wonder is that one doesn’t even care any more. True or not (possibly true, the weather description was familiar!), thanks Mike! I’m quite sure the temperature dropped five degress while I was reading this report. Next time when you go, could you make some room for a Dutchman? I can take my own rum.. Cheers, Herman (great report snipped, indeed!)         the wonder of very well written prose is that one has substantial difficulty in separating truth from fiction.  well done, pommy. wayno

– Cheers, Herman Herman Nijland Daytime webmaster Lifetime flyfisher

Response:

I go fairly regularly Herman, any time you fancy a trip ( couple of days if you like ), just drop me a mail and we can arrange it.  I can be at a number of good places on the Danish coast within three hours from where I live, so can also do day-trips etc without any problem.  At this time of year, and earlier, a good seatrout is not a common occurrence, but it does happen. Cod are mostly caught, depending on weather etc, some big ones.  The herring will be in soon, and both cod and seatrout hunt these shoals, and you can have excellent sport then. You can catch plenty of herring on the fly as well if you are so inclined.  The trip report is perfectly true by the way, but I must admit that it was my best trip this year. I caught quite a lot less on other trips, in fact actually blanking once, and though this is rare, it does happen.  I know a few people who have fished for two years or more without catching one single seatrout. I must be lucky, I have caught quite a few, some large ones as well. TL MC — "In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – An even bigger wonder is that one doesn’t even care any more. True or

Response:

Question:

Your cleaning method appears sound, but I would definitely do it by hand and stay away from any washing machine, no matter how "gentle" the cycle may be. Regards from Montreal John Brkich

Response:

I would second this recommendation….after trying some others.  The only thing that I would add is that you can purchase a product specifically designed to clean neoprene waders (I forget which company makes it…Simms, I believe)…but I’ve just used liquid soap.  I have a den with a bathroom/shower that is just off of the garage.  When I come back from fishing, if I notice that my waders are getting a bit "foul", I put them in the shower for cleaning.  By putting them on inside out, it’s easy to wash them and ensure that you’ve not skipped anything.  In fact, when I do such a washing, I usually do both the inside and outside…then hang them in the den and over a large plastic bucket to catch water.  It works well. Barry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Put them on inside out, and wash them in the shower. Neoprene is a closed cell foam, so the odor should just be on the surface. My neoprene waders are getting so funky even I don’t want to put them on anymore.  Is there a way to wash them -the insides especially- and if so, what works the best? I was thinking of using Woolite and putting them on gentle cycle, but…..I’lll ask the experts first. pete

Response:

On the way home from a trip, I stop by a neighborhood do-it-yourself car wash. For $2 and 10 minutes I get clean waders (inside and out), clean felt on my wading boots, and no sand residue on the inside of the boots (which can wear the neoprene bootie). It’s also a good time to clean up the beer cooler! Jerry Donovan, Littleton, Colo. My neoprene waders are getting so funky even I don’t want to put them on anymore.  Is there a way to wash them -the insides especially- and if so, what works the best? I was thinking of using Woolite and putting them on gentle cycle, but…..I’lll ask the experts first. pete

(just kiddin) but its the way I fly fish. — George Gehrke All Writings

Question:

I have recently started fly fishing with a $35 combo rod/reel I bought at Sports Authority – its made by South Bend.  I thought that $35 was a good gamble if I didn’t like fly fishing, I wouldn’t be out alot of cash. The problem is, I love it!  I have had more fun than I can tell you! Freshwater Bass is a blast on the fly and now I am going after Snook in the brackish waters of the Indian River Lagoon here in SE Florida. I am interested in networking with others who can share information with me with regard to what flys work best and what brand/size rod and reel I should consider steping up to.

Response:

There are a number of great fly fishing sites that offer a wealth of information, include bulletin boards, chat rooms, etc. All of these can be valuable. For a start, log onto our site and go to the links page. Click through those links and they, in turn, will lead you to others. — Hope you always have the time to go fishing! Jerry in Lodi Al & Jerry’s Excellent Adventures http://www.softcom.net/users/dorado Al & Jerry’s Fishing Forum http://pluto.beseen.com/boardroom/m/19629

Response:

Question:

Anyone have any thoughts on L.L. Bean flyrods? Thanks in advance.

Response:

I believe they’re made by Loomis. Although Bean changes often. If you call  their FF desk, they may tell you. One thing about LL Bean , any problem, ever,  they take it back no questions asked. They have excellent customer service.

Response:

Anyone have any thoughts on L.L. Bean flyrods? Thanks in advance.

If you like the way they cast, then I highly recommend them.  Bean’s backs up their products as completely as any vendor in the flyfishing business. You can’t go wrong with Bean’s.

Response:

I teach fly casting at a local university. At the start of my last class, a  student showed up with an 8.5′ 6 wt sold by LL Bean. It was my first  opportunity to evaluate one. Because of Bean’s reputation, I had expected them  to be ‘okay’. To my surprise, it was not. It was excellent! Based on that, and  my prior dealings with the company in other areas, I’d say you can’t go wrong.

Response:

Anyone have any thoughts on L.L. Bean flyrods?

I got a rod from LL Bean after being introduced to flyfishing by a couple of friends. It’s a low-mid range rod & reel (4 piece graphite travel rod), but it impressed both of the guys I fished with. Bean does change their model names around all the time, but I got the "Angler" model about three years ago for around $150. I’ve picked up most of my gear from Bean, including vest and boots. I’m a little sensitive about displaying their name all over my body, but I shopped around quite a bit (high end and low end) before ordering. My experience was that they have a good medium price on decent quality stuff with well designed features. And of course there’s the "don’t sweat it" warranty. — Jeff Cook Washington, DC area

Response:

The service at LLBEAN is incredible.  I had a mix-up with replacement netting  for my dip net.  They bent over backwards to help on an $8 sale!  

Response:

Anyone have any thoughts on L.L. Bean flyrods?

I ‘m very happy with a 9′ 5 wt Double L rod I picked up earlier this year.   My experience with Bean is that anything they sell as a major line (and their  fishing gear certainly qualifys as a major line) is good quality.  Sometimes  they dabble in things they don’t know much about–for example, I wouldn’t buy  a kayak from ‘em.   Allen

Response:

Does anyone have any experience with L.L. Bean rods?  I’m looking at getting one of their Guide series 5-weights.  Any info on who they are made by? What about their guarantee?  Thanks for the help. Kevin Hernandez

Response:

Does anyone have any experience with L.L. Bean rods?  I’m looking at getting one of their Guide series 5-weights.  Any info on who they are made by? What about their guarantee?  Thanks for the help. Kevin Hernandez </PRE</HTML

I don’t know anything about their Guide Series rods specificaly but I can tell you they are a fine company to do business with.  They stand behind all their products.  They have a great reputation and it is well earned. Joel Axelrad

Response:

Does anyone have any experience with L.L. Bean rods?  I’m looking at getting one of their Guide series 5-weights.  Any info on who they are made by? What about their guarantee?  Thanks for the help.

I have that model, it’s a fine rod regardless of whoever makes it.  They originated the no-questions asked return policy.

Response:

Question:

        Hi! I am dying rabbit pelts for bunny leaches and I noticed that they shrink to almost a quarter their actual size I’ve heard to use cold water but I cant get the full colors I want.  I am using RIT dye any help or directions would be appreciated THANKS!                                         Dolph

Response:

        Hi! I am dying rabbit pelts for bunny leaches and I noticed that they shrink to almost a quarter their actual size I’ve heard to use cold water but I cant get the full colors I want.  I am using RIT dye any help or directions would be appreciated THANKS!

….what’s your time frame? I dye rabbit pelts with room-temperature water and rit dye, and get good (usually olive) colors everytime. But I find I have to let the pelts soak for a least a week to to get it. —  * Center For Computational Biology            –o0O  * Montana State University  */

Response:

        Hi! I am dying rabbit pelts for bunny leaches and I noticed that they shrink to almost a quarter their actual size I’ve heard to use cold water but I cant get the full colors I want.  I am using RIT dye any help or directions would be appreciated THANKS!                                         Dolph

Hi Dolph When Gretchen & I dye rabbit pelts we pin them to a board before drying them to keep them from shrinking. For more info on dying check the "tips & tricks" section of my web site. I’ve reviewed temperatures and other tips there. Take care & … — Tight Lines ….. Al Beatty BT’s Fly Fishing Products Catalog,Tips & Tricks, Fishing Reports, & NeverSink at: http://www.btsflyfishing.com

Response:

        Hi! I am dying rabbit pelts for bunny leaches and I noticed that they shrink to almost a quarter their actual size I’ve heard to use cold water but I cant get the full colors I want.  I am using RIT dye any help or directions would be appreciated THANKS!

If you want very bright colors, you’ll have to peroxide the pelts first. You can use Miss Clearall (sp) or any other product made for bleaching human hair. This will strip alot of the natural color & leave you with a much lighter hair to work with. Willi

Response:

Question:

Anyway, my default setting is to fish with a sink tip line, casting towards shore with a wolly bugger, sometimes a gold ribbed hair’s ear [though I've yet to catch anything with this].  Both are hauled in with a slow steady retrieve.  

You might be better off casting parallel to the bank if the bottom drops off fairly quick (and *especially* if there are rushes sticking out of the water.)  You’ll cover more water that way and you’ll be better able to keep your fly down near the bottom.  If you’re casting in towards the bank with a sink-tip, your fly will swim away from the bottom unless you pause or retrieve slower as you fish the cast out.  Personally, I think full uniform sinkers are a lot more useful for fishing wet flies, unless you want the fly to swim up pretty quick (i.e., up a drop-off.) Also, try varying your retrieve.  That’s always the first thing I change if I’m searching and nothing’s going on.  Besides, I always have better bugger luck if I fish them with at least a little snap to get the hackle pulsing. As for flies, one of my best lake patterns is just a small marabou leech, fished right off the bottom and kind of slow.  Keep your eyes out for the local bug life, though, and fish the ones that interest you. Good luck, Dave DeLacey Corvallis,Or. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aaron W.

Response:

Any other ideas?  Flys?  I am fishing in Southwest Washington, and possibly will go near Mt. St. Hellens.

        Though we don’t see a lot of tubers here in Maine(other than potatos – yuk,yuk), we do a lot of pond and lake fishing for brook trout from canoes. Common to almost all of these ponds are Callibaetis (hatch 3 times a season and matched with Adams dry) and damselflies, both of which may be indigenous to your waters. Also present here are Hexigenia, stoneflies similar to Acroneuria, generic BWO’s, and some giant caddis species.  We have a lot of other  options as well(leeches, flying ants, scuds, cress bugs, sow bugs,etc.). I fish a pond that stays cool enough for dry flies all summer and I never fish much deeper than 8 or 10 feet, and then only because I have to.         Techniques run the gamut. 90% of my fishing is done with a floating or intermediate line.Checking with local fisherman (and observing), doing a stomach check on fish kept (yes, we will eat one now and then), using a nymph net to check for samples, are all integral to fitting the pieces of the puzzle. We give a close watch to dropoffs (potential byways for big fish) and the weedbeds (home to most of the insects.I’m sure your water may have some differences, but there may be more similarities than anyone realizes. Hope I’ve given you some ideas. Good luck….

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I would love to hear some advice about float tube fly fishing for trout.  I have read my share of books, had fair experience, but am still not that satisfied with the results I get.  Still love it though. Anyway, my default setting is to fish with a sink tip line, casting towards shore with a wolly bugger, sometimes a gold ribbed hair’s ear [though I've yet to catch anything with this].  Both are hauled in with a slow steady retrieve. Any other ideas?  Flys?  I am fishing in Southwest Washington, and possibly will go near Mt. St. Hellens. Thank you. Aaron W.

A really good lake is Coldwater Lake, near St Helens.  People do well with various things; it would be hard to go wrong with a small black or olive wooly bugger (size 10 to 14).  I use a full sinking shooting head, in type II or IV, for most of my lake fishing in the area.  Try different retrieves, try waiting different times to let the line sink to different depths, try points and dropoffs, try fishing where the codger factor is high.   Oh, you don’t know what the codger factor is?  That’s the average age of the fisherfolk within a 100 yd radius.  Anything over 50 is a good bet. A fly that does well for me in the cascade lakes in the spring is an olive brown wooly worm, with brown hackle, in size 8 or 10,  Matter of fact, that or the wooly bugger will be on the sinking line just about any time I can’t see something else in particular to match.   Caught 10 feet of cutthroats with the wooly bugger yesterday, in 8 to 10 inch increments.  Beautiful day, beautiful fish, and a great way to start the season.

Response:

I would love to hear some advice about float tube fly fishing for trout.  I have read my share of books, had fair experience, but am still not that satisfied with the results I get.  Still love it though. Anyway, my default setting is to fish with a sink tip line, casting towards shore with a wolly bugger, sometimes a gold ribbed hair’s ear [though I've yet to catch anything with this].  Both are hauled in with a slow steady retrieve.   Any other ideas?  Flys?  I am fishing in Southwest Washington, and possibly will go near Mt. St. Hellens. Thank you. Aaron W.

Response:

Anyway, my default setting is to fish with a sink tip line, casting towards shore with a wolly bugger, sometimes a gold ribbed hair’s ear [though I've yet to catch anything with this].  Both are hauled in with a slow steady retrieve. Any other ideas?  Flys?  I am fishing in Southwest Washington, and possibly will go near Mt. St. Hellens.

I have never had much luck with sunk flies on sinking lines.  I usually cast toward shore to rocks, logs and grassy cuts with a small elk hair caddis or stimulator. -Burton — L. Burton Hawley           2330 NW Hummingbird Corvallis, OR

Response:

Question:

Just sent in a check for $245 to the Montana wild life dept. The out of state  license is a lottery.I am not asking for am elk license and wonder if anyone  with experience knows the odds of being picked. I know this is a rather foolish  question to ask but I just might get an answer. Jim

Response:

1995 results for non-resident deer combo license was 20%. Don’t recall what 1996 results were but they weren’t much different. Just sent in a check for $245 to the Montana wild life dept. The out of state

 license is a lottery.I am not asking for am elk license and wonder if anyone  with experience knows the odds of being picked. — Brian D. Nelson, Missoula, Montana Montana Flyfishing and Hunting Outfitter http://www.montana.com/dno/dno.htm http://www.montana.com/dno/hunt.htm

Response:

Question:

Anybody know of good flyfishing waters in or near Steamboat CO??? Pointers to the best flyshop in the area are also welcome…. Thanks, Lee Butler

Response:

Anybody know of good flyfishing waters in or near Steamboat CO??? Pointers to the best flyshop in the area are also welcome…. Thanks, Lee Butler

all of ‘em. TimW

Response:

Question:

 Could someone post a response as to where the location of the nearest hospital or emergency treatment center is to the St. Regis Canoe area in the northern adirondack section of New York State?   I’ve gotten conflicting info about Tupper Lake, Paul Smiths, etc. I would like to have the location in mind just in case a planned trip there has a medical emergency arise. Thanks, Woody

Response:

Saranac Village has a very nice hospital. I had to take my wife there last year when she was bitten by a "carrion fly" who left behind some foreign matter and she had a nasty reaction to it. Her leg swelled up about twice its size and nasty red streaks were running up toward her hip… The highest volume patient service that the emergency crew there provides is the removal of fishing hooks . There is no hospital at Paul Smiths, although the College has a first aid facility when the students are there.  I suspect there is one at Tupper Lake, but I don’t know for certain. -Tim — Tim Hewitt – President, Downeast Chapter Wooden Canoe Heritage Association, Ltd http://www.wcha.org

Response: