+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: What is a Tenkara Rod

  1. #11

    Default

    I really am enjoying this thread here. Maybe though I should clarify what I see as the history of Tenkara. From my understanding there is no written history because of most tenkara anglers were peasants and illiterate. If this is incorrect I am sorry please correct me. I got this as I spoke with someone very knowledgable. I also believe that they fished Tenkara because of it simplicity and ease of transport.
    That said I believe that many people made their rods in varrying ways to meet what felt right to them. So why is it so wrong for us now to fish what FEELS GOOD AND COMFORTABLE as Tenkara wwithout being told we are not. In the spirit of Tenkara let us make things simple.

    Cheers,
    Brandon

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    409

    Default

    I think it is important to keep in mind that the early tenkara anglers were commercial fishermen. They use what worked and what they could make themselves or acquire inexpensively. Although there aren't contemporary accounts of their fishing, there are for at least a couple of the commercial fishermen in England and Scotland, who used very similar equipment. James Bailey, a commercial angler who was known as the best angler in Scotland, used a rod made of Hazel and a horsehair line tied to the rod tip. David Webster, a commercial angler in England, used a wooden rod and horsehair line tied to the rod tip long after reels were common place. He also used 9 flies at a time. I seriously doubt that either one of them - or any of the early tenkara anglers in Japan - would have been at all swayed by ideas that they should limit their gear or techniques to fit someone else's idea of what was "proper." The Halfordian ideas that fly fishing should only be done upstream and only with dry flies and only to rising trout, or the purist ideas that tenkara should only be done with a cork gripped rod of at least 11', with only a single unweighted wet fly, and only for salmonids in mountain streams may be fine for someone fishing for sport, but not for someone fishing for his livelihood. I would argue that the "spirit of tenkara" is to use what works.

    Personally, I believe that fishing dries, emergers, wets, nymphs, hoppers, poppers, bugs and buggers can all be tenkara. Weighted or unweighted is fine. Brookies, bluegills, bass and bluehead chubs are all fair game. Floating indicators and sinking split shot - if you want to use them go ahead. A few weeks ago I had a great time catching trout with a 7' rod with virtually no grip at all. I would and did call it tenkara fishing.

    I had a very nice conversation with Dr. William Hanneman yesterday. He developed the Common Cents system for measuring and comparing fly rods, and is working on an article applying the same techniques to tenkara rods. His suggestion was that we ignore the tenkara vs. not tenkara argument entirely. Call them all "telescopic rods" match them with the appropriate line and go fishing. Wise advice, I'd say.
    Tenkara Bum

  3. #13

    Default

    Moonlit there is nothing "wrong" with it. That would imply a moral or ethical implication. What you are describing as being called "wrong" is neither.

    Chris I concur in your statement "They use what worked and what they could make themselves or acquire inexpensively".
    On that note if a rubber worm would have caught more fish they would have used it.

    Don't forget It is just fising... We are not joining a cult now are we?

    By the way Dr. Hanneman sounds like a very level headed fellow.
    Last edited by JC_Hall; 07-20-2012 at 02:32 PM.

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CM_Stewart View Post

    I had a very nice conversation with Dr. William Hanneman yesterday. He developed the Common Cents system for measuring and comparing fly rods, and is working on an article applying the same techniques to tenkara rods. His suggestion was that we ignore the tenkara vs. not tenkara argument entirely. Call them all "telescopic rods" match them with the appropriate line and go fishing. Wise advice, I'd say.
    I agree with Chris, but tend to take it a step farther. I like to refer to it as Fixed-Length Line Fly Fishing. In my mind, that is the basic concept.

    Regarding the source for the original post, I may be wrong, but I somewhat doubt that the ancient masters used graphite or fiberglass rods, much less with cork grips or telescoping sections. Otherwise, it would seem like the ancient practice of tenkara didn't start until sometime in the 1950's/60's maybe even 70's/80's? Certainly sometime after I was born. Maybe that's why I feel so old.

    It seem like one should at least be consistent, either stick with tradition or don't.
    Last edited by pszy22; 08-20-2012 at 07:58 AM.
    "People tend to get the politicians and the fishing tackle they deserve" -
    John Gierach, Fishing Bamboo

    http://www.tenkaraflyfish.blogspot.com/

  5. #15

    Lightbulb Hmmmmmm ......

    Quote Originally Posted by CM_Stewart View Post
    ... His suggestion was that we ignore the tenkara vs. not tenkara argument entirely. Call them all "telescopic rods" match them with the appropriate line and go fishing. Wise advice, I'd say.
    My personal preference is to refer to the gear and / or the style of fishing as Tenkara. It is a simple word that conveys an approach to fly angling that appropriately distinguishes it from conventional fly angling gear and techniques, and from switch and spey rods and equipment more closely associated with those forms of fly angling.

    It definitely is fixed length fly line fishing, but for me, at least, that is a real mouthful to get to the same point, to communicate basically the same thing, except it does bring in to the discussion a lot of very non-tenkara and non fly angling stuff. For example, the equipment which was the subject of the following piece that I wrote a number of years ago - which is a fixed line approach, but definitely not Tenkara:

    But - today I tried out my first home made rod and outfit, so I qualify to talk about CHEAP, and CHEAPER, and CHEAPEST rods.

    My entire fly fishing outfit today cost less than $1.50. I got skunked, but that is not relevant, because I'm satisfied that I can catch fish with this outfit in the right place at the right time.

    The rod is a Scott 401.5-1O. ( Hope the other Scott has some sense of humor about this, if they run across it. ) The designation may not be familiar to you. It is a four foot for 1.5 weight one piece made of oak. Get beyond all that fancy language and what you have is a 48" X 1/4" oak dowel from the local hardware store. It cost $.84, including tax. The rod was finished with a tiptop fashioned from Maxima Chameleon leader material, and a decorative butt wrap of fly tying thread.

    The line was a custom made Scott 1.5 LLF. Another unfamiliar designation ? It is a 1.5 wt level line floating. The line was furled using 45 plus feet of 20# dacron fly line backing on a seven foot jig to end up with a six strand level line about six feet long. Some mucilin turned a sure sinker into a floating line. Since I had the backing laying around, it didn't cost anything, unless you include labor, but as cheap as I am, I wouldn't pay myself - so it was free.

    The leader was one of my standard thread furled leaders with silver chain tip ring. They cost about $.35 for materials, and I don't pay labor for that kind of thing.

    Can't calculate the cost of four feet of 4x tippet, so let's just say that was $.10.

    Fished a size 18 griffith gnat. That's probably another $.20 ??

    That actually comes to $1.49 - got a penny to spare !!

    Anyway, I could actually cast this outfit well enough to get the fly almost 20' from where I was standing. The rod was super fast action - some people would call it a stick, of all things. The line carried a tight loop, the furled leader turned over beautifully, the dry fly floated along nicely in a drag free drift. What more could you ask for, except for some nice brown or cutt to take the fly ??

    I have to admit, the rod was a bit fast for my liking, and casting such a short rod with a 1/4" grip is a bit tiring. And it would probably max out under 30' even if I added a couple more six foot sections of Scott 1.5 LLF.

    But it only cost a buck and a half, with change to spare - and I had a blast. Next time out, I'm gonna fish a creek where a 20' cast is almost always too long, and the fish just love to play with things floating along the surface. Can't hardly stand the wait.

    Never did catch a fish with that rig. And oak dowels don't really stand up to much abuse, not nearly so much as well designed and engineered graphite.

    John



    The fish are always right.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Bloomington, Indiana
    Posts
    133

    Default

    I guess in tenkara terms that would be a 1:1 rod. I'd like to have a go with the 1/8 inch oak dowel instead of the 1/4 inch. The tanago version.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. First Tenkara
    By 51BC in forum Tenkara Fishing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-12-2014, 12:05 PM
  2. Tenkara
    By Bill-B'klyn in forum Warm water Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-29-2013, 09:35 PM
  3. New to Tenkara
    By SteveW in forum Tenkara Fishing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-16-2013, 01:32 AM
  4. Tenkara ... What?
    By Fishingfiend in forum Sound Off
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 08-24-2012, 06:23 PM
  5. Another Tenkara Rod
    By cycler68 in forum Tenkara Fishing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-29-2011, 11:52 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts