I know we have that long winded thread going but this is a little aside and should be short if we don’t get into definitions of what a fly is and so on.
Buddy mentioned in the other thread that as long as we are casting the weight of the fly line we are fly fishing. I found that interesting because I had not exactly thought of it that way and it may be the definition…I don’t think so though…to me it doesn’t go far enough…shouldn’t it be ???
…Fly fishing is fishing using a technique whereby you are using a rod that is casting the weight of a line with a fly on it.
Note …nothing said about a reel…and no definition of a fly or rod necessary :roll:
Fly-fishing
? noun the sport of fishing using a rod and an artificial fly as bait.
Main Entry: fly-fish?ing
Pronunciation: 'flI-"fi-shi[ng]
Function: noun
: a method of fishing in which an artificial fly is cast by use of a fly rod, a reel, and a relatively heavy oiled or treated line
Definition
fly-fishing Show phonetics
noun [u]
when you try to catch fish using a fly to attract the fish
Why must people always have to define things. I find more time gets wasted on try to define something than trying to do something about it.
Defining something always seems to need to put limits on it. You can’t do this and you can’t do that, you must do this and you must do that. Blah blah blah.
I don’t use bait not because I think I am above using bait but because it is more of a hasle than it’s worth. I have used lures with a flyrod and I have used marabou crappie jigs just because it was different and I was in the mood to do it. I have used pork strips and spinners on a fly rod just because it was different. I used these items with flyrod techniques, drifting, mending, and swinging. Was I flyfishing? I don’t know and I don’t care.
I have watched so called purists that only flyfish and won’t use a spinning rod because casting and reeling in is ‘not challenging’ sit there and cast a clouser (jig) on a sinking line out and just strip it in with technique no different than casting a small jig with a spinning rod and just reeling it in.
If that was the definition then every participant in recent fly fishing tournaments wasn’t fly fishing. Czech/Polish/Hi-stick, what ever you want to call it… doesn’t involve casting.
Some participants hang a foot or two of fly line out the tip of their rod… perhaps for form’s sake, but really, the technique is better suited to drift rods (11-15 ft in length) and spinning/centerpin reels.
From a historical perspective “fly fishing” predates anything we would call casting. 18 foot rods with not much more than 18 foot of line and tippet. The fly is sort of swung , flipped , dapped and hung from the rod. Not the sort of thing we call fly fishing but back in the day that was, what fly fishing was.
AgMD
My definition based on my limited experience is casting an artificial where the line propels the fly or lure, rather than the weight of the fly or lure propelling the line. A reel need not be mentioned as it has no function in fly casting itself. I could be all wet, & I will defer to those of you far more knowledgeable than I.
Mike
Ah… but maybe that is it! Fly fishing is a practice where one spends hundreds of dollars on a reel that serves no practical purpose other than to hold line!
I’ve been thinking on this and was going to start a similar thread.
I think I’m with Micropteris on this.
No definition is needed (if you think it is, ask yourself ‘why?’).
No reason to define any portion of the sport.
Don’t matter ‘what’ a fly is or isn’t.
Don’t matter what the rod, reel (or lack thereof), or line actually is or looks like.
If ANYONE believes they are fly fishing, then they are.
Any other definiton is elitist, limiting, and basically useless in any logical sense. Besides, ‘defining’ anything first envolves the power to enforce the definition. No such power exists in this kind of ‘sport’.
The dictionary ‘definitions’ are a function of the written language, and have no basis in the defining of any activity in fact. They have proven to be changeable and often erroneous as life and/or activity evolves.
AND, any answer to the question ‘why does it matter?’, other than ‘it doesn’t’ brings into question the motives of the answerer, regardless of ‘who’ they are (qualifications like experience or education are NOT revelant here).
All of the above is simple logic, not an opinion. As logic is defensible, so is all of the foregoing.
A month or so ago I posted many of the State reg definitions of fly fishing.
As long as we can do away with Fly Fishing Only areas we need no definition of Fly Fishing. However, once you want an entitlement like FFO, you better have a solid, ironclad definition of the term. Hey, don’t blame me, that’s the law, it’s called “substantive due process”, it protects us by ensuring that laws are not overly vague. Most of the State definitions have large holes that can be exploited – for example, the reg may say “casting a fly by the weight of the line”; well, you can ball up some leadcore line into a nice little ball and cast the fly with your spinning gear. Sure, that’s “reducto ad absurdum” but it illustrates my point.
The pre-1992 State regs in NH and ME had a conservation reason in FFO. Under the old regs, you could not use weight on line, leader, or fly. This meant that fast water provided “sanctuary” for the trout, as you couldn’t get a fly down more than a few inches. Lee Wulff considered this an important element of FF and the most sporting method. Now that these States allow weight, it is probably hypocritical to have FFO stretches since ALO is just as good from a conservation perspective.
So, for those of you who say FF is what you want it to be, please join me in eliminating FFO water. Thank you.
I’ll get the duct tape and we’ll put the lid back on.