# Flies Only



## ESOX

Try swinging Speys.


----------



## Dead Bird

I was thinking this afternoon about this paying to fish waters that are special....

as a duck hunter I pay to hunt managed areas with shell restriction limits, limits on how often I hunt and when I hunt... I can also hunt areas that none of these rules apply...

why is it so wrong that the same type of rules apply to something other than duck / goose hunting... have a restriction on these special waters... need a permit drawn in a lottery to fish... only a limited amount of anglers... rules on the gear you are allowed to use... rules on the area of the bank and the river you can fish... the times of day you are allowed to fish...

looking from the outside in this may be what you guys need.... 

as a side note I can remember what it was like to hunt before all these rules were in place... there are other people thinking that you guys maybe need rules also... just something to think about...


----------



## Shoeman

Yup, get there at 4am, enter the lottery, have them count your flies, just to find out you have to fish hole #16, or go back home.

Makes sense to me.


----------



## Dead Bird

Spiltshot...

I was being a smart-a**.... Just trying to make a point that there are people that will use the fact that the weakest point in the chain is every other link...


----------



## tmz

Remember, it dosen't say you can't fish in flies only stretches it only says you have to use flies. If you take the pm for example a decent amount of anglers fish with spinning gear and flies. Change your ways and jump outside of your paradigms and fish flies on a spinning outfit if you want to fish.


----------



## tmz

sorry guys this post didn't go were it was suppose to go.


----------



## Shoeman

True, one can fish those waters with traditional spin tackle, but it's very similar to someone bowling in socks instead of bowling shoes.

You will draw scornful looks, some will even question your presence and legality. I bet you'll only do that once or twice.


----------



## Mike

> True, one can fish those waters with traditional spin tackle, but it's very similar to someone bowling in socks instead of bowling shoes. You will draw scornful looks, some will even question your presence and legality. I bet you'll only do that once or twice.


Bad analogy. Sweaty feet equals moisture on the approach, and problems for the next guy. 

I see your point, and unfortunately there are folks on the river like that. Ran into a guy last year who was all aghast about people using spinning gear in the fly water. It was funny to me, had to give him a lesson on the rules.

Mike


----------



## Shoeman

Sorry Mike...  

Spin tackle in many aspects is about as effective for fly-fishing as socks are for bowling. Maybe not for Salmon or steelhead C&D'ing, but there's no way to make a delicate presention with a casting float during a hatch


----------



## tmz

Splitshot,

I guess my post did go to the right place. I don't recall stating that I was or was not in favor of fly water but thanks for answering for me. You make a good point about fly fisherman being able to fish where ever they want to without any limits. Fly fishing is limited by water. There are some stretches of river that are to big to fly fish with any degree of success. I don't turn my nose to anyone because of the way they fish. I choose a fly for the rivers and that's the extent of it. I also choose to join groups that support, donate time, and keep up flies only stretches. If we talk about the Ausable, primarily the Mason Tract, that is accessible do to the fact that it was donated to the state from a private owner with the intent to keep it a flies only fishery. The money to maintane that area of river comes from local groups and Trout Unlimted. If you take all the trout rivers and look at the amount of fly water to the amount of all tackle sections, I would consider it fair. There are plenty of all tackle areas which are great trout sections that any fisherman can enjoy.


----------



## snag

tmz ~ I don't understand how you consider having the exclusive rights to over 100 miles of the most prime trout waters in the state to be fair. Fair to who?


----------



## tmz

I don't claim the river and would encourage anyone to fish it regradless of their means. I don't feel I have exclusive rights. You and anyone else can fish it. Keep in mind that this issue was voted on as house bill 55 something. It was originally attached to another bill inabling kids to keep trout in catch and release areas. There is way more to this bill and you can read it by getting it off of a michigan government site. The bill was passed to increase the 100 miles of special regulation waters to 212 miles. It had a fair amount of press to seperate the 2 bills and vote on each one seperatly. If you truely feel there is no good out of having special regulations on portions of rivers than follow legislation and vote or contact state representitives. Maybe you did this and that's great. If you didn't start a grass roots campaign and let your voice be heard. That is what we did to insure quality fishing regulations on a small amount of Michigan's rivers. You can support any argument with scientific data on mortality, habitate, etc. There is no science needed. Fly Fisherman looked at the amount of fishing opprotunities and felt the need to protect some areas to preserve the sport. This is common practice from one end of the country to the other. Do I look to change your feelings? No. But, if you want to fish these areas then do it. If you don't like the regs, form a group and fight it at the goverment level.


----------



## Shoeman

tmz,
You're right on the money. The entire "trout fishery" is going to Flies Only.
Prime example: My folks took a trip out west and covered 5 or 6 States. Most prime rivers have a flies only designation, with many being C&R. 
My dad never had the opportunity to fish any of them do to a range of motion limitation. Kinda sad, if you consider that all of them are PUBLIC WATERS, yet unless armed with flies, it's OFF LIMITS.

Something's wrong here.


----------



## tmz

We are talking about 212 miles out of thousands of miles of trout streams. The Ausable is 200 miles from the confulence with the north branch. That is just the mainstream! The Manistee has more miles. The PM is 300 miles worth of river sytem. Not to mention the tributaries to some of these streams. Again, if you can't find an area to fish with the gear you choose I'm sorry. I certainly believe the numbers are in your favor. It could be worse. In some western states like Colorado you are not even allowed to drop anchor in areas of the river under private holdings. Landowners own the bootom of the river! The only way you get to fish there is by way of a guide unless you have the skill to navigate the river for yourself. There is no dropping anchor and fighting a fish. That is one example. You want me to justify why we have special regs on some rivers. Justify to me why there is only 212 miles of such rivers with over thousands of miles of trout fishable water. Again, I said from the start I don't care who or how people fish. So grab your spinning rod and arm it with a weighted decent size streamer and go fish. Don't sit there and say you can't fish it. If someone throws a nose up at you, who cares. They are probably people you or I wouldn't want to associate with anyway. If you fly fish great, if not, maybe you might consider trying it to extend your fishing enjoyment.


----------



## ESOX

> _Originally posted by tmz _
> * Justify to me why there is only 212 miles of such rivers with over thousands of miles of trout fishable water. *


I can't justify it, that's 212 too many for me.


----------



## Shoeman

*The Best 212 miles*


----------



## tmz

If you want to see HB5556 in a nut shell go to www.mctu.org and click on action alerts. It will read to increase special regs waters from 100 to 212 miles. It will also talk about setting up a criteria for rivers who would elegible for these regulations. That is new. Flies only stretches were in place prior to this. As far as saying special regs, yes it can include flies only. Just like artificial lures only, catch and release, or size restrictions that differ from the general regs hence the term "special regs". You talk about funds to maintane these waters. A large portion of our funds to improve river habitate, streamside habitate, and water quality comes from local efforts, volunteers, large corporations such as orvis, and organizations such as tu with help from State or Federal grants. Maintanence or enhancement what ever you want to say takes place at point sources such as sewer drainage, erosion, or loss of habitate to name a few. They also do tree drops to create more structure both in and outside of flies only water. Again, a large amount of the funds come locally. Point sources can be miles from the flies only stretches so I don't claim that only the flies only water is maintaned. I also don't recall saying anything of the member base of trout unlimited. So I really don't know your point there. I have yet to compare different styles of fisherman and don't see a need to. Like I side I don't care of the method. You are also right you can't donate something and say how it will be run. But, I am sure there was a consensus to keep it in the state it was in when tu founders dreamt up the notion of tu. So, you show me the research that went into flies only water and give me a reason why we shouldn't have it.


----------



## Steve

> Justify to me why there is only 212 miles


You're kidding right? Why there is *ONLY* 212 of the best miles of river dedicated to one method of fishing?.... this would be analogous to taking a couple of the best whole counties of federal or state forest in the state and saying from now on deer hunters there must use stick bows only,... no compounds, no guns.


----------



## Shoeman

Steve, 
Guys like him will never see that type of analogy. It's a selfish mind-set without regard to the rest of fishing community.

All in the name of "Protecting the Fishery"


----------



## tmz

Your kidding me right?
You bring hunting into fishing. There is 3 monthes of bowhunting and 2 weeks of rifle. What is your point. It seems to me non bowhunters would have your same point. I am an avid bowhunter and rifle hunter so I'm not picking. But, the same argumnet could be with non bowhunters so I don't know why you brought hunting up.


----------

