# Flies Only on the Rogue



## reeldeal3 (Aug 27, 2002)

I was thinking about this last the other night. I think the Rogue would be a better river if there was a flies only section on the Rogue? I dont think it would need to be a huge streach of the river, just enough to have more natural reproduction. I know this will cause a bit of a stir..........but if you had to make the zone, where would it be and why?


----------



## discdrag (Jul 21, 2001)

one section of the rogue? probably between childsdale and packer, its the longest stretch, and there's lots of good gravel, either that or the dam down to jericho


----------



## knockoff64 (Oct 14, 2001)

What on earth would make you think flies only will lead to more natural reproduction?


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

With a name like Topwater, perhaps a "Dry Fly Only" section. That will lead to even more reproduction.  
Why not a hookless fly section. Or just close it all together, better yet


----------



## huntingfool43 (Mar 16, 2002)

How about we make a section for spawn only and another wigglers only.Yo better not forget catch and release too.Give me a brake. If you want your flies only go above the dam and leave the rest alone.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

Thought there already was a flies only section on the Rogue.


----------



## Steely-Head (Dec 2, 2001)

If I HAD to make a new flies only zone? Well, it would be in Ohio! Screw flies only.


----------



## huntingfool43 (Mar 16, 2002)

Steve
If I am not mistaken there is a flies only section above the dam. Topwater is talking below the dam where the steelhead and salmon spawn.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Considering the age of the "Yea" sayers, I will overlook the thought. 

If one wants to improve the fishery, close the river from March 1 - May1.

Would you guys want me to bring that up at the next Fisheries Meeting?


----------



## quillbackCARPSUCKER (Jan 7, 2003)

Yeah, there is a flies only section on the Rogue upstream of the Rockford dam.

I don't really think creating a flies only section on the Rogue below the dam would help out natural reproduction too much(maybe im wrong) It would probably eliminate some snaggers which would be nice, but I don't think it would be fair to bait fisherman.

It seems to me that a heavier DNR presence would help that river more than anything. I have called the DNR after seeing crews of nighttime snaggers with lanterns raping the gravel in the Rogue at 2am. Some of them get busted, but every year I see the same thing. But I know its a real tough job for our local DNR because they are way understaffed...I just try to help them out the best I can by reporting any snaggers that I see on the cell phone.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Hey Quillback.

Glad you could join us. I always enjoyed your posts on TSS.... lol

Here's a stocking table for the Rogue. With all these plants, I hardly think that the additional natural reproduction would benefit the fish or the fishery.

Besides, what's the difference if the fish are molested with spawn or a double fly rig?

Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 5/6/2002 4,600 7.56 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/15/2002 20,000 7.84 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/20/2001 21,539 7.72 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/20/2001 5,031 7.36 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/17/2002 9,400 7.8 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/21/2000 24,300 7.44 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 4/21/2000 3,710 7.32 State Plant right pectoral clip
Kent Rogue River Steelhead Michigan 5/5/2000 6,000 7.24 State Plant right pectoral clip


----------



## mickey (Sep 25, 2000)

The section above the dam used to be artificial lures only. 16" limit on fish and a creel limit of 2. 
When they implimented the type I, II, III, etc. The artificial lures section was no more. 
Please someone correct me if Im wrong but I think those are the facts as I used to fish it a lot.


----------



## SA ULTRA MAG (Nov 7, 2001)

I'm confused ?

Why do flyfisherman NEED a fly's only stretch ? If we create another fly's only stretch can we keep you from fishing on "OUR" stretch ?

If this is the case then let me know where and when I need to go to vote and I will vote for your fly's only stretch.

If I had to pick a stretch downstream from the Rockford Dam it would be from the dam to the first bridge, yup, all 50 yards can be yours.

Pat


----------



## quix20 (Jan 14, 2001)

if we go flies only on any more rivers lets go to foam darts only for deer hunting certain areas. that oughta lead to more natural reproduction of the deer population, thus giving us more deer that we can all shoot our foam darts at.


----------



## Mitch (Jan 10, 2003)

I really have no input on the Rogue subject since I have only fished it twice to kill some time and refine some skills. My question is this, Why couldn't there be sections that are just "no kill" instead of "flies only, no kill". I haven't looked into this to see if there are any Michigan water like this. If not, Why?

In today's society it's surprising I haven't heard of anyone suing our conservation agencies for discriminating against the baitfisherman.

Any thoughts? Mitch


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

> _Originally posted by Mitch _
> *
> 
> In today's society it's surprising I haven't heard of anyone suing our conservation agencies for discriminating against the baitfisherman.
> ...


Not yet. 
Flies Only is gaining support on a national level, probably do to a lack of unification by hardware and baitfishermen. It's lobbied by municipalities, fishing clubs and guide houses, all without opposition. 

Did you guys ever think that a 16 year old can open that "can of worms" again?


----------



## scoot (Jul 4, 2001)

No way, flyfishing for trout is a joke below the dam and a lot of the water is good for fishing with bait. Plus natural reproduction is a joke and doesnt matter because they stock the crap outa the rogue and flies only or not idiots will still stomp all over redds. I do love the rogue though, lotta fish, some wild. Maybe with some management with beaver dams and such the upper rogue should be flies only because that used to hold some monster browns


----------



## knockoff64 (Oct 14, 2001)

Mitch, The only stretch of river that I can think of that fits that bill is the Huron between Dexter and Delhi, but that is managed for Smallmouth Bass.

There are also some lakes that are strictly catch and release, mostly because of pollution though.

I don't think we need more no-kill waters, our fisheries are thriving and taking some fish for consumption is not effecting the fishery adversely. Most "fragile" waters are closed Sept. 30 to the end of April anyway.


----------



## knockoff64 (Oct 14, 2001)

Scoot, I don't understand the logic!

What does Flies-only have to do with the quality of a fishery? Except to exclude the majority of fisherman who would use otherwise legal means to catch fish. It certainly won't stop poachers, snaggers and other violators. It doesn't matter what laws or rules are passed, some will break them regardless.

We need to enforce the laws we have, not make more!


----------



## Mitch (Jan 10, 2003)

knockoff64,

My thoughts exactly, I couldn't agree with you more.

Mitch


----------



## WALLDADY (Feb 3, 2002)

Thousandcasts / Split Shot , You guys are just slayin me . I cant keep callin Da Boyz up . Are gonna kick the crap outa someone , or not . LMAO !!!!! As Im reading these posts I an laughing out loud . The topic was beginning to get heated . Im glad someone put out the fire . Still LMAO !!!!!

I live out of state and pay lots of $ for licences in Mich . My $ supports just as much conservation efforts as the next guys . If its Flys Only , That eliminates me ftrom a fishery that I helped support . Thats like me sayin , OK the St. Joe ( where I fish ) pick a section , NO FLY FISHIN ALLOWED . Thats not right either .


Good Luck and Safe Trips ........... Walldady


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Splitshot _
> *Spankey knows I don't have an SUV. *


No SUV! But you do have your trusty , brushwhakin' Audi which you use just like an SUV


----------



## mechanical head (Jan 18, 2000)

Whit, Watch your tongue ...... Ray wouldn't be caught dead in a Subaru. Hell the way he drives I'd be dead if he were driving a Subaru..

You better Edit that before he sees this post.

It an AUDI....or nothing for Ray...


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

On a similar note I would like a section of the PM , (custer to scottville setaside for just me. I get tired of going down to the river and finding out Shoeman and SFK have been up and caught all the fish! Since Shoeman has got his new driftboat Fishing has declined by 90% on the PM.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

> _Originally posted by mechanical head _
> *
> 
> It an AUDI....or nothing for Ray... *


Or an "Innie" in some circles...


----------



## mickey (Sep 25, 2000)




----------



## Kevin (Oct 4, 2000)

Ray I forgot to ask you if you have a link for those "Finnish Wondertires" or whatever they were called. You were amazing me in that snow.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

Ray,
I stand corrected. It was a classic case of brain fartness.

Clay and Ralph KEEP FISH???? Why those curs, those low lifes, those...those....Well.........I'm a gentleman and my better decorum prevents me from using inappropriate verbage no matter how appropriate it might be.


----------



## Spoon3234 (Jun 26, 2002)

Rather than attempting to accomplish solitude on the river by putting all sorts of time and money and effort into powerful fly fishing organizations that use that money and power to push for flys only regulations, why not put all that time and money and effort in the best organization, the DNR!!?? Then we could have more CO's and those who don't belong on the river would no longer be. All legal ethical fisherman could enjoy the resource then (even those who like to keep a fish for a meal or some bait and then use the bait to fish  ) and no one would have to compete with the rippers for space. 

If only it was just that simple.


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

Isn't Audi to Suburu the same as Mitsubishi to Dodge....? 
Splitshot, you can still have your SUV....have you seen the new millenium version of the Suburu Brat??? Can't remember the name but I bet it's catchy!

I know, I know.....I'll be lookin' over my shoulder!


----------



## WALLDADY (Feb 3, 2002)

SO . Call up Bubba and Da Boyz , and lets go beat them up . Keepin a couple fish to eat .... WHATS THAT Still LMAO

Good Luck and Safe Trips ....... Walldady


----------



## STEINFISHSKI (Jan 30, 2001)

You all better stay off the Rouge. sp  

Stay out of MY spot if you know whats good for you!!!! lol

And stop posting about this small stream on the internet!!! Do you have any idea what kind of pressure that can put on a small fishery like the Rogue?!!!! 

If you mean more restrictions=less pressure for you? I like throwing spawn please. NO


----------



## captdenny (Jan 24, 2003)

I remember going up the Rouge once in a boat. Did that ever get a stare out of a few. Took a few steelhead out of that river that day. Guess the stares were worth it. What's this on flys only? Could we still "chuck and duck"? Fish-on


----------



## Spanky (Mar 21, 2001)

Sooooo. splitshot, how does that AWD work on the icy lakes and stuff! 
I bet them finnish tires are great for ice fishing!


----------



## reeldeal3 (Aug 27, 2002)

I really dont understand how the last 4 or so pages had anything to do with the subject.................


----------



## mickey (Sep 25, 2000)

I havent seen why Mr. Topwater thinks the flies only would benefit the Rogue? You stated that it would but why...


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

MT,
Now and then a thread gets off topic. This thread is an example. The discussion could go on ad infinetum, as it has in the past. 

In this thread some statements were made, some humor (at times misunderstood) was added and responses were forthcoming. These things happen in the normal flow of discussion.


----------



## No Threat (Nov 28, 2001)

What we have here is one of them there filibuster things. Now be a good little fly-flinger and take your silly little Bill home cause it will never come to a vote here.  


Just kidding, I think the last 4 pages can tell you how a vote would go here.


----------



## MOKE-D (Jan 11, 2003)

I agree with quillback,

I do not think there should be a flys only section in the rogue. For one, the steelhead are stopped at the dam in rockford which means there isn't enough water for all the fisherman there anyway. Every year gets worse with the amount of people trying to fish the small section that the steelhead can reach. 
A flysonly is better for a longer river like the PM. I believe a no kill section (or the whole river) would be a better way to help natural reproduction. 

I agree with quillback
More CO's catching late night snaggers would not only help natural reproduction but help legal fisherman catch more fish. Ripping fish leads to a shy fish that is less willing to bite because of all night rippers. If anyone sees this going on please call the DNR I know I will. 

MOKE_D


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

Welcome to Michigan-Sportsman.com MokeD. If you visit often and take part in the forums, adding your reasoned comments and knowledge, I'm sure that you'll enjoy your stay.


----------

