# Flossing in Michigan



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

Wait... what?









https://bettsguideservice.com/


----------



## Pier Pressure (Dec 21, 2008)

Freestyle Nymphing!!!:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

TheoJohn said:


> Wait... what?
> 
> View attachment 592117
> 
> https://bettsguideservice.com/


Interesting first post there Theo. Seeing that you're from Wellston, I'm sure you're aware that Chad isn't the only guide (or guide service) that runs a Chuck and Duck program for the non-biters. Heck, BB&T has had a tutorial on their website for 20 years. It's still there, but has been cleaned up for the PC crowd. Most just don't blatantly call it flossing. Whatever you call it, it's all the same and fighting 20lb fish on light tackle keeps the clients coming back year after year.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

theo is not from wellston. Click on his screen name. New account just opened up. Someone who doesn’t like chad or just wanting to ruffle feathers. People open accounts like this all the time to stir the pot..


TK81 said:


> Interesting first post there Theo. Seeing that you're from Wellston, I'm sure you're aware that Chad isn't the only guide (or guide service) that runs a Chuck and Duck program for the non-biters. Heck, BB&T has had a tutorial on their website for 20 years. It's still there, but has been cleaned up for the PC crowd. Most just don't blatantly call it flossing. Whatever you call it, it's all the same and fighting 20lb fish on light tackle keeps the clients coming back year after year.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

jwheelfan03 said:


> theo is not from wellston. Click on his screen name. New account just opened up. Someone who doesn’t like chad or just wanting to ruffle feathers. People open accounts like this all the time to stir the pot..


Yep, that's why I started my post with the "interesting first post" and followed it up with disbelief that a guy from Wellston would have issue with Chad when local flossing (Wellston) has been in style below the coffer for 40 years or so. Who cares how the guides fish as long as they don't low hole you? Salmon are put and take to me. Except I'm not much into the taking part once they are in the river. 

It's always amazed me that guys will pay a guide to help them floss, when even a rookie can hook fish with cheap gear and home made yarn flies right next to the shore.


----------



## AdamBradley (Mar 13, 2008)

I have no words.... wait, a couple come to mind: Walmart reels, chumming, teenage girls, and Thailand.

I guess you can say he’s a professional, especially at knowing how laws actually read, and abiding by them.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

Treat others as you would want to be treated. If you did 500+ trips a year why would you buy very expensive equipment to have people ruin it? Been there done that. I’d assume a pair of simms waders vs. hodgman or a sage rod vs. redington or white river makes you a better fisherman and person as well eh?


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

AdamBradley said:


> I have no words.... wait, a couple come to mind: Walmart reels, chumming, teenage girls, and Thailand.
> 
> I guess you can say he’s a professional, especially at knowing how laws actually read, and abiding by them.


I was going to ask the OP to do a little googling, but then it might not be appropriate. Definitely some good stuff out there.

If we are pushing for certain groups to vote, why not allow certain groups to floss?:evilsmile


----------



## AdamBradley (Mar 13, 2008)

jwheelfan03 said:


> Treat others as you would want to be treated. If you did 500+ trips a year why would you buy very expensive equipment to have people ruin it? Been there done that. I’d assume a pair of simms waders vs. hodgman or a sage rod vs. redington or white river makes you a better fisherman and person as well eh?


The Walmart reels mention went 100 feet over your head. Zero to do with cost. Well, I guess it does. If you know, you know.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

AdamBradley said:


> The Walmart reels mention went 100 feet over your head. Zero to do with cost. Well, I guess it does. If you know, you know.


I doubt someone from the east side knows.


----------



## AdamBradley (Mar 13, 2008)

http://www.masoncountypress.com/2013/01/28/district-court-news/

6th bullet down.
Ok I guess I don’t know too much.


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

TK81 said:


> Yep, that's why I started my post with the "interesting first post" and followed it up with disbelief that a guy from Wellston would have issue with Chad when local flossing (Wellston) has been in style below the coffer for 40 years or so. Who cares how the guides fish as long as they don't low hole you? Salmon are put and take to me. Except I'm not much into the taking part once they are in the river.
> 
> It's always amazed me that guys will pay a guide to help them floss, when even a rookie can hook fish with cheap gear and home made yarn flies right next to the shore.


Newaygo " Bank Billie" here, I must have driven by BGS 50 times this month and I still don't know where the heck it is. oar even GAF .

I have 2 watercraft also.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

AdamBradley said:


> http://www.masoncountypress.com/2013/01/28/district-court-news/
> 
> 6th bullet down.
> Ok I guess I don’t know too much.


Keep em coming. Where’s the others Mr. Novi?


----------



## troutguy26 (Apr 28, 2011)

jwheelfan03 said:


> Keep em coming. Where’s the others Mr. Novi?


https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1643431509038993&id=553807588001396


----------



## AdamBradley (Mar 13, 2008)

Mr Novi is done with fact checking. Are you done too mr newaygo? That you Chad? For the rest I’ll leave it at as originally stated “if you know, you know.”

The issue is encouragement of flossing limits off gravel, because it’s “legal” (debatable by DNR definition) in the name of a dollar today versus a better fishery tomorrow. All from a gentleman without the most law abiding track record.

I haven’t caught a clipped fish on the big man in years. Those fish being pulled off the gravel are what provides the majority of the fishery on that river. That is all.


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

jwheelfan03 said:


> Keep em coming. Where’s the others Mr. Novi?


Swan Ave. is a 5 mile walk down 88th street


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

AdamBradley said:


> Mr Novi is done with fact checking. Are you done too mr newaygo? That you Chad? For the rest I’ll leave it at as originally stated “if you know, you know.”
> 
> 
> The issue is encouragement of flossing limits off gravel, because it’s “legal” (debatable by DNR definition) in the name of a dollar today versus a better fishery tomorrow. All from a gentleman without the most law abiding track record.
> ...


No this isn’t Chad but he is my neighbor and I don’t think it’s cool for people to trash talk anyone especially an outsider like yourself who’s not from here. If you don’t like flossing then write your congressman for a change. I can’t say I condone it but it’s legal, plain and simple. If you want MI to turn into a place like Oregon where the fishing guide is the size a phonebook and you can’t fart without permission then that’s your opinion. But once again your from the blue side of the state so it doesn’t surprise me with your cnn fact checking and rumors you’ve heard that’s been misconstrued as information flows down the water cooler.


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

First rule of Newaygo County is the same as the first rule of Fight Club


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

Bucket-Back said:


> First rule of Newaygo County is the same as the first rule of Fight Club


Maybe in white cloud or big prairie


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

Haven't had the enjoyment of WC in a few months. I should visit the laundromat or UHaul one of these days


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

AdamBradley said:


> The issue is encouragement of flossing limits off gravel, because it’s “legal” (debatable by DNR definition) in the name of a dollar today versus a better fishery tomorrow.


This. This right here is why I started this thread. I don't know Chad, never met him, this thread wasn't posted cause I don't like him or had some vendetta against him. I simply have a lot of different bookmarks to various resources I use as fishing reports to help know when I should get my butt out there. The Betts site just happens to be one of the many links I check when the season is upon us.

Flossing is a subject that comes up a lot on this forum in a negative way, as it should. There was an Ionia case where the DNR suspected someone of purposely "flossing", so we know where the DNR stands on it. The regulations are clear on what snagging is, and hooked in the mouth or not, when someone has "purposeful" intent flossing IS snagging. Sure it's tough to prove someone had "purposeful" intent... unless they come right out and say it like this!

I was simply shocked when I read "Flossing is legal in Michigan" on a professional services page and wondered what everyone else would have to say about that.

Here's how you do it, and we teach and encourage our clients to do it.

I just wanted to share, and know that I'm not alone in how I feel about this.

Yes, this was my first post, I simply just lurk. But this irked me enough to create an account and share.


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

jwheelfan03 said:


> If you don’t like flossing then write your congressman for a change. I can’t say I condone it but it’s legal, plain and simple.


So flossing "IS" legal in Michigan? Or do you really mean accidental flossing?

Straight from the guidebook...
Snagging: It is unlawful to snag a fish, attempt to snag fish, or keep a fish that has been unlawfully hooked. Taking or attempting to take fish in a manner or methods where the fish does not take, or have the chance to take, the hook voluntarily in its mouth is defined as snagging and is unlawful.

Purposeful flossing fits that last sentence to a tee.

Taking or attempting to take fish in a manner or methods where the fish does not take, or have the chance to take, the hook voluntarily in its mouth is defined as snagging and is unlawful.

I don't see how flossing can be said to be legal by anyone when it's so clearly stated that it is not.


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

jwheelfan03 said:


> No this isn’t Chad but he is my neighbor and I don’t think it’s cool for people to trash talk anyone especially an outsider like yourself who’s not from here.


And to be clear, I'm not personally "trash talking" Chad, could care less about his history or record or whatever. Like most people I've met, they end up actually being pretty cool once you get to chat'n and getting to know them. But... his guide service did say "Flossing is legal in Michigan", which is why I pointed it out. I mean, it was news to me that "Flossing is legal in Michigan".


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

TheoJohn said:


> So flossing "IS" illegal in Michigan? Or do you really mean accidental flossing?
> 
> Straight from the guidebook...
> Snagging: It is unlawful to snag a fish, attempt to snag fish, or keep a fish that has been unlawfully hooked. Taking or attempting to take fish in a manner or methods where the fish does not take, or have the chance to take, the hook voluntarily in its mouth is defined as snagging and is unlawful.
> ...


Chuck and duck, bottom bouncing = legal snagging. Flossing = legal snagging. Until there is a limit on leader length it’s flossing so yes it’s legal. You can fish spawning fish on gravel with a long leader which is legal and called: flossing. Oregon has limits on leader lengths etc. MI does not. Hook sizes in certain rivers and locations is pretty much it. I’ve been stopped and had my hooks measured multiple times which aggravated the hell out of me because I was the only person drifting skein in this particular area.


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

jwheelfan03 said:


> Chuck and duck, bottom bouncing = legal snagging. Flossing = legal snagging. Until there is a limit on leader length it’s flossing so yes it’s legal. You can fish spawning fish on gravel with a long leader which is legal and called: flossing. Oregon has limits on leader lengths etc. MI does not. Hook sizes in certain rivers and locations is pretty much it. I’ve been stopped and had my hooks measured multiple times which aggravated the hell out of me because I was the only person drifting skein in this particular area.


Seems like a misnomer to me. There is no such thing as "Legal snagging".


----------



## Whitetail_hunter (Mar 14, 2012)

Flossing is legal that is unless you can prove the intentions of the fish, which you can't.

Isn't a little late in the year for a thread like this?


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

TheoJohn said:


> Seems like a misnomer to me. There is no such thing as "Legal snagging".


Sure there is. What defines snagging is a matter of ethics not legality. Some people may say flossing or chuck and duck is snagging. Others may say it’s not. If it’s legal to chuck and duck people that think it’s snagging can call it legal snagging. It’s a matter of terminology and an age old debate.


----------



## eyepod (Dec 31, 2010)

If a fish is hooked in the mouth is it not a legal catch?


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

eyepod said:


> If a fish is hooked in the mouth is it not a legal catch?


Not if the fish had no intention of biting, having had the hook shoved in its mouth, no its not legal. But yes, proving that isnt possible... unless of course you advertise the fact as such is the case in point that started this thread.


----------



## eyepod (Dec 31, 2010)

TheoJohn said:


> Not if the fish had no intention of biting, having had the hook shoved in its mouth, no its not legal. But yes, proving that isnt possible... unless of course you advertise the fact as such is the case in point that started this thread.


So again Eye ask, if a fish is hooked in the mouth is it not a legal catch? a simple yes or no answer is suffice. Thanks. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book.  End of story.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

TheoJohn said:


> Not if the fish had no intention of biting, having had the hook shoved in its mouth, no its not legal. But yes, proving that isnt possible... unless of course you advertise the fact as such is the case in point that started this thread.


If I’m in the tribe and spear a fish at a dam is it legal?


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

eyepod said:


> So again Eye ask, if a fish is hooked in the mouth is it not a legal catch? a simple yes or no answer is suffice. Thanks. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book.  End of story.


A simple yes or no question to only one part of the definition does not negate the yes or no against the other components of the definition, no matter how much a snagger may want it to. The regulations say to be legal it has to be in the mouth AND willfully bitten. The two are not mutually exclusive. Getting it in the mouth does not automatically void the other requirement of it willfully biting. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book. End of story.


----------



## jwheelfan03 (Jun 9, 2011)

TheoJohn said:


> A simple yes or no question to only one part of the definition does not negate the yes or no against the other components of the definition, no matter how much a snagger may want it to. The regulations say to be legal it has to be in the mouth AND willfully bitten. The two are not mutually exclusive. Getting it in the mouth does not automatically void the other requirement of it willfully biting. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book. End of story.


So next time you land a fish ask it if it willfully took the bait. That’ll give you the answer you’re looking for


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

jwheelfan03 said:


> If I’m in the tribe and spear a fish at a dam is it legal?


There are specific regulations for who, what, and when spearing is legal.


----------



## hypox (Jan 23, 2000)

I would argue that the fish has a chance to take the hook voluntarily in its mouth. This = legal fishing method.
I could care less though, once a salmon is past the river mouth I have no interest in fishing for them.


----------



## Whitetail_hunter (Mar 14, 2012)

TheoJohn said:


> A simple yes or no question to only one part of the definition does not negate the yes or no against the other components of the definition, no matter how much a snagger may want it to. The regulations say to be legal it has to be in the mouth AND willfully bitten. The two are not mutually exclusive. Getting it in the mouth does not automatically void the other requirement of it willfully biting. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book. End of story.



As I stated a few post back you nor the dnr or anyone for that matter can prove the intentions of the fish. So "willfully" is null and void.


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

jwheelfan03 said:


> So next time you land a fish ask it if it willfully took the bait. That’ll give you the answer you’re looking for


If someone is purposely flossing they already know the answer to that question before they even hooked the fish. This thread is about those that know full well they are snagging, but saying flossing is legal cause they successfully slid that hook in da chops. Glad to know which camp you fit into now, though.


----------



## eyepod (Dec 31, 2010)

TheoJohn said:


> A simple yes or no question to only one part of the definition does not negate the yes or no against the other components of the definition, no matter how much a snagger may want it to. The regulations say to be legal it has to be in the mouth AND willfully bitten. The two are not mutually exclusive. Getting it in the mouth does not automatically void the other requirement of it willfully biting. The answer to that question is specifically stated in the rule book. End of story.


Can anyone prove that a fish willfully or unwilfully got a hook stuck in its mouth? You can spin all you want, the bottom line is, if it is hooked in the mouth it is a legal catch. That is the end of the story. Have a good day.


----------



## TheoJohn (Oct 15, 2020)

eyepod said:


> Can anyone prove that a fish willfully or unwilfully got a hook stuck in its mouth? Bottom line is, if it is hooked in the mouth it is a legal catch. That is the end of the story. Have a good day.


I guess that right there is the crux of my aggravation right there, people knowing full well that they are snagging unwilling biters in the mouth, yelling "prove it", and laughing all the way to the bank... like yourself with all these end of story comments. Just because you can get away with making it appear legal doesnt make it legal.


----------



## eyepod (Dec 31, 2010)

TheoJohn said:


> I guess that right there is the crux of my aggravation right there, people knowing full well that they are snagging unwilling biters in the mouth, yelling "prove it", and laughing all the way to the bank... like yourself with all these end of story comments. Just because you can get away with making it appear legal doesnt make it legal.


Just as all your spin can not make legally mouth hooked fish illegal. End of story.


----------

