| Author |
Topic  |
|
|
flyfishingandflytying
Forum Admin
  
165 Posts |
Posted - 22/12/2008 : 11:00:12
|
|
In the February 2009 issue, Peter Lapsley attempts to explain why American anglers are so different from UK ones. It might be approach, tactics, flies, attitude to rivers, etc... but why, when we share the same origins? Your thoughts...?
|
|
|
JKissane
Starting Member

22 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2009 : 12:40:05
|
quote: Originally posted by flyfishingandflytying
In the February 2009 issue, Peter Lapsley attempts to explain why American anglers are so different from UK ones. It might be approach, tactics, flies, attitude to rivers, etc... but why, when we share the same origins? Your thoughts...?
Speaking from my own experience, there is a great deal of difference between what is accepted as fly fishing in the US, versus the restrictive definitions in the UK. The U.S. definition is based solely on the fly, itself, being the defining criterion. I dislike this - it has resulted in bobber-lobbing spin fishermen throwing rooster-tailed spinners with a single hook and calling themselves fly-fishermen, but it is probably a reflection of the resistance to "controls" of any kind on outdoorsmen's activities that is inherent in the American persona. The freedom or relative opennness of public waters to fishermen has added to the lack of control in trout fishing in the U.S. as well. Regulation in any fashion is resisted by American outdoorsmen, as they seem to view outdoor recreation as an opportunity to shed regulations, conventions or restrictions as part of the experience. I've long maintained the reason many Americans went West is that so many of them could not abide by social norms of a more densely-populated area.
I think there has to be a happy medium somewhere between the helter-skelter American approach and the restrictive Halfordian dry fly upstream to feeding fish only approach. But maybe that's just me.
Although prequalified by virtue of their brain size, trout have no politics. |
 |
|
| |
Topic  |
|
|
|