Is the “soul” of fly-fishing being sacrificed?

[bigfly]

Juan, speaking for myself....
The soul of this activity resides in a natural Eco-system, that we can learn over time.
I enjoy the challenge of predicting a fishes behavior, or an insects timing....
To stand at the center of the circle of life and understand where we stand......
And then throw a perfect cast to perfect fish of course.

[Ed Wahl]

I have 2 nephews, both in their mid teens now who fly fish. They also have friends that they can show fly fishing to. As long as there are kids out there trying to figure out how to make this stuff work to catch fish the soul of fly fishing is alive and well. What we oldsters do has no bearing on it at all. Think back to when you all started, that magic is still there and will be for as long as we have fish and insects.
Ed

[Darian]

Almost all of the responses to the question make reference to fly fishing for Trout in freshwater and the surroundings involved. All of these things are great on their own. However, Fly fishing has a greater breadth as a subject area. It includes fly fishing in warm water, salt water, rivers, estuaries, lakes, reefs, surf, open ocean, etc., ad nauseum. Maybe the question should've been narrowed to reflect the question including the context of the article....(??)

[Mike O]

Don't understand the comparison of how indicator fishing has stopped people from matching the hatch...one still has better luck matching the hatch if using the proper bug, no? It just made it a little easier...by reminding us of how we fished before we fly fished.

And I agree with Jimmie. Souls are individual...

[bonneville54]

I wondered whether I should have used the word soul in my original post- although it was used in the article mentioned - when asking the question(s). I wasn't really asking if such a thing, an immortal essence, if you will, exists in the activity or in any inanimate object, for that matter. That, perhaps, is a discussion better suited to a campfire, single malt and a starry night.

Might we all agree, to a certain extent anyway, that in fly-fishing (as in many other sports or activities) there exists a traditional aesthetic? This aesthetic might include physical skills that take time and practice to develop, like the cast…but intellectual skills too, like reading the water, understanding a bit of entomology and aquatic life and an appreciation of the outdoors. Of course, none of these are exclusive to fly-fishing and there may be other aspects of the sport one could include in the idea of a traditional aesthetic.

The article then asks – within the idea of “growth in the industry” – Is there a danger that this aesthetic is being lost in the simple quest for numbers of fish caught? The guide quoted in the article uses the strike indicator as an example of the “dumbing down” of the sport, implying its use has allowed fly-fisherman to catch greater numbers of fish, but at the cost of some of the traditional skills - the cast, for example. Additionally, the article implies, this quest for the number of fish caught may discourage an appreciation for the more emotional aspects of the sport – a sense of wonder of the outdoors and so on.

After reading the article, I wondered if those of you “in the industry” felt the same. That is…has the quest for a larger harvest per outing put some of the traditional aspects of the sport in danger? The opinion of those in the article seemed to imply that it has ( and therein lies some danger for growth overall in the industry it implies, but I was less interested in that aspect)

An interesting question? Perhaps not….but what the hell, no harm in asking.

[BobVP]

I appreciate that there are those that take the time to write/ask these questions which I, sometimes, think about but rarely articulate.

The only "soul" I can be accountable for is my own. That is enough work for anyone...

That part of me that flyfishes started when I was ten years old on a smaller creek in West Marin. For my purposes that is when there started to be any soul to flyfishing as prior to that time it was someone else's habit, sport, credo or obsession, therefore it was a nothing to me as my own soul was not involved.

Fifty one years later I can honestly say that every single time I walk toward the river with a fly rod in hand I am still that 10 year old boy wearing bluejeans and tennis shoes carrying the hand-me-down Union, bamboo rod my oldest brother gave me. I still have the hands that tied on the Black Gnat....I feel the leader, way too large....I have a "muscle memory" of swinging that rod around too fast, trying to find rhythm with speed....I see the first thing I "caught", that willow behind me. It was late in the day when I started and those two hours went quickly and they remain, for me, the soul, my soul connected to fly fishing.

As for you interesting question concerning "the sport" itself: I can only say that any single individual takes full responsibility every time they walk into the river. If they must have the latest, hottest selling rig..if they must catch the most or biggest fish...if they must give up on why they are really there to achieve some other goal then I would say they have given part of their soul to those goals, but the sport itself is simply a way for us humans to connect, soulless or soulfully.

Thanks for asking. How's Peardale?

[Darian]

BobVP,.... the description of your trip as a 10 year old made me think of the times I fished with my dad back in the 50's on the SoCal coast line. Not Trout or fly fishing but great memories all the same.

The change to an aesthetic attributable to fly fishing makes the original question interesting. IMO, there's definitely a long history/traditional aesthetic associated with fly fishing; there for anyone caring to look into it. Has it been lost or dumbed down?? For me, it hasn't been lost.

In addition to what I mentioned in my original post about the equipment, flies, etc., I still fish (altho not so much for Salmon/Steelhead/Trout any longer) and read about it as often as I can and keep in touch with guys in the industry to ask questions. From that point of view, I'd say that tradition has evolved but the aesthetic has not been lost.

Many guides contribute to the perception that things have been dumbed down by their pursuit of numbers of fish to satisfy their clients who've paid for the trip and expect results. For example, on some rivers guides insist their clients use indicators with specific leader styles and weighted nymphs. That effort promotes/requires the use of the most effective/productive method to catch and photograph fish. Also, it requires little more casting skill of the client than being able to lob the rig to the fish. All of which keeps most everyone happy.

At any rate, I believe that whatever the sport evolves into will become part of the history/tradition of fly fishing and will have its own aesthetic.

[bigfly]

At one time, snowboarding was not an Olympic event.
Likewise, oldsters will remember when dry fly was the fishing thing.
Whether you support change or drag feet, sports will change.
I had to learn to bobber fish, to get clients (and me) into fish here.
The T isn't devoid of rising fish, they just might not do it when we get to the water....
I teach all styles of fishing, but know which is most likely to work for clients.
Not just skill wise, but probability too.
Some folks fight it, "they know" what fly fishing is about, and a bobber isn't it.
I don't fight this, figuring it's their day......even if they are likely to blank.
Casting a dry is fun, just by itself....

What really frosts my jaws, is the bead thing....
Clearly these folks don't want to learn the water/bugs, they just want a fish.
On this curve, dynamite is an obvious next choice.
At that point, I think the soul will have left..

Jim

[TonyMuljat]

At one time, snowboarding was not an Olympic event.
Likewise, oldsters will remember when dry fly was the fishing thing.
Whether you support change or drag feet, sports will change.
I had to learn to bobber fish, to get clients (and me) into fish here.
The T isn't devoid of rising fish, they just might not do it when we get to the water....
I teach all styles of fishing, but know which is most likely to work for clients.
Not just skill wise, but probability too.
Some folks fight it, "they know" what fly fishing is about, and a bobber isn't it.
I don't fight this, figuring it's their day......even if they are likely to blank.
Casting a dry is fun, just by itself....

What really frosts my jaws, is the bead thing....
Clearly these folks don't want to learn the water/bugs, they just want a fish.
On this curve, dynamite is an obvious next choice.
At that point, I think the soul will have left..

Jim

Yes, bobber fishing is not very aesthetic. But I also wonder why they don't make the bobbers more aesthetically pleasing? In reality how is a bright green, red, or yellow bobber any different than the old red and white ones? I recall back in my adolescence, being primarily a gear fisherman, one of the fishing mags had a great article on these really cool bamboo or balsa wood bobbers that had north and south axis on them. They were very aesthetic....

[bigfly]

I will input, that it takes more technique to get a good bobber drift than a dry drift...and I'm not talking about drift-boat bobber fishing where the guide fixes the drift and can even set for you..
So for me, a bobber is not aesthetic in appearance, but in usage. Some serious subtlety involved believe it or not..
As far as aesthetic indies, how about small ducky bobbers? Maybe it could raise it's tail when we get a take....

By the way, I now refer to indicators, as a presentation platform....my biggest concern after picking a fly, is presenting it correctly in the water column.
Gotta go fish now....

Jim