longlines vs shooting heads

[Dana]

I'm working on an article for the Spey Pages on this subject and was curious about the membership's experiences with line control issues surrounding various spey line designs. My own experiences suggest that the belief that line and fly control are superiour with long belly lines is largely a myth that has its roots in the days when shooting heads were backed by monofilament (which was not particularly useful for anglers who needed to mend their lines). Once upon a time I was of the view that you couldn't effectively control a fly with yards of running line between the rod tip and the head section of the line, but my experiments with a variety of shooting heads and shooting head-style lines the past two years has me looking back over some of my old posts on other BBs and shaking my head. I'm also wondering how much line control really is needed when swinging flies for anadromous species. What are your experiences with line control and various line styles?

[wet fly]

Dana, I took your course on the Fraser River last march and wanted to learn to cast the long line. I had always heard one could not control the fly as good with the shorter heads. I did learn to cast the S.A. 8/9 line and the accellerator line in good conditions with no wind. In actual fishing conditions I found I always went back to the wind cutter. Now I am also using the new Air Flow line which handle very well. It seems weather I fish the Deschutes, Snake, Grande Rhonde, or Thompson there is wind. May be my skill level is not good but the shorter heads will cast into the wind so I end up putting the long heads back in my vest. As far as line control with heads I say whats the problem? With the win cutter and air flow line I feel I have good line control. The running line will lift another 20 to 35 feet of the running line to get the desired drift of the fly. Jerry

[L A Smithers]

Hi Dana: On reading your post on controling the line with short heads vs long lines;I was surprised at your statement that you could control the line satisfactorily with the short head.
If of course you were merely using a wet fly swing and casting 45 degrees downstream ,then you could make little flips to keep the line straight. However if you were casting 90 deg across stream ,and your cast was longer than 75 feet with a windcutter ;I dont see how you could mend the heavy belly to insure a good dead drift. Perhaps you could elaborate on your method of controlling line. or have I perhaps missinterpreted your post.

[kush]

LA Smithers,

I will let Dana explain the technique of long distance mending. He fished his shooting heads all season on the Thompson this year as he was interested in perfecting the Underhand Cast and the mends that go with it. On the broad Thompson flows he regularly fished well over 120-130'. These were casts very close to 90 degrees out and he had no trouble making the mends necessary.

While I much prefer long belly lines I did spend a few weekends using one of Dana's proto-type heads and I found the mends very easy to execute. While Dana does a much better job of explaining it, the basic technique involves lifting the rod and briging the line under tension, then a sort of a slow motion straight-armed lift upstream. The very fact that I can't exactly tell you how it works indicates that it is a pretty simple straight forward procedure. While I don't anticipate that I will be switching to short belly lines anytime soon, I certainly admit that what was once a major criticism that I had of the lines is certainly groundless - they mend very well at significant distances!

[L A Smithers]

Hi Kush: I read your post in reply to mine with intrest,however I`m afraid I still can understand how this can be accomplished.
There are of course places at Spenses Bridge such as the lower Graveyard and the lower Grease hole where the currents are uniform enough as to require little mending .On the other hand the Y and the Hotel do require true upstream mends.
With the typical head length of the Windcutter line of 50 ' and a 100 foot cast one is trying to lift a 12wt head with a 50 foot 2 wt line. It is true that one can pull hard on the rod and manage to get perhaps 20 ' of the head in the air,but they have already defeated the purpose of the mend ;by pulling on the rod and line the fly has been pulled up from the bottom significantly.To put this in perspective it is well documented that a pull of 1 '
will raise the fly in the water by 6".
If one feeds slack line into the mend as should be done to keep the fly from rising then from both personal experience and from watching some of the best spey casters in the world ,the Scots Gillies I am confident that it is impossible to lift more than a short length of belly with the typical 29 thousanths running line.
I am not trying to provoke an arguement by these statements but rather to elicite some rational statement of the technique which would be required to accomplish this feat.

[Dana]

Hi Bud!

Here's a few lines from a newsletter article on distance casting that provides a little more clarity:

****

Mending shooting heads

One of the chief criticisms levelled at shooting heads is that once the head leaves the rod rings it is impossible to mend because the narrow diameter running line doesn’t have enough mass to move the heavier head section. For several years I was of this opinion, and am on record as recommending that anglers avoid shooting head-style lines for this reason.

Then I met two gentlemen who changed my mind about shooting heads. The first was Per Stadigh. Per lives in Stockholm, Sweden, is a master salmon and steelhead angler and proponent of the Scandinavian style of casting and fishing that makes exclusive use of shooting heads. The second was American guide, angler and author Dec Hogan. After observing their methods I discovered that both anglers make use of a unique mending style that allows them to effectively control a shooting head at distances “you had not believed possible.”

Their method is as follows: once the cast is made and the line has settled on the water, the rod is raised near vertical in an effort to lift the running line from the water and maintain a direct connection to the head. The line is kept under slight tension, and when a mend is made the rod tip is moved in an upstream arc—a short, powerful move that capitalizes on the direct connection that exists between the rod tip and the shooting head. Anglers who have fished conventional tackle will immediately recognize this as similar to the methods employed when controlling a bait while bottom bouncing or float fishing. It is important to note that like all skilled anglers Stadigh and Hogan only mend when absolutely necessary, and then usually early in the presentation when setting up the drift of the fly.

****

I think one of the key points, and part two of my original post, was how much mending really is necessary? When it comes to steelhead, I think sometimes we mend too often and too hard. I know I used to do this, having cut my teeth trout fishing on Alberta trout streams where mending is critical. I find with steelhead the less I mend the more fish I catch.

[Dana]

It is exactly the experiences of people such as yourself who favor the shorter heads that got me re-thinking my bias towards long belly lines a few years back. When I started steelheading everyone told me that line control and presentation were the key to success. When I picked up a Spey rod I was told that long lines gave you better line control and thus better angling success. But then I started to meet a lot of people who used Windcutters and caught way more fish than I did. Initially this had more to do with experience than line control, but after a while I noticed that my long line friends and I weren't exactly outfishing the Windcutter guys, even on big water like the Thompson where one would think such an advantage would be apparent. Hmmmmmm...

[L A Smithers]

Hi Dana: Many thanks for the clarification of your earlier post,as well as the description of the Swedish approach which presumably derives from the Goran Andresson Underhand cast.
I will have to concede that if you are catching more fish then the results jutify the action. However I would point out that; assuming you are fishing a 100 fot cast with an Andresson line of a 40 foot head and 60 feet of running line; and you are using a 16"rod and you do not feed line into the mend you will be swinging the rod tip through an angle of at least 45 deg which means the tip will travel roughly 12 feet in one second and you will pull the fly by that distance and at that speed.
This means that the fly will rise by about 4 feet assuming the water is 6 feet deep and the fly will travel at a speed of 8 miles per hour.
I know of very few if any aquatic animals capable of travelling at such speeds even healthy minnows are only capable of about 4 miles per hour.
I can only conclude therefore that the Thompson Steelhead have become very aggressive and remarkably stupid.
or maybe its just me being stupid :devil: ( devils advocate)

[L A Smithers]

Hi : It just boggles my mind how dumb these Scots must be. Here they have been fishing the Spey R for at least 800 years, they designed and have been fishing spey flies for 200 years and have developed the double handed spey caster rod 150 years ago . For 100 years they have been teaching and guiding English sports fishermen like Price Tannant, and George Kelson and Americans likeLa Branch ; and in all that time they have never stumbled on these brilliant ideas that are now emerging from North American experts.
It just makes one wonder a little bit maybe they were just to busy developing the steam engine and the automobile to really use their imagination and begin to understand fishing.

[doublespey]

Hi Bud,

Thought I'd left your crotchety self on the FF@ list, but I see that I was wrong. :devil:

Seriously tho . . . I had this same discussion with Dana quite a few years ago when he was fishing the long belly lines (Derek Brown's SpeyDriver) for both floating and sinktips at prodigious distances. Reading your posts, they sound ~exactly~ like his arguments when discussing the merits and detriments of each line system. The problems with moving the fly in it's drift while mending, etc.

What I've personally found is that, after about 60 or 70', it becomes very difficult not to move the fly - even when throwing line into the mend to compensate - no matter what line system you're using. Most accomplished speyfishers I've been privledged to watch seem to set a major mend at the beginning of the drift, then make compensatory mends in the nearest 30 - 40' of line that don't disturb the fly after the swing has been set.

Tradition is a fine thing, but it's also a good idea to experiment for yourself. Maybe you should spend a season using the WindCutter so as to become more immediately acquainted with it's potential. ;)

My .02,

Brian Lencho / Doublespey

[Dana]

Now look at me, turncoat that I am, singing the praises of shooting heads--what's wrong with me! :D

Doublespey and Coot, Per and I had this same discussion a few years ago on one of "those other" BBs, at a time when I was solidly in your camp, Coot! DS, remember the first time I tried to cast your Windcutter system on the Skykomish? Hah! I was hopeless! Even today real Windcutter anglers point out that I still throw too much line behind me, a habit of too much top hand from my exclusively longline days. But I'm workin' on it...

These days I guess I'm kinda the Spey casting version of a switch hitter--I just kinda see what's gonna work best for me at the time and put it to use. Again, just my experience, but I've found that no one line system is inherently superior to another; it all comes down to preference and a belief in what works best for you. Each system requires changes in method to get the most from it, and I end up hooking just as many steelhead on shooting head systems as on longlines, which could mean that I'm a mediocre all round kinda angler who can't get the potential out of any given line system, or that when used to the best advantage I can each line system offers me a pretty even chance of hooking that fish out there (or perhaps a little of both!).

And it probably also means I'm gettin' a little lazier as I get older--why pick up and toss all those extra grains if I really don't have to? :confused:

[Scott K]

Just want to add....

Dana, you sound like you have proven the case for mending shooting heads and it sounds like it can be done (would appreciate if you could show me one day).

But another issue I want to bring up is the issue of stripping and shooting. While Spey fishing and the longer rod allow you to mend and control line much more effectively, they also lend themselves to much more efficent fishing because instead of false casting the fly with the single hander, you are back in the water after a few movements and a power stroke. Much more time fishing after a long day, and we know that the guy who has his fly in the water more than the next guy will catch more fish.

Having said that, how much time do you lose (or gain?) when you are stripping and shooting as opposed to just picking up a set distance of line which is commonly done by long liners and getting back out there? I'm not saying go out and count how many casts you do in a day with a long belly line compared to a shooting head, but just give a ballpark figure for what you think you lose (or even gain?) in efficiency/time in the water over the course of a day between long lining and stripping and shooting with the Spey rod. It might only be a few short seconds per cast, but over the course of the day a few seconds can turn into minutes worth of fishing in the course of a day.


Another issue I want to ask about is the use of a rear taper in spey fishing. Do long rear tapers have a place in Spey fishing? For shooting heads? Long liners? I would think for a long liner that a long rear taper might be useless and it might be better off to just have straight belly and a short rear taper, but for a "shooter?"

[kush]

Guys,

Maybe I should shed a little light on Dana. From my very close perspective I think Dana's changing outlook on casting styles is really due to the fact that he is a flat out spey casting junkie. He loves anything and everything about casting with doublehanders. I also know first hand, that when his interest is piqued - his enthusiasm and focus knows no bounds. So when he saw the underhand cast he just HAD to figure it and everything to do with it. His "switch" this past season to short bellied heads was, in my opinion, a natural progression for this "student of the game" - I don't hold it against him! As I said earlier, I even tried it for a while myself. I must admidt that there is in fact a certain rush to all that shooting line sailing off into the distance.

Scott's reference to all the stripping is now my only real criticism of the shooting lines. As Scott infers I do think that over the long haul of a season a long belly caster will get in significantly more casts than someone with short belly line will. Now having said that I am pretty certain that there is a smaller incidence of tennis elbow amongst the short belly guys than the long belly boys!

One further comment, this time in praise of the short bellies. I found them much more efficient casting into some of the heavy winds common on the Thompson. On a couple of extemely tough afternoons on the Graveyard I was seriously considering mugging Dana for his shooting head. He was casting 100' while I was making up some bizzare triple-dipple side-winder cast with my Speydriver to get my fly out 60'!

[Per Stadigh]

Dear all,

This topic, as Dana said, is what brought us together. We were into some serious fights, and eventually came out as friends.......
As influx works both ways I did fish a good deal last season in Russia with Windcutter and Accelerator lines, just to make sure that I not was missing anything central out, when being so hard headed about the virtues of tailored shooting heads and thin running lines.

What I found out is that the longer designs(too me even a Windcutter is looong..) are great to cast, at least in open situations or when waded out). One gets into effective distances ever so easy.

BUT, and this is the alarming part, they are poor in controlling the drift!!! This controversial statement derives from the fact that the long heavy belly is hard to keep up in the air. Also it is under pressure from a much "broader band" of currents, needing repetetive mendings to control the belly rather than the fly.

So I am even more convinced that the shooting head system makes for a far more effecient fishing technique. With them I often can cast 35-40 yds square, flip a good mend in that settles the 35'-45' head almopst parallell to the flow and then let it fish the "outer lane",where little competition is to be had. With the head sailing away under a a minimum of tension, and the running line either on the water, easy to lift free, or free in the air all the time, it is very easy to flip occational mends in that settles the head right. The horrible truth is that it reminds a bit of fishing a float... Often enough fish hook themselves as the take stops the fly but lets the head swim on to pull the hooks in from below.

I would like to return on this topic when I can get some peace to write (the family are off for a Sunday outing).

To close - to get the best of two worlds I tailor heads made of 25' level #12 Floating (A 40 yds DT makes many such") to 20 feet tips (#11) ranging for floating down to leadcore. Then you really get a good "float " with all the fine sinktips you Steelheaders have taught me to love. As for a running line either the Airflo Intermediate or the Flatbeam 35 pound is what I like.

Good luck!
Per

PS. 1) I never feed line into the mends
2) To mee the final stripping in of line is combined with a constant stripping during most of the cast. In fast water maybe less than 1"/second, in sluggish water up tp 10"/second. All to ensure that the fly is actively swimming out there. Once the cast is fished out I continue this stripping in a gradually quicker pace. Maybe 20% of my fish take me in this final stage. With the fly under tension the positive hookups are far greater than when the fly is hanging passive in the traditional "dangle". As you immediatly feel the fish the trick is to strike hard as soon as this the take occurs. As you see a big part of the "stripping in" is part of the actual fishing, adding a bonus effect. Hence it is hard to say that one actually looses much time as compared to flipping a full line out, without stripping. DS

[L A Smithers]

Hi Dana Brian and Per: I `ll begin this with a :p although I may end with a :eek: So many replies so many arguements.
First to Brian who tells me I should try a windctter. Brian I knew Jim Vincent 15 years ago when he was still joining various pieces of line trying to create a spey line so as a result I got 3 windcutters from him when they were first built. Believe me I have fished them and indeed because they are much easier to cast than a proper DT I was almost sold but alas the endless stripping in, both while fishing as Per suggests and after the hangdown simply defeated the true values of spey style fishing. His accelerator line was simply a bad concept. The use of a hinge to turn over the tip at 22 feet simply refleted the fact that Jim was not rolling the line but shooting it. this is where the basic dichotomy exists between the traditional and the current You loose half of the value of the spey cast when you shoot line rather than rolling it. When the line is low and rolling you can defeat the wind but when its up and shooting you are at the mercy of the wind.
To Dana who says that he is catching more fish with the shooting head style.;there is of course another possible explanation for this/.Because you are casting further you are fishing where the fish are,I have noticed that with fewer and fewer fish in the Thompson they are holding further from shore. Twenty years ag most fish were caught with casts of 60 feet nowadays you have to be out 100 feet :chuckle: the fish are getting smarter.
To Per may I say that I thoroughly enjoyed a visit to your country fourty years ago. As the guest of Dr. Stig Hagner the woods manager for Svenska Cellulosa I did a lot of fishing on the company rivers and lakes. I found that my long greenheart rod was a real novelty to the locals as was the traditional spey cast.
I hope to go back some day because it is one of the lovliest places in the world.
I doubt that I have added anything to this discussion althoug I may possibly have learned something but anyhow my best to all of you.

[Poul]

IMHO, I think the advantages of mending are over-stated. In most circumstances, an imperfect mend, and often a perfect mend, won't do anything to make your fly fish better or longer. The real key to fly control (as opposed to line control) is in leading or holding back rod movements through the cast, after making the cast at the appropriate angle, and sometimes appropriate length ( a short cast fishes quite differently than a long one sometimes) for the spot you're standing in.

Sometimes, having your fly fish a little fast is a plus because you cover more water over the course of a day. Steelhead rarely care, because they are, in fact, pretty stupid.

The real advantage to long bellies is not having to strip in line.
However, this season I went back to the windcutter after getting a new Loop rod and discovered the following advantages:
1. the shorter back-cast loop is a real advantage when you're tight to the bank;
2. the extra-thick head sets hooks very securely without "striking";
3. my monthly visits to the chiropractor have become unnecessary.

Poul

[L A Smithers]

Hi Poul : I`m glad to see that I have one more person to dissagree with. You say that mending line has little to do with how the fly fishes, I`m afraid you are dead wrong. The majority of steelhead and to a lesser extent salmon hold tight to the rocks and will not rise to the fly. This was the whole basis of the design of the true spey fly. The small head,the fine body on heavy long iron and the shapeand design of the wings were all an attempt to get the fly down to the rocks quickly and to keep it down there.
This can only be accomplished by successive mends of the line which properly involve throwing slack line into the mend.
The minute the line tightens either because the fisherman begins to strip retrieve line or because a downstream belly develops then the fly rises and you are out of the fishing zone.
It is true that if the fish will come up to a waked fly in tailouts then a tight line will be successful, similarly if you fish the wet fly cast with a sinking line 45 degrees downstream then the fly will stay deep. But if you believe that the dead drift followed by a slow swing is the way to go you must mend line and you must avoid the fly rising.
Sorry to be so dissagreable but its hard to teach old dogs new tricks especially if the tricks seem to defy reason.

[Per Stadigh]

Hello,

Thank you for your nice comments about Sweden and your good input in the discussion (anything based on experience rather than hours in the library is worth gold!)

What you say about the casting of course is true, for many of us. Their are no general truths. Maybe I am too obsessed with catching fish - rather than enjoying the art as such. But that's me.

The few times I have had the oppertunity to visit B.C I have felt humble. What an fantastic corner of this planet!! It is sad there are too many "wallet-emtying time" zones that separte us.

(It is a small world: my father (L-E Stadigh) studied with Stig at the University of Uppsala!! I think they made the life rough for quite a few brownies, as well...)

All the best,
Per

[Moonlight]

Very good thread by knowledgeable anglers. I have to play the part of the Old Sage (Satanic Advocate whatever) here for a moment and re visit the late great Roderick Haig Brown and some of his more enlightening prose. To wit : "The real truth is that sport is made by and exisist in just three things: tradition, ethics and restraint. Reduce, remove or destroy these and nothing useful is left. It may be enough to satisfy the newcomers to the sport for a little while, but it cannot hold them long-there will be nothing to grow on, nothing to advance to. In the end, if any real efficency could be attained, the sport itself would die and be forgotten."
This is out of Fisherman's Summer and beleive it or not the single most fundamentaly pure thought regarding angling I have ever come across. I have, since reading it over 40 years ago, tried to fish accordingly to the thoughts these few lines instilled in me.
Simply stated if it makes it easier and its new fangled it needs to be reviewed. Does it make things alot more efficent? If I answer this with yes then it usually is my choice to stay away. you of course can chose to do whatever you want.
Bear in mind some of the individuals mentioned herin are Professionals that are deriving monetary rewards for making successful anglers out of neophytes. This requires increased efficency and I don't think its quite up to the test of the RHB three categorys of tradition ethics and restraint.
Anyhoot its always uplifting to go to my library and dig out the RHB and get the quotes right, now I will read the whole book in camp this week.

[Poul]

L.A. Smithers:

I think you mis-understood my post. I didn't say that mending has little to do with how your fly fishes. It has a lot to do with how your fly fishes: when I mend, my fly usually isn't fishing or swimming the way I like it to until the current removes the slack from my line. So, except in limited specific situations where you have to mend to effectively fish, I'm saying that rather than having a neutral effect, mending actually has a negative effect.

I fish surface/waking flies less than 10% of the time although I always fish a floating line except for winter-runs. I generally like my fly to fish deep, but not on the bottom. In my view, a fly fished a foot or so above the fish is more visible and therefore more effective than a fly fished right in the rocks (therefore hidden by the rocks until the last second). I use a 20' leader and very sparse flies on heavy wire hooks to gain depth. I guess we each have our own well-earned style, which is what it's all about. As long as I'm having fun and catching my share, I'll stick to mine and you'll probably stick to yours. ("Never argue about politics, religion, or fishing method?")

Poul

[L A Smithers]

Hi Per: Its really a small world after all;I`m glad to learn that your father knew Stig well; he is a fine forester and a credit to the Royal College.
In addition to meeting Stg in Sweden I worked with him on the selection and propogation of natural hybrids of Lodgepole Pine in Northern BC during the period that Lodgepole was being planted in Sweden to overcome the ravages of Fomes annosus in Scots pine.
I was particularly impressed in Sweden to see how the Svenska Cellulosa Co was encouraging their employees to enjoy the benefits of fishing and hunting in their forests. The techniques they employed should be a lesson to all forest industries on the benefits of a stable and dedicated forest working staff.
It was also enlightening to visit the forests belonging to Sora Copperberg which had been under carefully reported management for 400 years .The depth of history of forest and land management in Sweden was one of the highlights of my experiences.
Fishing has been the godsend of my life.Spending much of my life in the forest on research work it was one of the few forms of recreation that I could persue. It is perhaps this aspect of my long association with forestry and fishing that makes me loath to abandon the traditional approaches to it.

[L A Smithers]

Hi Moonlight: I can but applaud your thoughts on RHB and your joint view of the world of fishing. Like you I regard Roddy as one of the true giants of fishing prose.
Like you I have a bound collection of his works on my bookshelf to which I return often as a source of inspiration and pleasure.
Would that we might still have such giants among us.

[L A Smithers]

Hi Poul: You`r right I did indeed misinterpret your post. I see now that you are fishing a tight line swung by the current as much as possible. This indeed was the technique employed with the wet line for many years. Your use of heavy iron makes this possible with floating lines and long leaders as well.
I must confess however that I am committed to the dead drift style for deeper long drifts. This is based on my experience that tells me that under most circumstances the steelhead or salmon sees the fly approaching dead drift and slowly at current speed;he drifts backward with the fly observing it carefully. As the fly enters the swing it speeds up slightly and moves away from him like an escaping prey and it is a this point that he makes his decision to take or not.
Thus the long dead drift followed by the swing are crutial elements of my approach and in order to achieve them I must mend repeatedly to insure the dead drift ,lead the line with the rod tip to slow the fly and use small line pulls to tease him into striking.
Let us all hope to achieve our objective of learning the ways of fish and fishing and live longer because of it.

[Dana]

This is great--here we are at the virtual long table a Vicky's virtual coffee shop on the banks of the virtual Thompson/Sauk/Spey/Au//Rynda, mugs in hands, a couple of scraps of toast or bacon left on the plates in front of us, discussing the merits of various line systems! Very cool!

A point of clarification: Bud, I did not say I was catching more fish with heads (at least, I don't think I did!); I'm certainly not catching any fewer fish with head systems--in fact my stats are probably about the same.

Scott, I totally agree with you and others about the issue of stripping and shooting somewhat limiting a fly's water time. But as Per points out, stripping back is a good thing, and longliners probably miss a few fish each season because they aren't pulling the fly on the dangle away from the fish in a measured fashion that might provoke the strike of a following fish. But there is one other thing that has me re-thinking this whole "long lines are superior" thing: how many casters can comfortably and consistently pick up a long belly line at all fishing distances? I know when I started I would often get into the routine of "false casting" my Spey line: the first cast didn't work due to a casting error or three, so I'd make another, and another, and maybe a few more before the line finally rolled out as I originally intended. The longer the belly the narrower the margin for error. So in some cases a caster struggling to throw an entire 100ft belly of a long belly line might actually be reducing their fishing time, plus disturbing a whole lot of water in the process.

So, am I advocating we all dump our Mastery Speys and Accelerators and pick up a Loop Adapted shooting head system? Nope. In fact, in the winter I use a long belly line precisely because I don't want to strip and shoot (guides freeze up). And when I'm messing around trying to hit my next "personal best" for distance casting I'll spool on my Spey-Driver (combined head length of over 100ft) and flail away. So I like long belly lines and use 'em when I feel like it or believe they will give me an advantage, as in winter fly fishing. What I'm suggesting is that the conventional wisdom surrounding the belief in the mending superiority of long lines should be re-examined in the light of the experiences of anglers who do just fine mending shooting heads and shooting head-style line systems. I tried shooting heads, found out I was wrong about them, and am now happily trying to get my wading brogues out of my mouth.:chuckle:

[L A Smithers]

HI Dana et All: I have thoroughly enjoyed our discussion of long vs short head lines I believe it may have made each of us rethink our fishing techniques and perhaps made us better understand some of our problems.
I think you made a very significant point when you raised the issue of maximum distance vs maximum consistancy of casting. The best spey caster I have had the pleasure of fishing with has mentioned many times the importance of determining your maximum distance for consistant casting each time you fish.He suggests gradually increasing your length of cast untill you reach that distance at which your consistancy begins to fail;and staying within that distance for that days fishing. Good consistancy of casting is more important than maximum distance.
One of the things I have observed is that on the Vedder R ,90 percent float fish ,as opposed to bottom bounce;Suggesting that on that river the dead drift down a slot is more important than the swing.The opposite is true on the Thompson suggesting the either because of the size of the river or the distribution of fish it is more important to cover the fish with a swing rather than with a dead drift.
Another point this ex gillie made ,having caught thousands of both Atlantics and steelhead is that Atlantics will more readily rise to the fly ,and there is less need to fish the rocks.This may well account for why the swing with a rising fly is more sucessful on Atlantics while the dead drift moreso on steelhead.
May I close by complimenting you on the excellent job you have done with this new board I see great results from your efforts

[Scott K]

I was gonna report Dana to a moderator for stirring sh$t on this very humble board, but what good would that do me? LOL j/k...

I guess it's nice to see the diversity that the Spey "culture" offers us and the many challenges that lay ahead for all of us as spey casters and fishers. One day, I may master the long line (my preference right now) and when that day comes (probably eons from now) I can maybe have a go at the shorter shooting heads and what comes with them as a new challenge.

Like it's been said before, Spey fishing and the equipment that comes along with it is often best summed up by "different strokes, for different folks."

OH, and shooting heads are for wussies!

[Per Stadigh]

This is already getting bad - I put the alarm clock an hour earlier just to get a bit of extra "surf-time".......:eyecrazy:

Lots of good stuff is being ventilated in here. A few comments:

Atlantics versus Steelies: To me it looks like Atlantics are more sensitive to water temperature than what the steelheads are. (like L A points out) Or rather, their reactions differ more over a given temperatur range than what appears to be true for Steelheads. (Remember; I have 95% salmon and only 5% steelhead in my "data-bank")
When we start for A. , like my upcoming trip to the Brora in early March or first week of June in Russia, the water will be very cold. Then one needs to go deep and present a large fly on a slow swing. (Like Poul, I think it is better to swim the fly just above the fish than at their level.)
As soon as the temp reaches +5-6 C one can fish the fly a bit higher up and also increase the speed somewhat. (In Russia, our rivers being as far north as Brooks Range, the salmons are adapted to cold water in a way that they can start to chase flies almost in the surface even at these cold temps.)
Once you hit +7-9 C intermediate or medium sinkers is all you need, with floaters being possible. The salmons can be very active and many a time have I had big fish that chase a big Sunray Shadow for long distances before hitting the fly with half the back out of the water. The faster the fly the wilder the reaction!
From +10 C it pretty much is a matter of floating and increasingly faster swings. Sometimes the best drill is to cast square and mend DOWN to get maximum speed in the fly, often in combination with fast stripping.
All this is a rough guide - there are many different ways - like fishing minute flies on a slow swing in warm water.
My point is that Steelheads rarely seem to react to very quickly fished flies. Those Steelheaders we get to Russia often need a day or two until they get confident in the fast flies. For me it was the other way around. I was too fast when first set free on the Babine....
Really, it often is more relevant to compare Steelheads with our Searun Browns than it is with the more written up Atlantics. Searuns have a behavior that reminds a lot of Steelheads. Sadly little is written about our big Baltic ones that compare well with Steelheads, also when it comes to size (Up to 40 pounds, with the fly record of 34 lb from river Em).
I think it is good to keep all this in mind when comparing tactics. If I have understood the Steelheads wrong I am certain you will tell me!!
Per

[L A Smithers]

Hi Dana et All: It has become clear to me that the dichotomy between those who prefer to shoot spey cast short heads and those who prefer to fish the classic spey with long double taper lines,is in part due to the change of materials ie graphite,and the failure of north American rod builder to design rods capable of employing the long double taer lines.
One of the basic requirements for the classic spey style is a rod which delivers its energy over a long period of time. Except for the dissadvantage of its weight Greenheart was the best material for this purpose. In contrast graphite delivers its energy in one short burst . As a consequence graphite spey casters designed in North America ,even those designated as "traditional" are really not suited to make the classic spey cast.
Design can in part overcome this deficiency of graphite, but only if the rod is subjected to rigourous testing by people who know the proper feel of greenheart. In only one case ,to my knowledge has this been done. Talon forwarded a series of test rods to a man who was once the junior spey casting champion of Scotland . As a result the final prototype of the Talon 16' spey caster is closer to the true feel and performance of greenheart than any other rod in America.
That is not to say that everone will like such a rod.It requires a good understanding of the fundamentals of the classic spey cast as well as a feel for the timing of the cast ,which is far different from the shoot and hoot method.
Some other builders have submitted their rods to informed judgement with variable effects. Lamiglass sent its spey casters to Mike Maxwell for scrutiny .originally these were fairly good rods but their adventure into 4 piece models virtually destroyed the otherwise good qualities of their material.
Initially Jim Green at Fenwick made an effort to study spey casters in Scotland however he became infatuated with reverse taper a totally useless aproach designed only for materials like cane and never did produce a good spey caster rod.
In an attempt to overcome rod design failures Jim Vincent engulfed by the scandinavian shoot and hoot tried to solve the problem by line design .Thus we see a very short abruput cast which features shooting rather than rolling of the line.
Perhaps none of this matters;we will find a way to fish with the tools available to us however it seems clear to me that we will in all probability never be able to cast long double taper lines in the traditiona Scots style nor will we be able to fish the extended dead drift with the deeply sunken fly which is fundamental to the traditional methods.
Shurely something is being lost here ,those of us who had the pleasure of fishing greenheart sixty years ago will mourn this loss but those who never fished a classic greenheart will never know what they have missed.

[Poul]

L.A. Smithers:

I've thinking about this a bit more, and suggest that our approaches aren't really very different. I also get quite a few of my fish at the point where the fly first comes under tension -- interestingly, this is true with both dries and wets, so I'm not sure if it's the rising of the fly through the water column (kind of a "Leisenring Lift"), or if it's just the sudden action makes the fish think the fly is getting away. Where we differ is how we control tension on the fly: you mend repeatedly to reduce tension, I use rod movements something like an under-stated reach cast to reduce and/or increase tension.

Poul

[L A Smithers]

Hi Poul: I would not want to give the impression that I dislike fishing short shooting heads. I often fish 20 to 30 foot heads both for deeply sunken flies for winter steelhead and floating heads for waked flies in tailouts. However I seldom bother to spey cast them since there is always backspace for a 30'head;and if there isent I can always use the Galloway cast. Since I have to rterieve running line anyway I might just as well overhead cast.
With the heavy sink heads of up to 800 grains I see little point in trying to mend line and use a strip retrieve coupled with rod tip action to work the fly. With a head that heavy there is no way its going to rise significantly.
In this regard I have been experimenting with the newer braided filament running lines such as Power Pro These lines float and a 30 pound test line is the same diameter and even less weight than an 8 pound monofilament.They have virtually no stretch and no tendancy to form coils .To me they are the ideal running line for shooting heads. They do have one deficiency if you do get hung up and have to break off be careful not to hold the line in your hands to break it .It will cut you to ribbons.Place several turns around a stick or other hard object and pull on the stick to break the line.

[Rick J]

Regarding the concept that stripping in all that line with a shorter head is inefficient, generally if you take a few steps downstream between casts, you would be stripping at this point and not casting with either method so I am not convinced that you get in that many more casts with a long line system ( though I also usually prefer the long line). As a final note, there have been more fish than I can count that have grabbed the fly on the retrieve so to say that the fly is not fishing during th strip is not entirely accurate

[Poul]

At least in the instance of my mediocre casting skills, we're not talking about stripping more than 20-40' of line.

If you're using a 54' windcutter, a 20' leader and a 14' rod, your fly is 54' + 20' + 13' = 87' feet away from your reel with just the head out. Shoot 20' of line and your fly is 107' feet away. Shoot 40' and it's 127' away..

[wet fly]

Danna, This is the most interesting and thought provoking discussion I have ever read on these pages. I enjoy the wealth of knowledge from all over the great Spey areas of the world. Each of us has a bit of knowledge from our own little nooks and crannys. This knowledge along with our personal prejudices can help open our minds to others views. This knowledge from all the great Steelhead fly fisherman from the past along with our much inproved tecnology of lines and rods keeps elevating the skills of all of us. It would be nice if RHB and other greats could see what they started. With this knowledge we fly fisherman can sometime hook as many fish as our gear fishing friends. In the right conditions we can ever hook more fish. Thank you Jerry

[silverdoc]

As a recent convert to heads, I've concluded that there is no major loss of efficiency, because I'm stripping the running line as I take my steps downstream. The fly spends as much time in the water as with a DT.
Here in the midwest, a 90 degree or even upstream doublespey is used at least as often as a 45 degree down/across. Hey, our rivers get COLD! I add a reach into every casting stroke & that eliminates most mending problems.
I guess the only thing about the heads that bothers me is not being able to stack mend the running line.
Just my $0.02
Bob

[Scott K]

I'll try and word this in a non sarcastic, non tongue in cheek tone.

So what is being said is that after every cast, and drift (or swing) fished, some of you head guys walk downstream enough distance to make up for the loss in efficiency (which would be from stripping in the line)? How much are you shooting?
I would imagine you would shoot about 20-30 feet on average. You're walking downstream 20-30 feet after each cast to make up for the lack of efficiency compared to that of the DT or long belly spey line? Sure you're covering the water? You might be missing 20-30 feet of it. From whom I've learned off of, seen, and been subjected to, cold water Steelhead take a much more thorough fishing in a run to bite often times compared to that of a Summer Steelhead. This means more casts placed to get that perfect exact swing or hang down before you start moving downstream and covering water.

[Rick J]

Scott,
You misunderstand. When steelhead fishing I rarely make two casts in he same place. I am usually fishing a run. So to cover as much water as possible, I make a cast, fish it out then take several steps downstream and make that same cast - this is "traditional steelhead swing fishing". What folks are saying, as you make the several steps downstream, you are stripping in line you shot. The fly is still in the water on the dangle and often, you will get grabbed during this strip so it is not necessarily unproductive time as you are stepping down. If you did not shoot line, you would just let the line hang below you as you step down then make your next cast. In either case, by the time you have stepped down, you are ready to make the next cast, whether you shoot line or not

[Scott K]

Rick,
So let me get this straight, what you are saying to me is that when you are letting your fly sit down on the dangle, you are walking to it while stripping in line you shot so it still remains fishing. I would imagine most Spey casters who shoot would shoot 20-30 feet of line, so you would have walked the length of line you shot. When you arrive at this fly on the dangle having fully stripped in the line to the same amount of Belly outside the rod tip that you had on your previous cast, you just walked downstream past 20-30 feet of river by the width of the river that you didn't swing through. I don't know if I could say you are fishing the water, more truthful to say you are skimming the water. Am I hearing this right?

Also, Cold water (or Winter) Steelhead must see your fly in a certain way to smack it because colder water temps make them more lethargic. Thus you have to be very very thorough with your dangles and then slow swings to setup that perfect presentation. This may be mean casting in the same section of river or a few different seems from the same spot 2 or 3 or 4 times, creating a few dangles along those certain seems, and then slow swings at the end. Then take a few (maybe 3, 4 or 5) steps down. There are obviously certain factors that effect fish daily so as to how far they move to bite or strike, the water temperature being one of them, and probably one of the bigger ones I would imagine.

[L A Smithers]

Actually there are two basic patterns of covering the water in steelhead fishing. It really boils down to whether you are fishing in a group or which method you prefer if you are alone .
The first method is essentially as described by the previous writer
The second is to make a series of casts from the same stand ;each cast being lenghtened by the distance required to give good coverage depending on water temperature. two foot intervals are good for winter and fall ,4 to 5'intervals in summer fishing.
When you reach maximum length of cast for your gear and ability you step down to the hangdown point of your shortest cast and begin another series.
This latter proceedure fits best with long line fishing you merely add two or 4 feet to your last cast ,pick up and cast.
Regardless of the strategy you employ you are still losing fihing time if you fish short heads and have to retrieve line . If you descide to fish short heards you would do better to retrieve your line while your fly is swinging rather than wait till its at hangdown. Steelhead will follow a fly but as soon as they get into water which is less than 3 feet deep they will break off and swim back to their holt. If you fish to the hangdown then you should be standing in water close to chest deep.

[L A Smithers]

Hi Per: I read your post on comparative behaviour of Atlantics and steelhead with great intrest. I especially noted your reference to the similarity of behaviour between sea run browns and steelhead.
I have posed this question to many steelheaders and biologists without a satisfactory answer.
Early in the season sea runs stay down in the estuary and after each rain ,will run upstream for a few miles on a rising tide.
This is the behaviour many sea run fishermen captialize on in Canadian waters.
My question is: do steelhead ,which are really sea run trout demonstrate the same behaviour.I have never heard of a steelheader fishing the mouths of rivers in earliest daylight the way sea run fishermen do.

[Dana]

...with all that wind that you mentioned a few pages ago (hey everyone--we should print all of these posts and bind 'em together into some kind of book on the longline/shooting head debate...). Yeah, I was getting it out there in that nasty wind, and feelin' pretty smug about it too...until you caught that fish 60 feet out!!!

[Rick J]

I actually do not quite fish the technique that LA Smithers describes and admit I mainly am fishing summer and fall fish as opposed to winter fish. I agree with cold water conditions you need to slow things down. But my normal technique and that of most steelheaders I fish with for summer/fall fish is to start out as suggested making longer and longer casts from the start position, lengthening the cast by a few feet per cast. Once I have reached my comfortable casting range I will take 2 to 4 steps downstream. If I am shooting line (which I do with a single handed rod but less with a 2 handed rod), I am stripping line in as I step down (so am not wasting much fishing time). The fly is pulled back upstream to me as I take my steps down. I am generally out far enough so I am in water deep enough to hold fish below me. Though it does not happen often, I do get grabbed on the strip enough to keep me on my toes. Once I have taken my steps down, I do not repeat the series of casts. I just make my longest cast. Ths longest cast is thus always covering new water. If I make the series of casts then I am fishing water already covered from my station above. I am looking for aggressive steelhead and feel the more water I cover the better chance I have of more steelhead seeing my fly. Thus it does not make sense to me to repeat the series of shorter casts after every step down. If I find fish or if the water is colder, then it makes more sense to add the additional casts and slow things down.

If you are in a crowd that does not allow you to fish this method, and are restricted to just a single run where you are making multiple casts and hope fish are moving through, then I agree that stripping takes up time esspecially if you are stipping back through unproductive water

[Dana]

...60 feet out.

So much for shooting heads!:chuckle:

[kush]

Dana,

Like I said, you were fishing 100' with your shooting head and I was cussin' and trying to make up some bizarre triple spiral roll cast to get it out 60'! If you had been in front of me YOU would have been posing with that fish. I do feel that for me, the extremely adverse wind conditions we faced that day almost required a shooting head. In fact I am cosidering carrying one in my vest just for those conditions.

[Poul]

..but aren't those heads perfect for making 60' casts (without shooting)?

;)

[Dana]

see, that's the thing about Tyler: he makes a cast and somehow the fish are just there. I can't figure it out. Just another example of what the masters have said:

"a 30ft cast to where the fish are is better than a 60ft cast to where they aint"

or something like that!

[Scott K]

Makes you want to just whack 'em in the elbows kinda like what happened to Nancy Kerrigan..

Nice Waders Kush...looking forward to having a pair myself quite soon...can't wait...

[Dana]

been giving all this more thought, and this has occured to me--I tend to favor shorter heads with my 12ft, 13ft & 14ft rods, and longer bellies with my 15ft & 16ft rods. 14ft seems to be a transition point for me--I feel comfy with both shorter and longer lines in this rod length. Does rod length determine anyone else's line choice?

[L A Smithers]

Your right on Dana 14' is the break point. Anything shorter than 14 is not a spey caster its a whirl it around your head,short head shoot it across the pond rod.

[Dana]

...I still use long belly lines on the shorter rods too at times--again, in the winter if I am doing the lightline thing, and in the summer if I feel like it. Of course it is more challenging casting a long belly line with a shorter rod--not as much distance between the rod tip and the water so you don't have as much room for error on the back cast--but I still tend to think of the longer rods as being the ones for long belly lines. I think this says more about personal casting history than anything else, at least for me: my first two hander was a 15 footer and I cast a long belly double taper with it, so I just tend to associate longer rods with long belly lines. The flip side of this is that last fall when I fished the Thompson with Henrik Mortensen he said that a 15ft rod would be great for the Thompson...with a shooting head and the Underhand cast.:)

[doublespey]

Yep, 14' for me too! The 12 and 13' rods are nice for shorter heads, but I don't enjoy trying to control long-belly lines with them because it requires (at least in my own meager attempts) either more force than I like to use or more exaggerated arm motion to cast the longer (over 60') head lines. Also, the times I choose to use the shorter belly lines are often when I'm fishing a river with brushy banks/overhanging trees with minimal room for a D-loop. In these conditions, a longer rod is more of a liability than a asset.

Similarly, I like longer belly lines for the longer rods because, with shorter heads, I'm always fighting moving the anchor point on the doublespey. Longer rods just seem to beg for a longer (head) line.

My .02 - I make no claims as to the validity of my observations other than for myself. :devil:

DS

[juro]

Howdy Coot - enjoyed reading your curmudgeony posts ;) Wow it's been a long time... we're talking' waay back in the FF@ days! Hope you are well.

During those days I worked my way thru the two-handed casting learning curve with a DTF in the late (how time flies). I can't cast like a "Scot" but I sure enjoyed myself and caught a lot of fish. After that wonderful summer with the DTF, winter came and I bought a spool for a compact winter head, then eventually several more Spey rods with everything from Accelators to Windcutters to homemades.

For summer steelhead I really like using a DTF but don't own one for each rod weight. They just aren't versatile enough to warrant the purchase for every rod IMHO, fishing in the present that is. The loss of the wonderful DT casting feel and zero stripping between casts is a tradeoff in order to throw 18 foot type IV tips needed to wiggle the fly in the zone in deep, cold, turbid winter flows. I don't find that unpleasant, in fact I find it quite pleasant to have success with steelhead on the fly.

I guess what I mean is that on a fall day nothing could be better than a DTF to your point. Perhaps there are big differences between the Spey rods of old and the ones we use today and the deep traditions of that era are to be treasured for sure but centuries later there is more in common than not about the overall fishing styles and philosophies - and I find that amazing in and of itself! I hope I do get to fish a Greenheart, but if I don't I'll still be pleased to have Spey fished for steelhead, however modernized things may have become. In fact I hope to fish the Spey itself for atlantics - and yes there I will be fishing a DT.

Juro

[gordonf]

I regularly fish both long-lines and Wind-cutters and have never understood the basis for the mending controversy. As Dana explained, when mending a Wind-cutter simply lift the long rod up high into the air and place the line where you want it - it’s that simple. The only thing I can’t do with the short belly line is back-mend (throw loops). If back-mending is necessary then I usually revert to a single-handed rod or use a double-taper line. The one disadvantage of a short belly line that no one mentioned is the necessity of stripping line when the air temperature is below freezing. Invariably water freezes in your guides and makes shooting the line difficult. I never have this problem, of course, when casting a double taper.

[fredaevans]

long heads on rods at 15' or greater. The longer headed lines (except the DT's) are a complet flumex for me; the short heads with 15 - 18 footer causes just the reverse problem. Not enough 'anchor' to wind the thing up.
fe:confused:

[L A Smithers]

I`m very much afraid that a great deal of the contovery over spey casting and mending and stick and the little whit mouse comes from a complete American missunderstanding of the spey casting process.
Mending line is not simply a process of straigtening the line or of minor repositioning of the line. A proper mend rolls the line upstream or downstream into a fair curve which adds line to the cast by slipping line during the mend. The mend should reshape the line all the way to the leader butt without applying any pull to the fly caused by tightening of the line. Most people would benefite by reading the lengthy disuccion of mending line in WHE Woods Journals from Cairnton.
In order to make such a mend the line at the rod tip must be heavy enough to lift the heavy belly of the line beyond it most of the way to the tip.
Americans should cast and fish any way they choose but they should refrain from calling what they do ,spey casting. it aint.
To prove ths to yourself simply spend some time on the Thompson when the Ghillies from Scotland are on the river and note the difference .
The second issue of the stick and the little white mouse is again a missunderstanding. Provided you are using a long belly of at least 80 feet or a double taper. and provided you are rolling the line not shooting it and provided your timing is proper ;there is no need to set the line on the water during the formation of the D loop . A full proper circle with the rod tip will generate the loop without any stick and therefore there is no white mouse .These things are merely figments of Jim Vincents imagination.
Those that quote with abandon the Scots version "a laDerek Brown" should be made aware that the redoubtable Brown is completely unknown to most of the Ghillies from the Spey R. I made a point of checking this out by writing a half dozen of them and none of them had ever heard of Derek Brown.
I believe it is a serious mistake to bastardize something by changing the process but calling it by its classic name.All it does is cause confusion and missunderstanding. Call it shoot and hoot if you must but dont call it spey casting.

[gordonf]

LA, I do concur that the manner of mend you describe that allows an angler to add slack to a particular point in the line is not really possible with a short-belly line. To accomplish this and achieve the classic deep wet-fly swing as you describe does require the use of a long-bellied line. I have no argument with you on that point.

I am, however, intrigued by your suggestion that true spey-casting does not require the formation of an anchor as the D-loop forms. While I have never actually seen a live Scottish gillie performing spey-casts as you have, I have spent quite a bit of time studying the late Hughes Faulkus’ books and his video. It certainly appears to me that he is anchoring his line in the water as his line changes trajectory and forms the D-loop. Am I perhaps misunderstanding your comments or am I misinterpreting what I am seeing? Please clarify as this is a very interesting point.

[L A Smithers]

Hi Gordon: In order to see how this is done without an anchor you have to find an old ghilly from the Dee R The Dee cast is really just a spey cast without an anchor.
You lift and swing slightly towards the near bank and then out with sufficient power that the line travels in a fig8 path all the way to the upstream end.Then you swing it down completing the fig8 to the downstream end .Now you retrace the upstream path but as the fly passes you you widen the loop into a dloop and make your forward cast.At no time does the fly touch the water from when you first lift it untill you drop it across stream to complete your cast.
Probably this cast is no long used even on the Dee. It is usually a somewhat shorter cast than the Spey. I was taught this cast as a boy by my uncle who regularly fished the Dee
You can however make your Spey cast in the same fashion without making the full fig8 however you must time the formation of your D loop just as the fly passes your body in the air.
You must however make a very full circle with the rod tip to form your loop You also need to give some lift to the loop by raising the rod as you make the loop.
I find such a cast useful when fishing very fast water like the upper Vedder R. if you drop your fly onto the water it drifts back downstream so fast that the line gets submerged and you cant get it unstuck
I have also developed a triple spey cast to deal with this situation. You simply throw the line far enough upstream so it cant drift down on you and keep the line out of the water by making a seies of double spey waves of the rod tip. When the fly finally drifts down into the proper position for a cast you swing your d loop and fire the cast.
It takes a while to get the hang if just were the fly should be to give you time to form the d and make your cast.
its a bandaid but I can save a cast in fast channels.