charlieH

Nice fish, Dave. I've heard a couple of reports of good fish from other western rivers in recent days - I'm sure that the nets have been sieving out these better fish, which has led to the preponderance of small grilse. Of the last 10 or so grilse I've had from little rivers in Mayo over the last few years, I doubt if one has been more than 3lbs, so it'd be nice to see some better quality fish. Can you give the dressing for your fly? It looks quite similar to a Silk Cut shrimp.

I have a couple of them for salmon fishing, and they seem good value for the money, though I have read one or two reports of them breaking. I don't know what lines the manufacturers have based the capacities on; they may be OK for a shooting head or WF line designed for single handed use, but I think they're hopelessly optimistic where modern speycasting lines are concerned. If you're looking at salmon reels, the Koma has noticeably less capacity than, for example, a Marquis 2, Magnum 200D or other conventional reels.

I didn't know the Dove had them, but there are definitely wild rainbows in the Derbyshire Wye - the Haddon Hall fishery is very proud of them! There used to be a population in the Chess in Buckinghamshire, and possibly a couple of other rivers round there, but they were very hard hit by abstraction and I think the fish may have been wiped out. Further afield in Europe, I have a feeling that rainbows may perhaps also breed in a few places in Slovenia and Austria. I seem to recall that the Warren Slaney, river keeper at Haddon Hall doesn't believe the rainbows compete with the browns or grayling - they tend to occupy different lies, etc. You can contact him through the Peacock Hotel's website: thepeacockatrowsley.com.

I agree with much of this, but I'm no clearer why a DT is better for a novice to learn on than a spey line. As you say, a spey line is basically just a long belly WF, albeit with a specially designed taper. However, I certainly didn't mean to suggest that a novice should start speycasting with a conventional WF - sorry if that wasn't clear. I think a specialist spey line has two significant advantages over a DT. First, the front taper is typically much longer than you will find on a DT line, with the main weight of the line closer to the rod tip. It is therefore easier to transfer energy down the line and get good turnover of the fly when spey casting. Unlike with an overhead cast, the forward movement of the rod in the delivery stroke doesn't act directly on the tip of the line, so the transfer of energy from the belly is the only way the fly can be propelled forwards. Secondly, as with a conventional WF line used overhead, it is easier to shoot line into the cast because, assuming the back of the head is at the rod tip, the thin running line is so much lighter and offers less resistance than a DT. I started speycasting with a DT line, because that's what I had with my existing setup; specialist spey lines weren't widely available at the time (mid 90s), though Michael Evans (who I believe was the first person to produce a modern spey line commercially) had in fact started selling them by then. But since these lines have become widely available, and in the past few years have got so much better, I don't see any reason to use a DT line, when a spey line will do the job so much better most of the time. DTs are still useful on small rivers, where you may need to cast very different lengths of line and distance isn't a prime concern, but I think a spey line will still perform well enough in those conditions unless you're really casting a short line (in which case there is the option of using an overhead cast), and certainly they come into their own anywhere that you want to cast more than, say, 20 yards. This is true for novice or expert alike.

Mullarkeys have a good reputation and have been selling them for a long time. I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind this. Apart from cost (and there are some cheap options) I don't think DTs have any significant benefit over WF lines. So far as I know, instructors don't start single handed casters off with a DT line, so why should it be any different for double handers? Lines are one piece of tackle that really can make a big difference to your casting and fishing. They're far more important than reels, for example - for fishing in the UK there's absolutely no need to lash out big money on anything other than a very basic reel, yet so many people seem willing to spend £££s on the latest super-duper large-arbour, disc drag models. I'd advise anyone starting out to spend more on their line and less on the reel. Mill ends can be fine, but it's pot luck, as by their very nature you don't know what you're getting.

I've got a multitip line, but don't really use it these days - I've gone back to proper sinking lines where conditions demand. If you need to get your fly down to fish, multitips aren't nearly as effective as a proper sinking line, particularly in fast flowing water. I saw some interesting research from the US a few months ago that confirmed this, though now can't find it I'm afraid. Although it depends a bit on where you fish, I'd suggest that you'd do better to buy a floating line, a slow or medium sinker and some polyleaders (or you can make these from old sinking trout lines if you have any). With some flies of different weights (especially tubes, in brass and aluminium) you can ring the changes quite effectively to cover most eventualities. This does mean buying a spare spool, but the cost of the two lines plus polyleaders probably won't be much more than a single multitip line, and in the long term you can buy an intermediate and a fast sinker to add to the armoury when or if you find you need them.

Regrettably, this is untrue - see replies nos 168-170 on the FFF thread, from yesterday afternoon, for evidence to the contrary. Again, I would ask you to address the practical issue of how regulations are to be enforced, how the enforcers are to be funded and what sanctions should be available to restrict persistent offenders. I've raised this point twice on FFF, but you seem somehow unwilling to address it. Contrary to some claims (not least from you, David), canoeists are evidently quite happy to canoe rivers at low levels and not only during the winter months. The current attitude of many canoeists to the laws governing access does not inspire confidence that any code allowing access on a restricted basis will be complied with without enforcement.