Thanks Thanks:  1
Likes Likes:  20
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    South Yorkshire
    Posts
    1,496

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by Cap'n Fishy View Post
    No it wouldn't. The washing-liners are fishing static without any deep-hooking issues. Are you telling me static dry fly is a problem regarding deep-hooked fish? It's detecting the takes that is the problem, surely? I've had fish that have taken my dry fly while I have been looking the other way, and by the time I have realised I have a fish, the fly has been as far inside them as any that have swallowed a booby.

    Col
    I'm speaking generally and its a fact that static flies are more likely to deep hook a fish than a fly which is being retrieved.
    There are two basic fly designs, those designed to catch fish and those designed to catch fishermen, the latter being the best seller

  2. #12

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_B View Post
    I'm speaking generally and its a fact that static flies are more likely to deep hook a fish than a fly which is being retrieved.
    But it is not that that is the problem. Dry flies are fished static and are not regarded as being associated with fish swallowing them. It's the detection of the take that is the issue.

    Col
    Please note that any views expressed in this post may be those of the
    originator and do not necessarily reflect those of the reader.

  3. #13

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_B View Post
    I'm speaking generally and its a fact that static flies are more likely to deep hook a fish than a fly which is being retrieved.
    I've only started using the booby this year and although I call it static, I haven't used it on perfectly still, dead calm water; there has always been a drift from the wind moving the fly. All I can say is that I've yet to catch a fish that has swallowed the booby, but maybe I don't look away! I do strike pretty quickly and miss some takes. But I'd prefer that to delaying the strike and deep hooking a fish that I have no intention of killing.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    7,640

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    I remember reading an article by Gordon Fraser who created the booby back in the early 1980's who stated that it is pointless to try to hit the tugs when a trout shows interest in a booby fished deep and very slow. His advice was to keep on retrieving until it all locked up. That was classic booby fishing back in the day. It worked very well, but the incidence of deep hooked fish was high hence the current debate.

    Marabou tails etc. etc came later and made the booby what it is today. That trout will take and literally eat boobies there is no doubt. I caught a trout at Farmoor that had swallowed two boobies so far down they were all but out of sight. Many years ago now before I got nymph happy.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Hampshire UK
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    "In defence of...."

    If using boobies is within the fishery rules they don't require any 'defence'.

    And in the frequent case, particularly so in the very popular small southern put and take 'ponds', where C&R is often not required, and equally often not allowed, deep hooking simply doesn't matter.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Fife
    Posts
    7,492

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by BobP View Post
    That trout will take and literally eat boobies there is no doubt. I caught a trout at Farmoor that had swallowed two boobies so far down they were all but out of sight. Many years ago now before I got nymph happy.
    Nah...that’s called being so grossly out of touch with your flies that you have failed to detect the first take,never mind the second...bad angling in other words (very)...

    I hope that was before you became a guide.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    7,640

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by flyfisher222 View Post
    "In defence of...."

    If using boobies is within the fishery rules they don't require any 'defence'.

    And in the frequent case, particularly so in the very popular small southern put and take 'ponds', where C&R is often not required, and equally often not allowed, deep hooking simply doesn't matter.
    It is one of the three methods that seem to raise the hackles in the angling fraternity. Boobies, blobs and the indicator. I'm not a real fan of the first two but I am of the third under the right circumstances. None of the above methods require a "defence" any more than pulling "traditionals" or fishing dry fly or any other legitimate method of extracting trout from our rivers ans stillwaters.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    It's all down to self imposed standards. Personally I find a booby to be unacceptable. I just don't want foam in my flies, and am not desperate enough to fish for fish that are stuck to the bottom. So booby fishing for me needs a robust defence.
    Fabs, indicators and snakes etc, in my opinion, reek of desperation, clutching at straws.
    The defense is desperation to catch when real flies have failed.
    Purely my own self imposed standards mind.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Hampshire UK
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    Quote Originally Posted by BobP View Post
    It is one of the three methods that seem to raise the hackles in the angling fraternity. Boobies, blobs and the indicator. I'm not a real fan of the first two but I am of the third under the right circumstances. None of the above methods require a "defence" any more than pulling "traditionals" or fishing dry fly or any other legitimate method of extracting trout from our rivers ans stillwaters.
    Exactly.

    I don't fish lakes/'ponds' very often, but where allowed I have used a booby on rare occasions (without a great deal of success, I admit).

    To me, and I stress it's only my personal feeling, I feel boobies are my 'last resort' fishing, and I'm not really happy to get to that state of mind. Others of course are free to feel different.

    Re rivers, I'm somewhat of a traditionalist, sticking mostly to flies such as iron blue, ginger quill, Lunn's particular, caperer, greenwells etc. Plus the genuine, unmodified, Sawyer PTN. But I'm not any kind of purist, I will try the 'modern' flies if they don't work.

    And if others do different it's fine by me. Even if its not in the rules - I don't consider myself any kind of unofficial 'policeman'.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Near Southampton
    Posts
    4,201

    Default Re: In defence of the booby fly

    I find the booby fished subsurface to be relatively ineffective on our small clearwater fisheries in Wessex, for several reasons.

    First, to state the bl33din' obvious, some fisheries such as Avon Springs ban its use in the fishery rules. Second, again referring to fishery rules, almost all of these fisheries mandate the use of a single fly only, so opportunities to use the booby as a controller fly for a washing line rig are out. Third, I find fish on this sort of fishery hold and feed higher up in the water column than on larger lakes so there's little need to explore Davy Jones' locker. Last, even in midwinter when the bankside and subsurface weed is gone, there's clumps of starwort and similar weeds on the lake bed and even if you want or need to fish extra-deep, you'll keep getting snagged up.

    All this is in contrast to fishing reservoirs and gravel pits, where booby tactics are a key part of the angler's repertoire, either fished very deep off a DI5 or DI7 line or as a controller on a washing line rig at various depths.

    Also the booby, being effectively unsinkable, is a great wake fly on all sorts of lakes and even on rivers for sea trout. Better than a muddler in this respect. Although maybe fast fished wake flies for rainbows in lakes is a bit of a tactic of the past, as has been discussed elsewhere on here....ACW has commented to this effect....
    Last edited by JohnH; 17-11-2019 at 10:00 AM.
    "In wine there is wisdom. In beer there is strength. In water there is bacteria." - German proverb
    JH based near Southampton

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Case for the Defence
    By eddleston123 in forum Salmon Fishing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-01-2017, 03:28 PM
  2. defence
    By dogpatch06 in forum General Fly Fishing Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 25-12-2009, 07:12 PM
  3. In defence of the midge.
    By Gander in forum General Fly Fishing Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25-07-2006, 05:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •