The more time I spend in this forum the more I get confused regarding guide selection on building a Sage 8# flyrod blank. I've been told high frame double foot stripper guides such as SVSG will control line slap. Then I read in this forum that LNSG double foot guides are also considered high frame guides, sort of, as compared to the non-concept NSG double foot guides. What's up? I purchased both, and the difference is the SVSG guides are about 4mm taller than the LNSG’s (#16). Now, is 4mm that much crucial in eliminating line slap in the application that I am about to describe to you? I know this is a sacrilege amongst you fly rodders, but I plan on running mono, yes mono on this purposed rod set-up. Many fishermen use this technique in Michigan streams for steelhead, and with a fly reel, if you can believe that. Does this change the rational on line slap (6-8lb mono line will be used)? I know one rod doesn't do it all, but I'd like to maybe run a traditional fly line set-up with this on occasion. Given this unique situation (very small diameter mono line as compared to much thicker fly line), does this change one’s decision on going with high frames or low frames? The bottom line is, I like the looks of the LNSG guides as strippers, but if SVSG's would work better with mono, then I go that route. Oh, by the way, my stripper guide sizes are #16, #12, #10, then LSG #8, (7) LSG #7, and a FST #7 as the tip. I know this is a redundant post on my part, but I want good money spent wisely. Thanks!!

Mark, I live up near Anchorage, Alaska. Many local fishmen fishing in the rivers for Red Salmon with a flyrod here, use mono with ceramic guides because the distances are very short and because of the sweep and hook method used to catch the Salmon. However, I don't think you would get much performance out of the line without the accompanying weight attached near the end of the line.
Line slap is not much of an issue to me. I don't think the SVSG guides will improve much. Whichever, guides gives you satisfaction on your rod, I'd say that would be the set I'd choose.
Patrick Vernacchio

Patrick,
"Sweep and hook method" here in Oregon we call that snagging and they put you in jail for snagging Steelhead or Salmon.

Like heck they do.

I watched a couple of guys at N. Fork Alsea do that in plain view of a warden, who told them that "maybe it'd be best not to make it so obvious."

I have never heard of anyone jailed in any state for that violation...

Anyway, back to the original question--

With a chuck & duck rig you won't be casting far enough to worry about line slap. As far as I know (or at least the way it is in Wisconsin), the average 'cast' is about 10-15'. So your line slaps, and you lose 1/4" of distance...damn. :)

If you can make a clean line path from reel to tip (line touching no guides), you'll be better off for fly casting, and probably better off for mono chucking too, for what that's worth.

Hey, Hey, lets keep this on a more technical matter. Lets not get the Orvis boys excited!!! For the record, I catch and release. Always have, always will.....Emory, I haven't forgotten about the "guide study". I've been out of town this week. Will get in touch with you soon.

Scott,
It is a class C felony to snag either Salmon or Steelhead in Oregon and I know a number of people that have been given tickets for it. In fact, your warden was an accessory to attempting to snag which is also a class C felony. He will not be a game warden, which in Oregon is a state police officier, for long with an attitude like that.

I find it interesting that some one would be so discriminating about a thing like a guide style and yet so indiscriminate about snagging.

The "sweep and hook" method is nothing more than spot snagging. I guess it's a discussion for another forum, but no matter if you catch and release or keep the fish it still not fishing. Lets face it, huge sized split shot with screaming loud colors on oversize bait in clear water going at break neck speed will not and never has been an effective way to get a hook inside a fishes mouth. It's a great way to get a hook into a fish on the outside of the mouth or at least on the head, the fight looks and feels the same but in the end it's indiscriminate snagging. It both depletes the fishery and the credibility of fishermen and it remains surprising how many people use the method thinking they are fishermen. The skill really is more akin to pitching a baseball or throwing darts, it is a repetitive motion not fishing prowess.

I suspect this post borders on if not crosses the line, sorry for that, it needed to be said.

Gary,
I hope your post wasn't referring to the original post made by me (but it sounds like it). I think the guy up in Alaska is the one you might want to question on his methods. Don't jump to conclusions until you know his exact methods. Personally, I do not snag. The method that I was referring to in my proposed setup is called "drift fishing". I drift mainly with flies, and on occasion, spawn. Perfectly legal, moral, and sportsmanlike. I fish the Pere Marquette and the AuSable rivers here in Michigan, and quite often in the "flies only" section. And you know what? I have seen more fish snagged with flies in those restricted areas than any other areas (oh, I know it's not intentional, so they say). A snagged fish is a snagged fish PERIOD!!!! A real shocker huh!!!

The method Mark is talking about is indeed widely used on Great Lakes tribs-- helps get the fly down to the fish as soon as possible. While it's not typical 'fly-fishing', it is very effective, especially in water which is very cold, often just at 32.1F. There are many guys who are very good at it and they catch a lot of fish, 99.9% of them legally hooked in the mouth. I didn't do it for the five years I fished GL steel, but I know that it WORKS.

Thanks Scott,
I should have explained it like you did. Sorry for giving off steam on my last post, but it tees me off when people suggest that any other method other than their own is considered snagging. Oh, by the way, I did find out that the Fuji MNSG’s are a little higher in height than the LNSG’s, which is what my original post was all about.

I live in Southeast AK and fish the Situk in the spring, which boasts the largest run in the state. At least 80% of the river is log-jammed, and clearing it is illegal because it is in a national park. Hooking into wild 20+ pound steelhead is not uncommon, but banking one is. Many people, mostly locals, use heavy mono (20+) pound as their mainline. When you hook into a 25 lb wild Situk steelhead, they go straight for the logs where your flyline can get damaged and/or snagged up and you have to cut it in the middle. Its a small river so you don't really have to backcast at all, so many just rig up the heavy mono and roll cast a "Jerry Garcia" glo-bug with a small split-shot. I'm sure some people rigged like this "line" their fish (drifting the leader into the fish's mouth), but taking them legally is the norm. Snagging is taken seriously here, as the rules are very strict. Only two steelhead over 36 inches can be taken per year. Its easy to tell if a fish has been "lined." Just look at which way the hook is set in the fish's jaw. If the hook point entered the fish from the outside of the mouth, it has been snagged. I usually use floating running line instead of a standard flyline...depending on the hole.

Emory & Gary,

It's just a description that is particular to fish Red Salmon, and only in particular rivers. It is not snagging and it absolutely requires the fish be caught with the hook set in its mouth. There are rules specifically set for Red Salmon in certain rivers. It is regulated right down to a particular unweighted fly called the Russian River Fly. The Alaska Fish and Game folks regulate it very seriously and at least the Alaskans I know treat it the same. I would not, and do not advocate, any fishing method that is illegal or even unethical. If you haven't fished for Red Salmon in the Russian or Kenai Rivers, and you haven't read the regulations concerning it, please step down off of your soap box and focus on the original question.

Patrick Vernacchio

I have fished the North Shore of Lake Superior streams for Steelhead and Salmon for about 20 years, and the standard rig is a 7 to 9 weight fly rod and a fly reel filled with mono. Most people use this rig to drift a yarn fly or spawn. It can be setup as a snag rig, but you can tell a snagger from a legal drifter in a couple of ways. Drifters use a lot less weight (allows for an actual drift) and put the sinker further up the line than the snaggers, and the drifter only sets when he feels something out of place on the drift. The snagger is putting a ton of lead down by the hook and jerks every time he hits the bottom. You also see the liners with a good sized chunk of lead on and leaving it set out in an area where there fish are likely to travel and bump their lines.

Any time you have a line and a hook down there with moving fish you are gonna snag one now and then, if you are ethical you fight the fish quick and release it, or just break it off and let them go.

Apologies to anyone who I inadvertantly painted with my broad brush. I have fished Steelhead, Trout and Salmon in the Great Lakes region for well over 20 years. In that time I have witnessed the Flyrod/ Spinning method virtually every time I visited the upstate New York tributaries. Almost without exception the technique was being applied to visible fish, holding in water that did not fit the seasonal conditions, in other words fish that had been pushed and herded out of their usual holding spots. The weight, the bait size, line strength and overall method of "drifting" was as counter to successful Salmoniod methods.
Without exception the "fishermen" using these techniques would be experiencing far more action than virtually all others. Not that I can't accept that someone might do much better than another using different methods, you just know after 20 years what is real and what isn't.

Unfortunately that is what goes on in this part of the world, it is what I have seen of the method under discussion and it prompted me to comment according to that expeience. Once again, sorry to those who mistook my comments as directed at them.

No apology intended to those who use the technique I described.

You’re OK with me Gary. Judging by the number of posts, it's a very sensitive topic. The problem though, is that 99.9% of the perpetrators aren't interested in building custom rods or getting involved in other ethical fishing forums, for that matter.