I use an 8 1/2 ft rod, figuring that maybe 70 % of my casts are roll casts, due to all of the overhanging branches. I fish almost 100% dry flies, not because I am a purist, but because I am incompetent with nymphs, and I always seem to find a fish with a dry fly. I think that the length gives me many more opportunities to maximize drag free drift by creative mending of the line. I have to admit that I would not want a rod longer than this on such a technical stretch of water, but I would not want one much shorter either.

I went to the Ahr, and met one of the old guard who was one of the British embassy people who used to fish this stretch back in the days before the embassy moved to Berlin. He was fishing a 6 1/2 ft rod, and was amazed that I would prefer such a long rod. I see that many of the contributors to the small stream section prefer 6 1/2 to 7 ft rods.

Of course, it may depend upon your definition of a small stream. To a brook trout fisherman in the Smokey Mountains of my native North Carolina, it could be no more than a couple of feet across, with a small pool once in a while. To me, the Ahr where I fish qualifies as a small stream. It has many nice pools, many of which are chest deep, but the riffle stretches are rarely more than a yard to 2 yards wide. Even i would go with a shorter stick for the brookie water in the Smokies.

So, why the preference by Brits for shorter rods ? Fashion, fun, or function ?

That's probably the answer. Most of my fishing is done with an 8'6" rod because I am comfortable with it in most situations. I do have a 7'6" which I love to use and a 9 footer for use on, what I would class as, biggish Rivers. I have in mind rivers like the Usk which might be small to some people. Even then, the 8'6" is usually my GoTo rod.

I find the difference in an 8'6" and a 9' is disproportionate to the mere 6" it actually is. Much lighter and more manouvarable.

I did buy a 6'6" rod just in case but never used it.

__________________
Roy

Interesting question and a subject I have been thinking about recently.

I have now gone as short as 6'3'' for my local water and it is mainly due to the confined spots; our local river is fairly slow in the majority of places so you do end up casting ahead quite a bit as I believe the fish are more easilly spooked if you stand next to them in slow water and when it's really calm all motions need to be very slow.

Casting style would probably get slated by an intructor with a lazyish flicking side cast low to the water being the norm, I find on a short rod with tight loops and a braided leader to assist in minimising any spiralling you are able to keep the line away from foliage and bank edges whilst projecting the line ahead.

I recently used the rod in faster Welsh waters, which although small in places, it has more water pushing through and a greater drop in elevation than my usual spot; the 6'3'' did feel stretched for holding the line off the top at times but was just about manageable.

My colleague on the day fishes those waters more regularly and it is clear that his style is more nymphing orientated and is better for finding the fish closer up in fast water ... but ... whilst he was using circa 8'6'' he was also carrying a shorter rod for tight sections up river.

When visiting again, I would probably want to judge if dry or nymphing was the bias of the day and choose a length to suit; probably going to go for an 8' if Grayling fishing.

__________________

Help fund the WTT study of the Softmouth

I use a 8'6" rod in three sections. A very versatile tool I think.
If I need to make a really tight cast I take the bottom section off, dump it at my feet, and hey presto I'm fishing with 5'6" rod. Generally I use roll casts, catapult casts, flicks and wiggles. Or load the rod by dropping the line on the water downstream and then levering forward.

I couldn't fish a lot of the small rivers in west Wales with a tiny 6ft rod. Even 7ft would be tricky. I'm talking about rivers that split around boulders and complicated flows. The longer rod allows you to keep the line clear of some of the flows. A lot of runs in the gorges I fish you would be risking death to try and get below the fish, often you're crouching on boulder 8ft above the water, and have to clamber downstream to land a fish.

If the flows were more steady I would definitely consider it though as they are sooo cute! Small rods are fun.

The only reason I have a 7' 4pc orvis TB is its small enough to carry anywhere I go. I am always ready to chuck a flee on any water I stumble across.

Interesting post

I fish a stream/river which is about 10 meters wide after rain and about 1.5 meters wide in the "normal" state. Since it rained much of the summer I only got to see towards September that I'd previously been wading through some of the best pools. In fact I intended to go out today with a 7'3" but it started to rain torrentially last night - I bet Mostyn was doing a rain dance again - so thats it for the end of the season.

Without the rains comes the rod length - I've dropped down from 9' through 8'8" to 8'6" and occasionally a fastish 8' and have ordered a soft glass 7'9" for next season - its the short casts that irritate me. The rods don't load properly without at least a rod lenght of line - with a longer leader that means accurate casts only above some 20+ feet.

I agree with royvs - the change in attitude from 9' to 8'6" is disproportionate to the normative length and since receiving my 8'6" (thank you, you know who) am a much happier puppy.

I also haven't fished rivers as Dunk explains where the thing is about 3 meters wide but split up into pools divided by huge boulders where the longer length is necessary just to keep some control over the line. There again is the casting issue as my 9' progressive action doesn't really load (for me - never been able to get a roll cast out of it) until there is a rod and a half of line out there which is just too long for these pools. Or else you break your neck trying to get into a casting position. I had ordered a 9'3" 3 weight soft rod about a year ago, but the supplier still hasn't delivered.

Interesting one. Some Italians particularly Francesco Palu have been promoting the use of telescopic variable length rods for many years now - shortening the rod for overgrown sections. I think Gatti have these. I lke longer rods on small stream if I can get away with them but on one area of one stream I have to fish with a couple of bottom sections removed and stuck in my pocket! 8.5 ft is ideal for me but 7.5 ft is often the best compromise.

Malcolm

Whatever floats your boat, and suitable tackle for the area you fish, stream/river or a large river. I like a 6ft, or 7ft, for stream fishing, 7ft.6in, to 8ft, for medium rivers, 8ft.6in, or 9ft, rods for large rivers; and a 10ft, Streamflex, for winter Grayling fishing! Each to his own yeah!

I guess size matters after all ... :P For me 7' 6'', 8' or 8' 6'' are the best lengths. I prefer the longer lengths when there is enough space for casting. For very bushy places the smaller ones are great. Last season I fished a 7' 6" the most.

I have used a 7ft 6in rod for the whole of the season. On the main Monnow it felt small, on the Dore, Lynn and Taw it was comfortable but on my home water it feels too big because of the amount of overhanging vegetation in places.

I think its a case of using the right tool for the job.

regards

Vince