The Northern California Fly Fishing Board

bt45 wrote:
to tell someone the $50 license they purchase is not good on a stretch of public water because they don't fly fish is unacceptable to me

But they have the same right to fish that river as anyone else. They just have to use fly gear like everyone else. You may have an argument if only SOME people had to use fly gear and others didn't but fly fishing only doesn't prohibit anyone from fishing there. It's a gear restriction not a person restriction, just like artificial only is a gear restriction. Do you have the same problem with bait fishers not being able to fish with bait on artificial only waters? Or what about people that want to net fish or use pitch forks on salmon? Is it excluding them by not allowing them to use pitch forks and nets? What about not allowing someone to use a boat on certain lakes? They paid for the registration for that boat but it isn't good on that lake. Is that acceptable to you? Or what about rivers that don't allow use of motorized boats? Aren't people with motorized boats being excluded? You know, UC's original post in this thread wasn't even the slightest bit offensive. I don't see why you felt the need to take a shot at him over it. The funny thing is that UC actually fishes with other types of gear besides fly gear so he wasn't advocating flyfishing only everywhere. He just said it was a shame that we didn't have more flyfishing only waters. Jeeez... This IS a flyfishing board you know. Is it such a crime to go on a flyfishing board and say he would like to see more flyfishing only waters in California?