Even before the downturn, many decried the "expense" of fly fishing - and the need for the industry to produce inexpensive gear to recruit new genes into the pool.
I admit to some confusion around the gear aspect given the sub-$100 fly fishing outfits offered by several manufacturers (though I always wondered why they didn't put the damned backing and line on the reel instead of forcing some newbie to do it).
And yes, I think it's fair to say no newcomer to fly fishing should be expected to spend $3000 for a fly rod, reel, waders, boots and little gear, but frankly, fly fishing's never enjoyed as much really good, really affordable gear as it does now.
And compared to other outdoor pursuits, fly fishing's actually pretty affordable. (Priced a bass boat lately?) After all, a
day on the water costs as little as an annual license (amortized over many days), and the biggest single consumable expenses revolve around gas and flies.
In other words, it's possible that fly fishing's "expensive" reputation has little to do with reality, and a lot to do with perception.
So what's feeding that perception?
I've got a few guesses, but want to hear from the Undergrounders.
Some Guesses?
- In most magazines, the average newcomer is bombarded by ads & stories for high-end rods and $5k/week destinations
- Fly shops aren't always the friendliest environment for newcomers
- Fly fishing isn't expensive as much as it is hard - and to some, investing time to get "good" is the equivalent of "expensive"
What do the Undergrounders Think?
- Is fly fishing too expensive to recruit newbies?
- Is the industry newbie-unfriendly?
- Are fly fishermen newbie unfriendly?
- Is the sport's focus on high-end gear and exotic places throttling the sport?
- Recruitment during a recession is never easy (even as millions suddenly find themselves with spare time), but what will get newbies into the sport?
- Do we want newbies in the sport? (This last for you cranky readers.)
Pencils up,
Tom Chandler