Comments on: “Minorities” and Fly Fishing http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss essays and musings on fly fishing for native trout Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:57:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Talking Bull http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1624 Talking Bull Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:25:22 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1624 I don't know why I haven't clinked in on the essays and musings more often. Killer stuff Stalker. You have breached a sensitive topic and brought to light some great issues. I think you might be able to compare the minority debate on fly fishing with fly fishing native streams vs. fly fishing tailwater rivers. I wonder how many of the $166,200 group prefer native streams vs. tailwater rivers. I am thinking most of those guys are hitting "THE RIVERS". Some how I don't "connect" to the tailwater rivers like I "connect" to the native streams. I wonder if it is my socioeconomic background. I doubt I have a chance to personally experience the 166K group's perspective on life. It may be a similar experience for minorities. Maybe they just don't "connect" to the whole aspect of the fly fishing experience. Maybe it is more fulfilling to have the spinning rod and reel or the hook and line set-up. Most of the world rides bicycles, plays real "football" and does ballroom dance rather than play American football, basketball or baseball. Some of us American whites don't "connect" to anything other than the big three. In that light, maybe us whiteys on the fly should be viewed as the MINORITIES. I don’t know why I haven’t clinked in on the essays and musings more often. Killer stuff Stalker. You have breached a sensitive topic and brought to light some great issues. I think you might be able to compare the minority debate on fly fishing with fly fishing native streams vs. fly fishing tailwater rivers. I wonder how many of the $166,200 group prefer native streams vs. tailwater rivers. I am thinking most of those guys are hitting “THE RIVERS”. Some how I don’t “connect” to the tailwater rivers like I “connect” to the native streams. I wonder if it is my socioeconomic background. I doubt I have a chance to personally experience the 166K group’s perspective on life. It may be a similar experience for minorities. Maybe they just don’t “connect” to the whole aspect of the fly fishing experience. Maybe it is more fulfilling to have the spinning rod and reel or the hook and line set-up. Most of the world rides bicycles, plays real “football” and does ballroom dance rather than
play American football, basketball or baseball. Some of us American whites don’t “connect” to anything other than the big three. In that light, maybe us whiteys on the fly should be viewed as the MINORITIES.

]]> By: Eccles http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1468 Eccles Fri, 24 Jul 2009 03:43:19 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1468 Yea that map is a good negative image of the one I linked to. Yes and no to that kind of programme. In fact when I sent the comment as an email to you I had already cut out a long diatribe about exactly this sort of thing. It is relevant but also takes us into a debate on whether fly fishing itself needs/should advertise or attempt to recruit a wider participation base. I am skeptical. I'm sure there are a multitude of reasons why people get into fly fishing but I'm not sure that the proximate reasoning does anything more than demonstrate that the ultimate causes are based on economics, geography and history. As an example reasons might be you got into it because a family member fly fished, or that you saw it often and liked the look of it or started as a spin fisherman and "progressed" to fly fishing. But all of these depend on those ultimate factors and the conclusion as to why more minorities aren't fly fishing stems from this. Well those paragraphs from the focus groups sound exactly like the obfuscation I would expect. The report itself has some interesting points. Money, geography and a lack of role models (so the poster boy/girl would be a good idea!). But it comes across that when they are talking about fishing none are thinking about fly fishing. Bait and sea angling are the reference points, fly fishing is nowhere. Fantastic stats from FF mag. Sort of proves the point really. No wonder I never buy it. Toodle pip. Yea that map is a good negative image of the one I linked to.

Yes and no to that kind of programme. In fact when I sent the comment as an email to you I had already cut out a long diatribe about exactly this sort of thing. It is relevant but also takes us into a debate on whether fly fishing itself needs/should advertise or attempt to recruit a wider participation base. I am skeptical.

I’m sure there are a multitude of reasons why people get into fly fishing but I’m not sure that the proximate reasoning does anything more than demonstrate that the ultimate causes are based on economics, geography and history. As an example reasons might be you got into it because a family member fly fished, or that you saw it often and liked the look of it or started as a spin fisherman and “progressed” to fly fishing. But all of these depend on those ultimate factors and the conclusion as to why more minorities aren’t fly fishing stems from this.

Well those paragraphs from the focus groups sound exactly like the obfuscation I would expect. The report itself has some interesting points. Money, geography and a lack of role models (so the poster boy/girl would be a good idea!). But it comes across that when they are talking about fishing none are thinking about fly fishing. Bait and sea angling are the reference points, fly fishing is nowhere.

Fantastic stats from FF mag. Sort of proves the point really. No wonder I never buy it.

Toodle pip.

]]> By: Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1463 Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:40:34 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1463 Eccles, Thanks for adding a bit of data to the fray. I like the map (also from Wikipedia) that shows the <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5c/New_2000_white_percent.gif" rel="nofollow">white percentage</a>, that way everything else is "minority"--which really highlights making the case for geography as a factor. You mention some programs in the UK that try to include everyone, but have a problem sustaining the desire once the scaffold of the program is removed. Is <a href="http://www.substance.coop/files/Get_Hooked_Report_V2.pdf" rel="nofollow">this the type of program</a> (PDF file) you're talking about? Eccles, you said, "What is needed more is a collective outing of thumbs from the usual orifices to speed up social policies helping to bridge the 16K median income gap." This is probably a very important aspect, and something that's actually more important, in the long run, than why minorities aren't fly fishing. But I still can't let the question go. Ok, thinking off the top of my head for a second, how about this as a different question: What makes people take up fly fishing instead of spinner/bait fishing--how do they get into it in the first place? If we knew that, could we then come to some conclusions about why more minorities aren't fly fishing? A very interesting piece of research (actually focus groups, not "real" research) I came across was this: <a href="http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/SFBPC.pdf" rel="nofollow">Women’s, Hispanics’, and African-Americans’ Participation in, and Attitudes toward, Boating and Fishing</a>. It isn't fly fishing per se, but I think the same conclusions could be extrapolated from it. The preface to the conclusions said this: <blockquote>"As noted earlier, focus group research should not be used to make generalizations about population-wide issues. It cannot be concluded, based on these focus groups alone, why women, Hispanics, and African-Americans do not participate in fishing and/or boating at a rate comparable to their numbers in the general population. However, some observations can be made which will be found to be broadly applicable. Other conclusions are only suggestive of the need for further investigation."</blockquote> One of the 19 conclusions from this focus group research was this: <blockquote>"Explanations for the underlying causes of differential participation rates observed in fishing and boating for women, African-Americans and Hispanics are probably due to broad, complex social and cultural factors. Single, simple explanations should be avoided and efforts to increase participation should be based on sound research of local populations. Just as there is no “general” angler and/or boater in the total population, there is no “general” African-American, Hispanic or woman angler and/or boater"</blockquote> Some demographics from Fly Fisherman magazine: Fly Fisherman magazine is the leading magazine in editorial quality, circulation, and advertising pages. Demographics: <blockquote> * 53 Average Age * 18.4 Years Fly-Fishing Experience * $166,200 Average Household Income * 89% College Educated * 96% Bought Fly-Fishing Equipment * 55% Tie Flies Our readers spent over $473,000,000 on fly-fishing trips and over $188,000,000 on fly-fishing equipment</blockquote> You certainly aren't going to get many of those in that $30k bracket thumbing through Fly Fisherman mags. Some interesting statistics here: <a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_8_25/ai_108538956/" rel="nofollow">Prey Tell</a> A couple of other potentially interesting research links: Here is the final report for <a href="http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/factorsrelatedtohuntingcolor.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Participation in the United States."</a> There is also the report on "<a href="http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/YouthFactorsPhaseV.pdf" rel="nofollow">Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Participation Among The Nation’s Youth</a>." Eccles,

Thanks for adding a bit of data to the fray. I like the map (also from Wikipedia) that shows the white percentage, that way everything else is “minority”–which really highlights making the case for geography as a factor.

You mention some programs in the UK that try to include everyone, but have a problem sustaining the desire once the scaffold of the program is removed. Is this the type of program (PDF file) you’re talking about?

Eccles, you said, “What is needed more is a collective outing of thumbs from the usual orifices to speed up social policies helping to bridge the 16K median income gap.” This is probably a very important aspect, and something that’s actually more important, in the long run, than why minorities aren’t fly fishing.

But I still can’t let the question go. Ok, thinking off the top of my head for a second, how about this as a different question: What makes people take up fly fishing instead of spinner/bait fishing–how do they get into it in the first place? If we knew that, could we then come to some conclusions about why more minorities aren’t fly fishing?

A very interesting piece of research (actually focus groups, not “real” research) I came across was this: Women’s, Hispanics’, and African-Americans’ Participation in, and Attitudes toward, Boating and Fishing. It isn’t fly fishing per se, but I think the same conclusions could be extrapolated from it.

The preface to the conclusions said this:

“As noted earlier, focus group research should not be used to make generalizations about population-wide issues. It cannot be concluded, based on these focus groups alone, why women, Hispanics, and African-Americans do not participate in fishing and/or boating at a rate comparable to their numbers in the general population. However, some observations can be made which will be found to be broadly applicable. Other conclusions are only suggestive of the need for further investigation.”

One of the 19 conclusions from this focus group research was this:

“Explanations for the underlying causes of differential participation rates observed in fishing and boating for women, African-Americans and Hispanics are probably due to broad, complex social and cultural factors. Single, simple explanations should be avoided and efforts to increase participation should be based on sound research of local populations. Just as there is no “general” angler and/or boater in the total population, there is no “general” African-American, Hispanic or woman angler and/or boater”

Some demographics from Fly Fisherman magazine:

Fly Fisherman magazine is the leading magazine in editorial quality, circulation, and advertising pages. Demographics:

* 53 Average Age
* 18.4 Years Fly-Fishing Experience
* $166,200 Average Household Income
* 89% College Educated
* 96% Bought Fly-Fishing Equipment
* 55% Tie Flies

Our readers spent over $473,000,000 on fly-fishing trips and over $188,000,000 on fly-fishing equipment

You certainly aren’t going to get many of those in that $30k bracket thumbing through Fly Fisherman mags.

Some interesting statistics here: Prey Tell

A couple of other potentially interesting research links:
Here is the final report for “Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Participation in the United States.” There is also the report on “Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Participation Among The Nation’s Youth.”

]]> By: Eccles http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1462 Eccles Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:07:56 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1462 A couple of things occur to me about this. One pretty simple assessment would say that demography, geography and socio-economic status mitigate against minorities getting into fly fishing. Taking one particular minority as an example the census tells me that the population of the white majority runs at somewhere around 221 million and that of black Americans at 41 million. Does that mean we should expect 19% of the press coverage to contain pictures of black Americans fly fishing? There is more. The median income for whites is around 46K and for black Americans 30K. Fly fishing is not a cheap sport. I recently bought my daughter her first outfit. $18 for a really quite competent rod, reel and line made by a well known and sound manufacturer. It was a spinning rig of course. I wonder where $18 worth of fly kit would get me. What proportion of the black American population, whose median income is already lower than the majority population would choose to spend money on fly kit rather than something else. And then there are all the issues of demography and geography. 80% of the population is urban. Even supposing that the split between urban and rural living is even between the two groups it leaves very few of the minority out in the sticks, perhaps particularly so out in the sticks in trout country. This map (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_2000_black_percent.gif) for example, doesn’t exactly show the majority of the black population living close to trout trout waters, particularly not the kind if wild trout country the media likes to depict. And the split is unlikely to be even. The percent of black Americans in the city is arguably much higher than the 80% generalisation and conversely the percent of whites lower. In the face of such basic data the expectation that there should be more minorities in fly fishing would seem something of a non sequitur (though I know you are just posing the question here). Fly fishing doesn’t even come onto the radar of many minority groups. The second thought(s) comes from the questions you pose at the end of your piece. If the playing field were more even would fly fishing (as opposed to warm water fishing) have a “golf club” attitude to the appearance of minority groups on the river bank. I think not in general, aside from a few stuffy institutions perhaps. And I suspect that would not be because it is fly fishing but because that sort if institution contains the kind of person who would be recalcitrant in any similar field. So one might ask should the playing field be leveled? Should minorities be more represented in the sport? If so, given the demographic evidence, why? The Environmental Agency in the UK acknowledges that “few people in our five major ethnic minority categories know much about or are interested in angling.” The agency goes on to report that “yet, events aimed at or involving ethnic groups have been popular.” They use this as a reason for starting programmes for ethnic minorities. But it strikes me this is based on a false premise. These groups are deliriously happy that someone, anyone, takes a real interest in them at all. It could be fishing but equally it could be kite flying, horse riding or pancake tossing. For seven or eight years I worked at the coal face of this issue as a sport development officer for ethnic minorities in inner city London. What was clear was that however well intentioned the project, and whatever ephemeral reward it gave as a show and tell exercise it was doomed if there was not continued involvement from the providers after the initial demonstration. What is needed more is a collective outing of thumbs from the usual orifices to speed up social policies helping to bridge the 16K median income gap. That allow ethnic minorities the choice to live in places which are not demarcated by economics or historical migration geographies (get down you hard left socialist you). Leveling such a fundamental field would undoubtedly see more ethnic minorities in fly fishing simply through osmosis. It does not need hand wringing from the majority in attempt to put a “poster boy” ethnic minority on the cover of Fly Fisherman for a month so we can all go around clapping ourselves on our broad white backs to show what good folk we are. Having said that I might be completely wrong about the last bit. At the back of my mind a bell rings to say that an ethnic minority poster boy (girl) is exactly what is needed. Not that many ethnic groups are likely to pick up a copy of Fly Fisherman it has to be said. A couple of things occur to me about this. One pretty simple assessment would say that demography, geography and socio-economic status mitigate against minorities getting into fly fishing. Taking one particular minority as an example the census tells me that the population of the white majority runs at somewhere around 221 million and that of black Americans at 41 million. Does that mean we should expect 19% of the press coverage to contain pictures of black Americans fly fishing? There is more. The median income for whites is around 46K and for black Americans 30K. Fly fishing is not a cheap sport. I recently bought my daughter her first outfit. $18 for a really quite competent rod, reel and line made by a well known and sound manufacturer. It was a spinning rig of course. I wonder where $18 worth of fly kit would get me. What proportion of the black American population, whose median income is already lower than the majority population would choose to spend money on fly kit rather than something else. And then there are all the issues of demography and geography. 80% of the population is urban. Even supposing that the split between urban and rural living is even between the two groups it leaves very few of the minority out in the sticks, perhaps particularly so out in the sticks in trout country. This map (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_2000_black_percent.gif) for example, doesn’t exactly show the majority of the black population living close to trout trout waters, particularly not the kind if wild trout country the media likes to depict. And the split is unlikely to be even. The percent of black Americans in the city is arguably much higher than the 80% generalisation and conversely the percent of whites lower. In the face of such basic data the expectation that there should be more minorities in fly fishing would seem something of a non sequitur (though I know you are just posing the question here). Fly fishing doesn’t even come onto the radar of many minority groups.
The second thought(s) comes from the questions you pose at the end of your piece. If the playing field were more even would fly fishing (as opposed to warm water fishing) have a “golf club” attitude to the appearance of minority groups on the river bank. I think not in general, aside from a few stuffy institutions perhaps. And I suspect that would not be because it is fly fishing but because that sort if institution contains the kind of person who would be recalcitrant in any similar field. So one might ask should the playing field be leveled? Should minorities be more represented in the sport? If so, given the demographic evidence, why? The Environmental Agency in the UK acknowledges that “few people in our five major ethnic minority categories know much about or are interested in angling.” The agency goes on to report that “yet, events aimed at or involving ethnic groups have been popular.” They use this as a reason for starting programmes for ethnic minorities. But it strikes me this is based on a false premise. These groups are deliriously happy that someone, anyone, takes a real interest in them at all. It could be fishing but equally it could be kite flying, horse riding or pancake tossing. For seven or eight years I worked at the coal face of this issue as a sport development officer for ethnic minorities in inner city London. What was clear was that however well intentioned the project, and whatever ephemeral reward it gave as a show and tell exercise it was doomed if there was not continued involvement from the providers after the initial demonstration. What is needed more is a collective outing of thumbs from the usual orifices to speed up social policies helping to bridge the 16K median income gap. That allow ethnic minorities the choice to live in places which are not demarcated by economics or historical migration geographies (get down you hard left socialist you). Leveling such a fundamental field would undoubtedly see more ethnic minorities in fly fishing simply through osmosis. It does not need hand wringing from the majority in attempt to put a “poster boy” ethnic minority on the cover of Fly Fisherman for a month so we can all go around clapping ourselves on our broad white backs to show what good folk we are. Having said that I might be completely wrong about the last bit. At the back of my mind a bell rings to say that an ethnic minority poster boy (girl) is exactly what is needed. Not that many ethnic groups are likely to pick up a copy of Fly Fisherman it has to be said.

]]> By: Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1457 Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) Wed, 22 Jul 2009 23:50:02 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1457 Rough, Thanks for the Hawaiian clarification. I do realize that brownliners fish in all types of water, I just didn't know in what regards you were referring to yourself as a minority, so assumed it was the "roughfish" aspect. Rough, Thanks for the Hawaiian clarification. I do realize that brownliners fish in all types of water, I just didn’t know in what regards you were referring to yourself as a minority, so assumed it was the “roughfish” aspect.

]]> By: the roughfisher http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1456 the roughfisher Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:50:03 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1456 Scott, I appreciate your feedback and agree with your insight, however, I would to clear a few things. Not every brownliner fishes in ugly, urban settings. Perhaps we may be another "minority" group, but many of my cohorts are fishing for carp and native roughfish species on the same coldwater streams hosting salmonids. We choose to fish for roughfish not because of degraded water quality, destruction of habitat, or lack of proximity from a wilderness area, but because we enjoy the challenge. Many of us still pursue the occasional salmonid, but prefer the tug of a roughfish. Roughfish live in beautiful places too. Furthermore, the allusion to myself as a "minority" was not in reference to me being a brownliner, but rather a proud Native Hawaiian. I hope to see a few more different colored faces on the cover of those fishing rags or on the internet, because I know they're are out there. They're probably just busy fishing while I'm sitting here typing this. Cheers! Scott, I appreciate your feedback and agree with your insight, however, I would to clear a few things. Not every brownliner fishes in ugly, urban settings. Perhaps we may be another “minority” group, but many of my cohorts are fishing for carp and native roughfish species on the same coldwater streams hosting salmonids. We choose to fish for roughfish not because of degraded water quality, destruction of habitat, or lack of proximity from a wilderness area, but because we enjoy the challenge. Many of us still pursue the occasional salmonid, but prefer the tug of a roughfish. Roughfish live in beautiful places too.

Furthermore, the allusion to myself as a “minority” was not in reference to me being a brownliner, but rather a proud Native Hawaiian. I hope to see a few more different colored faces on the cover of those fishing rags or on the internet, because I know they’re are out there. They’re probably just busy fishing while I’m sitting here typing this.

Cheers!

]]> By: Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1452 Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:59:09 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1452 Hi Rough! "...the face of fly fishing is changing, and for the better. I feel fly fishing is becoming more accessible to the general public." I think you're right. I think the change is slow, but it's coming. As you brownliners continue getting more recognition, I think it helps cut down some barriers. Cliff used the phrase, "wilderness based," in referring to fly fishing. I think maybe this has given traditional fly fishing some of that mystique which adds to the perception of "status" sport. Those who traditionally received most press about their fly fishing typically had to go somewhere other than where they lived to fish, because fly fishing was traditionally (at least here in the US) for trout. By early/mid twentieth century, most trout were gone from urban settings. This meant traveling to find them. And, again, a lot of those writing about fly fishing belonged to angling clubs. But that was the <strong>public </strong>face of fishing--that didn't mean a bunch of poor people from the back country weren't fly fishing. Your "minority" seems to be fast becoming the majority though. Us blueliners are going to get run out of our own sport :-) Hi Rough!

“…the face of fly fishing is changing, and for the better. I feel fly fishing is becoming more accessible to the general public.”

I think you’re right. I think the change is slow, but it’s coming. As you brownliners continue getting more recognition, I think it helps cut down some barriers.

Cliff used the phrase, “wilderness based,” in referring to fly fishing. I think maybe this has given traditional fly fishing some of that mystique which adds to the perception of “status” sport. Those who traditionally received most press about their fly fishing typically had to go somewhere other than where they lived to fish, because fly fishing was traditionally (at least here in the US) for trout. By early/mid twentieth century, most trout were gone from urban settings. This meant traveling to find them.

And, again, a lot of those writing about fly fishing belonged to angling clubs. But that was the public face of fishing–that didn’t mean a bunch of poor people from the back country weren’t fly fishing.

Your “minority” seems to be fast becoming the majority though. Us blueliners are going to get run out of our own sport :-)

]]> By: Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1451 Cutthroat Stalker (Scott) Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:44:37 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1451 Cliff, Thanks for chipping in. I really appreciate the links--it's good to see some diversity. I think there is something to the $$ aspect here, but I'm not entirely sold yet. I think of my own introduction to fly fishing. My family was definitely lower middle income/upper low income (we lived in a mobile home until I was 11, then on a military base, then in a rented house--my parents moved into their own first house when I was 15). I never really even knew what fly fishing was. I had a spinnng/bait rig that I fished with some buddies. When I was 23 and in college I met a guy. He was just learning to fly fish. I mentioned it to my dad and he said he had a fly rod I could use (who would have thought). So for me, it wasn't a status symbol. (Although you're right, FF does seem to have that stigma--fodder for another post.) I was just using the tools that were available. "I can’t explain why they’re so white though." That's the perplexing thing. Sure, we can find the exceptions here and there, but the degree to which the sport *seems* to be white, is pretty high. Cliff,

Thanks for chipping in. I really appreciate the links–it’s good to see some diversity. I think there is something to the $$ aspect here, but I’m not entirely sold yet. I think of my own introduction to fly fishing. My family was definitely lower middle income/upper low income (we lived in a mobile home until I was 11, then on a military base, then in a rented house–my parents moved into their own first house when I was 15). I never really even knew what fly fishing was. I had a spinnng/bait rig that I fished with some buddies.

When I was 23 and in college I met a guy. He was just learning to fly fish. I mentioned it to my dad and he said he had a fly rod I could use (who would have thought). So for me, it wasn’t a status symbol. (Although you’re right, FF does seem to have that stigma–fodder for another post.) I was just using the tools that were available.

“I can’t explain why they’re so white though.” That’s the perplexing thing. Sure, we can find the exceptions here and there, but the degree to which the sport *seems* to be white, is pretty high.

]]> By: BigCliff/TankTX http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1450 BigCliff/TankTX Wed, 22 Jul 2009 04:05:19 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1450 I see lots of parallels between FF, Recreational Cycling, and Snow Skiing. All are gear intensive, somewhat wilderness based, and participation is viewed as a status symbol. They're all also white as rice. I can't explain why they're so white though. I can point out that we have some local exceptions that guide- http://www.guidesoftexas.com/Site/Contact.html http://www.alvindedeaux.com/ http://faroutfishingtrips.com/blog/?p=91 I see lots of parallels between FF, Recreational Cycling, and Snow Skiing. All are gear intensive, somewhat wilderness based, and participation is viewed as a status symbol. They’re all also white as rice. I can’t explain why they’re so white though.

I can point out that we have some local exceptions that guide-

http://www.guidesoftexas.com/Site/Contact.html

http://www.alvindedeaux.com/

http://faroutfishingtrips.com/blog/?p=91

]]> By: the roughfisher http://scarles.org/blog/cutthroat-stalker/1681/minorities-fly-fishing/comment-page-1/#comment-1449 the roughfisher Wed, 22 Jul 2009 02:23:46 +0000 http://scarles.org/blog/?p=1681#comment-1449 I observe plenty of non-traditional anglers gear fishing in both urban and rural areas. I don't think locale plays much influence on angling use by these groups, that typically come from traditional fishing cultures back in their homeland. I agree that "minority" fly anglers are not as visible in the public eye. Whether or not it is due to socioeconomic status, I can't say as I don't have any data supporting the claim. What I do know is that the face of fly fishing is changing, and for the better. I feel fly fishing is becoming more accessible to the general public. BTW, if you're looking for a "minority" website, look no further than my own: <a href="http://www.roughfisher.com" rel="nofollow">roughfisher.com</a>. I observe plenty of non-traditional anglers gear fishing in both urban and rural areas. I don’t think locale plays much influence on angling use by these groups, that typically come from traditional fishing cultures back in their homeland.

I agree that “minority” fly anglers are not as visible in the public eye. Whether or not it is due to socioeconomic status, I can’t say as I don’t have any data supporting the claim. What I do know is that the face of fly fishing is changing, and for the better. I feel fly fishing is becoming more accessible to the general public.

BTW, if you’re looking for a “minority” website, look no further than my own: roughfisher.com.

]]>