Stillwater verus River-the most skillful?

[Peter Bishop]

Had a natter with some of my club members last night and one of the discussions centred upon whether fishing rivers or stillwaters produced the more skillful angler. While most of my own fishing is done on still waters I accept a different range of skills and watercraft is required to fish a river successfully. Is the carp or tench specialist therefore less of an angler than the barbel man because he has to master the whims of the river as well? Dont stillwater anglers have problems like undertow and finding feeding spots to overcome? It was suggested by one friend that an angler experienced on a river could easily adapt to fishing a lake but not visa versa? What does everyone else think? I will admit to being more comfortable on lakes and regard accomplished river anglers with a deal of respect but is that feeling justified?

 

[Beecy]

I think there is different ways of looking at this, and how you define skill.


I would say on one hand, to fish a river succesfully requires better technical ability ie. getting a float to go through just right or having your feder set up well ballanced and generally being realy in conrol of your gear.


However, i think rivers,especialy large powerful ones are a lot more forgiving on the feeding front, because your feed will eventualy be washed away you can afford to get it 'wrong' sometimes, also you can attract fish to your swim from further afield. But on a stilwater you are generally only fishing for whatever is allready in front of you, so get the feeding wrong and you can be buggered for the day.

 

[Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)]

To catch successfully on both still water and rivers takes a great deal of skill.

On rivers, because of the flow, manipulative skills become more important.

But both demand a knowledge of watercraft, except for the over stocked noddy puddles I guess.

One thing is for sure. Still water fly fishing, especially on large waters such as reservoirs, can demand fare more skill than rivers.

 

[Graham Whatmore]

I agree with Ron, fishing a big expanse of still water successfully requires a lot of knowledge of your quarry and entails a lot of time observing and feature finding. Very few anglers can be bothered to fish hard waters and the bigger the water the less likely most anglers are to fish it even though the rewards may be greater, and I include myself in that.

Rivers are, if anything, easier but that doesn't mean they don't require skill and understanding. To bring fish into a swim on a river is to my mind much easier than finding fish on a 60 acre gravel pit.

 

[BAZ (Angel of the North) aka Fester]

I think it is the opposite way around. River fishing is the more skillfull of the two.

 

[john ledger]

Although i fish both i prefer the rivers but after saying that some still waters are hard to define.
The Great Lake at Welbeck Abbey for example had such a strong tow in winter at times i have actually set a stickfloat up to catch the roach and bagged up.
Lough Derg in Ireland is a very hard venue to reap dividens on as are most of the Irish Great Lakes.
The upper River Idle on a bad day will definitely sort the men out from the boys and i agree with Baz

 

[Phil Hackett disability bad speller with Pride]

Don?t believe either is anymore difficult than the other, they?re just different, requiring different skills of equal complexity.

But how many anglers know half of what those differences are, other than one is moving and the other allegedly is still? RATFLHAO!

 

[Emmo (Angling Trust)]

I fish both but must admit I generally have more success on still water. Not necessarily more fish but larger ones.

 

[Ric Elwin]

I'd say that stillwaters are easier for the novice. Once you've got a fair grasp of the sport, and can read a river reasonably well, any river will be easier than a really difficult stillwater.

Massive generalisations here, of course.

 

[Ric Elwin]

The most satisfying fishing though is for wild Trout on a river, with a fly.

Miles ahead of ripping out 20 stockies in a couple of years from an overstocked Trout puddle.

 

[Lewis Duffy]

Id say fishing a river takes more skill, speaking from past experience i found it harder to fish the river ribble than other stillwaters in the area.

 

[Bryan Baron 2]

They both take skill but in diffrent areas as stated above. I think the problem is comparing catches a couple of chub of the river can be classed as a good day but a couple of bream from a still water could be classed as a bad day. Its all relative.

Personally i prefare rivers so struggle more on stillwaters as i have not honned the skills required no the principles but do not get enough practice.

 

[john ledger]

The easiest of all still waters to fish are commercials,no skill needed at all especially on F1 waters ,christ the wife could catch 20lb of F1s

 

[chris 2]

Its how skilled you are at reading waters,being still or flowing.If you can read the water or know how to plumb/feature find a water it makes it easyer to catch.You can onley gain this with experiance and putting the fishing hours in.

 

[Benny The Bream]

I think carp tend to be more riggy and harder on lakes/pits as they see so much more pressure generally so for carp i would have to say still water but it all depends on where your fishing its all relative.