Woven Flies

[Ernie]

I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.

[Hooked]

"Ernie" > wrote in message
m...
> I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.
>
>

That's what I said after the first one.

Haven't tie one since.

[Myxylplyk]

They are a pain...sort of..
but it's hard to beat that woven abdomen on dragonfly, stonefly nymphs and helgrimites.

Myx

"Hooked" > wrote in message
...
> "Ernie" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> > didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.
> >
> >
>
> That's what I said after the first one.
>
> Haven't tie one since.
>
>

[Scott Seidman]

"Ernie" > wrote in news:mX%Jb.6482
:

> I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.
>
>

I've had real good luck with woven caddis. Once you're used to it, the
small ones tie pretty fast, and they catch alot of fish for me.

Scott

[Salmo Bytes]

"Ernie" > wrote in message >...
> I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.

A) making woven bodies gets a lot faster after the first dozen or so

B) adding fish catching ability isn't always the point.
If you eliminated all the patterns that include non-essential
visual frills you'd eliminate most of your fly box.
Non-essential frills are half the fun of fly tying.

C) And whose to say a two-tone body doesn't add fish catching
ability anyway? The George's Brownstone nymph, for instance, is
a Yellowstone river mainstay. I wouldn't want to fish it any other way
(than the way George Anderson designed it).

[Gene Cottrell]

You've stated what are probably the facts, but each person must decide what
floats his boat. After nearly 50 years of flyfishing, I've come to the
conclusion that flyfishing is much simpler than most people are willing to
admit,. especially those with commercial interests. I catch as many fish,
on a very few patterns, as anyone I've fished with. Of course, some days
they get more, some days I catch more. That said, I don't think there's
anything wrong with the enjoyment some folks get trying every new gadget or
pattern or trying to tie exact imitations of insects. This hobby/sport has
room for all kinds of fun things and if you're enjoying yourself and not
bothering anybody, you're doing the right thing.

Gene



"Ernie" > wrote in message
m...
> I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.
>
>

[Dave LaCourse]

Gene Cottrell writes:

>You've stated what are probably the facts, but each person must decide what
>floats his boat. After nearly 50 years of flyfishing, I've come to the
>conclusion that flyfishing is much simpler than most people are willing to
>admit,. especially those with commercial interests. I catch as many fish,
>on a very few patterns, as anyone I've fished with. Of course, some days
>they get more, some days I catch more. That said, I don't think there's
>anything wrong with the enjoyment some folks get trying every new gadget or
>pattern or trying to tie exact imitations of insects. This hobby/sport has
>room for all kinds of fun things and if you're enjoying yourself and not
>bothering anybody, you're doing the right thing.
>
>Gene

Bravo! Well said. I have been fly fishing since the 40s with a short (30
year) time off for military/career. Like you, I catch most of my fish off of
just a few patterns. But, it is fun to experiment. I've done the woven fly
thing but noticed no increase in my catching ratio. If a fly takes longer than
five minutes to tie, I get upset when I lose it. d;o)
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Hooked]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
>
> If a fly takes longer than
> five minutes to tie, I get upset when I lose it. d;o)
> Dave
>

Just took me about 4 hours to tie an Atlantic Salmon fly yesterday. I
wouldn't even think of fishing it.

[Skwala]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> Gene Cottrell writes:
>
> >You've stated what are probably the facts, but each person must decide
what
> >floats his boat. After nearly 50 years of flyfishing, I've come to the
> >conclusion that flyfishing is much simpler than most people are willing
to
> >admit,. especially those with commercial interests. I catch as many
fish,
> >on a very few patterns, as anyone I've fished with. Of course, some days
> >they get more, some days I catch more. That said, I don't think there's
> >anything wrong with the enjoyment some folks get trying every new gadget
or
> >pattern or trying to tie exact imitations of insects. This hobby/sport
has
> >room for all kinds of fun things and if you're enjoying yourself and not
> >bothering anybody, you're doing the right thing.
> >
> >Gene
>
> Bravo! Well said. I have been fly fishing since the 40s with a short (30
> year) time off for military/career. Like you, I catch most of my fish off
of
> just a few patterns. But, it is fun to experiment. I've done the woven
fly
> thing but noticed no increase in my catching ratio. If a fly takes longer
than
> five minutes to tie, I get upset when I lose it. d;o)
> Dave
>
> http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html
>

I was thinking along these lines myself over the weekend... as I was tying a
dozen or so of a Skwlala pattern I use that has about 10 steps to complete.

I realized that every attempt at uniformaty and proportion was entirely for
my satisfaction and not to inbue any additional fish attractor quality to
the fly.

Reminded me of something I noticed very early after taking up fly fishing,
namely, trout would prefer a well chewed and shredded hardware store quality
yellow humpy over a expertly tied and proportioned version.

Not that I did anything with this knowledge, such as tying a humpy and then
taking a wood rasp to it, I did gravitate towards renegades and haystacks in
my fishing, however.

Truth is I caught my best trout on a dry fly on a Cooper's Bug...

Skwala

[riverman]

"Skwala" > wrote in message
...
>
> ....Not that I did anything with this knowledge, such as tying a humpy and
then
> taking a wood rasp to it, I did gravitate towards renegades and haystacks
in
> my fishing, however.
>
>

Excellent and interesting observation. I find that, when I am choosing from
a selection of 'identical' flies, I also tend to gravitate towards the
renegades and visual rejects instead of the pretty ones. I attribute this
partly towards the decreased loss if it gets tangled in a tree, but mostly,
I always suspect that some derelict fly with an abnormality would probably
be more likely to have some secret attraction to the fish than a
mass-produced standardized one.

It makes me wonder why I spend so much effort trying to make 'perfect'
flies, when those are precisely the ones I choose not to fish.... The only
notable exception to this is a SuperPupa I tied up at last years Lapland
clave: I found that the 'perfect' fly actually did work much better. Other
than that, I seem to catch the most fish on some reject thing that I could
never replicate in a million years.

--riverman

[Dave LaCourse]

riverman notes:

>Excellent and interesting observation. I find that, when I am choosing from
>a selection of 'identical' flies, I also tend to gravitate towards the
>renegades and visual rejects instead of the pretty ones.

My "lucky fly", long since lost to a rock in a Maine river, was extracted from
the jaws of a 20 inch brookie. The fly originally was a golden stone fly
nymph, with a gold colored bead tied in at the body. The thing was all banged
up, with the biot tails torn and the dubbing around the bead mostly shreaded.
But it caught fish. I saw the same fly in a fly shop and bought a dozen in the
same size. Never caught anything with them. My "lucky fly" must have had more
personality. d'o)
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[riverman]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> riverman notes:
>
> >Excellent and interesting observation. I find that, when I am choosing
from
> >a selection of 'identical' flies, I also tend to gravitate towards the
> >renegades and visual rejects instead of the pretty ones.
>
> My "lucky fly", long since lost to a rock in a Maine river, was extracted
from
> the jaws of a 20 inch brookie. The fly originally was a golden stone fly
> nymph, with a gold colored bead tied in at the body. The thing was all
banged
> up, with the biot tails torn and the dubbing around the bead mostly
shreaded.
> But it caught fish. I saw the same fly in a fly shop and bought a dozen
in the
> same size. Never caught anything with them. My "lucky fly" must have had
more
> personality. d'o)


Or flavor. :-)

--riverman

OBRofft: whats the strangest thing you ever pulled out of a river?

For me, it was on the St Croix. I found a $5 bill plastered against a rock
in the main current, about a foot below the surface. This was about 20 miles
from civilization in the middle of a seldom-canoed stretch, with no one
around, late in the season. No clue where it came from or how long it had
been there. It was kinda slimy, but still legally tender.

--riverman

[Ernie]

"Skwala" > wrote in message
...
> Reminded me of something I noticed very early after taking up
fly fishing,
> namely, trout would prefer a well chewed and shredded hardware
store quality
> yellow humpy over a expertly tied and proportioned version.

You got that right Skwala, fancy nice flies catch flyfshermen,
not fish.
Ernie

[Sandy Pittendrigh]

RE>
>>You got that right Skwala, fancy nice flies catch flyfshermen,
>>not fish.
>>Ernie

....yes...
But catching fishermen can be a fun and (sometimes even) rewarding
excerize in its own right....almost as fun as catching fish.

[Skwala]

"Sandy Pittendrigh" > wrote in message
s.com...
> RE>
> >>You got that right Skwala, fancy nice flies catch flyfshermen,
> >>not fish.
> >>Ernie
>
> ...yes...
> But catching fishermen can be a fun and (sometimes even) rewarding
> excerize in its own right....almost as fun as catching fish.
>

There's a whole industry built around it...

[Dave LaCourse]

riverman writes:

>OBRofft: whats the strangest thing you ever pulled out of a river?

I had waded out to a sumerged rock and stepped from that large rock to another,
allowing me to be able to cast into the feeding line. The water surrounding
this last rock is about 7 feet deep. While on the rock, the water is just
about bellybutton high. I was nymphing and doing so-so, when all of a sudden
this mass came floating toward me. I didn't know what the hell it wat but it
was *BIG*. When it hit me, I was so startled that I fell over backwards into a
Full Reid and came up with this thing in my face. Stunk like hell! I managed
to get ashore (just a few feet) and inspected this thing. It was a dead and
very bloated beaver. It had apparently died during the winter (this was May),
and floated in the lake until it went through the dam and into the river.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Dave LaCourse]

Ernie writes:

>
>You got that right Skwala, fancy nice flies catch flyfshermen,
>not fish.

<G> A big fly shop a couple of towns over was going out of business. I went
to the sale. There was lots of good deals on equipment and supplies. They had
a big supply of Water Wisp flies (tied up-side-down, and backwards). Man, if
there was a fly that was gonna catch fish, it was one of these. They wer tied
in both caddis and mayfly patterns. After speaking to the salesman ( a friend)
and making a deal, he sold me about 50 of these flies for 25 bucks. Such a
deal! Bull! I fished those things for years and never caught squat. But they
sure did look pretty. d;o)
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Ernie]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> It was a dead and very bloated beaver.
> Dave

I worked for Pacific Bell and the management was careful about
allowing signs to be posted that were sexual or might be
offensive. One sign remained at a Xerox machine and never raised
an eyebrow. It said: "Eat a Beaver, Save a Tree". :)
Ernie

[Jim (Bear) Peterson]

for your own satisfaction, of course, why else would you want to tie
flies rather than just buying the assortment pack from the K-Mart.
;o)

Bear

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:48:58 +0100, "riverman" >
wrote:

>It makes me wonder why I spend so much effort trying to make 'perfect'
>flies, when those are precisely the ones I choose not to fish.

[Hooked]

"riverman" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> OBRofft: whats the strangest thing you ever pulled out of a river?
>


A condom. Don't care to know if it was used or not. I just cut my tippet and
said goodbye to it and my fly.

[DaveMohnsen]

"Ernie" > wrote in message
m...
> I tried a few woven flies but they were just too much work and
> didn't really add any fish catching capability to the fly.
>

I Ernie,
Despite what I may have said in an earlier thread . . .about simple is
better . . .I have to tell you I have fun with the woven . . .knotted flies.
One pattern I thought . . . in the 70's or so, I thought was crazy, was the
Bitch Creek Nymph. Thought those Montana guys were having fun . . .with
plant things . . .and then tying flies . . . hmmm . . .maybe things haven't
changed (g)

Caught a lot of fish on that pattern. Couldn't figure out why based on the
"realistic" more so patterns I was tying . . . but it worked.

As has been said before . . .in many different forums . . . I kinda rely on
presentation . . .gotta get the fly to the trout . . . in the feeding column
that has some interest to the trout. . .with a resemblance for a response.
( Uhh . . .I don't do so good on that part sometimes)

Anyhow, for you folks that tie flies, keep experimenting . . .it is fun.
There are several internet sites out there that are pretty good to help
folks. These can be some fun, and great looking patterns. They many not
catch much better . . .but it displays your tying skill to simple guys like
me.

I just keep mucking around.
BestWishes,
DaveMohnsen
Denver

[Tim J.]

"DaveMohnsen" wrote...
<snip>
> Anyhow, for you folks that tie flies, keep experimenting . . .it is fun.
> There are several internet sites out there that are pretty good to help
> folks. These can be some fun, and great looking patterns. They many not
> catch much better . . .but it displays your tying skill to simple guys like
> me.
>
> I just keep mucking around.

You, sir, misrepresent your talent:
http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=BG2003&id=9
http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=DD2003&id=16
http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=DD2003&id=17
http://home.planet.nl/~westb001/scintillator.html

.. . . one of the best tyers I know.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Ernie]

"DaveMohnsen" > wrote in
message
ink.net...
> I Ernie,
> Despite what I may have said in an earlier thread . . .about
simple is
> better . . .I have to tell you I have fun with the woven . .
..knotted flies.
> One pattern I thought . . . in the 70's or so, I thought was
crazy, was the
> Bitch Creek Nymph. Thought those Montana guys were having fun
.. . .with
> plant things . . .and then tying flies . . . hmmm . . .maybe
things haven't
> changed (g)
> BestWishes,
> DaveMohnsen
> Denver

There are those who tie for pleasure and then there are those
"like me" who tie flies to fish with. The simpler and easier the
fly is to tie the better I like it. The only requirement is that
the fish also like it.
Ernie

[Willi]

Tim J. wrote:

> "DaveMohnsen" wrote...
> <snip>
>
>>Anyhow, for you folks that tie flies, keep experimenting . . .it is fun.
>>There are several internet sites out there that are pretty good to help
>>folks. These can be some fun, and great looking patterns. They many not
>>catch much better . . .but it displays your tying skill to simple guys like
>>me.
>>
>>I just keep mucking around.
>
>
> You, sir, misrepresent your talent:
> http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=BG2003&id=9
> http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=DD2003&id=16
> http://gula.org/roffswaps/detail.php?page=DD2003&id=17
> http://home.planet.nl/~westb001/scintillator.html
>
> . . . one of the best tyers I know.


Overall, it seems that people that are good at something are generally
fairly humble about it.

Willi