Soft Hackles
 

I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? I think I'll tie some
up this winter.

Thanks.

- Dave

Soft Hackles
 

On 8 Dec, 17:00, mdk77 wrote:
I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? I think I'll tie some
up this winter.

Thanks.

- Dave

I fish a few soft hackles;

http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-on.../patterns.html

TL
MC

Soft Hackles
 

On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 08:00:33 -0800 (PST), mdk77
wrote:

I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? I think I'll tie some
up this winter.

Soft hackled Pheasant Tail is deadly! Same with a GRHR. Sizes 16 -
18.

Dave

Soft Hackles
 

"mdk77" wrote


wondered if you guys do. If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout?

- Dave

Well, Dave, if I absolutely HAD to catch a trout, yes, if my life depended
on it and I was in one of those hypothetical "one fly" situations .... I'd
pick either a Zebra Midge-like fly or a soft hackle, probably a SH ...
you're looking good from my view G

colors and sizes? short answer would be to stay within the same ranges as
"naturals"

one of my favorites that I don't see much other than my own box is an orange
dyed PT body, fine gold wire ribbed, ( this combo has a real 'glow' to it
that I love and trout seem to like ;-), and any of several choices for
hackle ... size #14 is a good, single choice

yellow and gray phase partridge ... #16

muskrat and gray phase partridge ... #18

OR

be creative, damn near any combination that seems good to you .... in the
#8/ 10 down to damn small range ... however don't tie more than a couple of
any given whimsy until you test it and get Mr. Trout's approval


AND,

don't get B.Sed into believing there is "one right way" to fish SH flies ...
they work on the swing ( like a soft hackle :-), with split shot like a
nymph, fluffed up with Frog's Fanny and fished in the film to risers like a
dry, and slowly stripped in like a nymph/streamer would be in a stillwater
/backwater .... and I've caught fish with the fly just hanging behind me in
the water as I moved to a new spot, too lazy to reel in, or stopped to take
a picture and it hung there "motionless"


If your next post is asking about Brassies and Copper Johns the trout are in
trouble

Soft Hackles
 

"Larry L" wrote


be creative, damn near any combination that seems good to you ....


probably belongs over at tying forum

BUT

get a good pair of tweezers with a rounded point, grip the very end of the
partridge ( or similar) feather and pull the fibers not gripped to reverse
them, trim the resulting tip and tie in by the tip, then wind a couple turns

IMHO ( and only MY HO ) this results in a nicer tie, especially in smaller
sizes, than tying in by the thicker section ala a dry fly hackle

if you then CAREFULLY wind back through the hackle without tying down any
fibers, the tie becomes much longer lived, trout teeth do nasty things to
soft hackles ... and soft hackles attract trout teeth G

Soft Hackles
 

On Dec 8, 10:00�am, mdk77 wrote:
I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. �If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? �I think I'll tie some
up this winter.

Thanks.

- Dave

The Soft Hackle King of ROFF is Tom Littleton.
If he reads your post you're in luck.
You'll get a wealth of information.

Soft Hackles
 

snip snip


partridge and yellow tied with fine yellow wire has saved my skin many
a day. sizes 12-16

Soft Hackles
 

hello mdk77

I thought this was a great great tutorial for the partridge and yellow ,
case you need one.I find it sure helps to watch a good tyer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqSspUEU4c

thanks , G

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7lofi/index.htm


"Joel *DFD*" wrote in message
...
On Dec 8, 10:00?am, mdk77 wrote:
I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. ?If so, then what
colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? ?I think I'll tie some
up this winter.

Thanks.

- Dave

The Soft Hackle King of ROFF is Tom Littleton.
If he reads your post you're in luck.
You'll get a wealth of information.

Soft Hackles
 

Larry L wrote:

get a good pair of tweezers with a rounded point, grip the very end of the
partridge ( or similar) feather and pull the fibers not gripped to reverse
them, trim the resulting tip and tie in by the tip, then wind a couple turns

IMHO ( and only MY HO ) this results in a nicer tie, especially in smaller
sizes, than tying in by the thicker section ala a dry fly hackle

I don't use tweezers or anything, but do almost always tie soft
hackles in by the tip end. Learned that way and it just seems
easier.

Favorites, in no particular order:

- Hare's ear and partridge
- PT and partridge
- Partridge and orange
- " and olive
- " and yellow
- Gray partridge and herl
- Grouse and herl
- Grouse and orange (for some reason, on a couple of rivers I
fish regularly this seems to out-fish the P and O.

There are a gazillion variations, but I usually have these in my
box. Hard to find small SF feathers, but a hare's ear and
partridge in #18 can often work wonders....

- JR

Soft Hackles
 

Edmond Dantes wrote

partridge and yellow tied with fine yellow wire has saved my skin
many a day. sizes 12-16


In the small freestone mountain creeks of my youthful distant past, most
days had a period when the sun was high and the fish hanging low. Dry fly
action tapered down to slow. My standard approach, at that time of day,
was a partridge and yellow #14 fished upstream just like a dry into the
plunge pools and pockets that define 'fishy' on such lovely little steams.
Almost always you could see the lightly colored SH, well benath the surface,
and the fish that came out of nowhere to eat it .... in many ways this out
performs "dry fly" for intense visual fishing entertainment.

I always "thought" that the P&Y worked so well because of drowned pale duns
and little yellow stones, both of which are common on the streams I fished
.... but Willi thinks it was because I put the fly where the fish wanted it
G .... either way, I am sitting here with a big smile, just remembering
the pleasure of those creeks, the sneaking, the climbing over boulders, the
fishing down on one knee ( hurts just thinking about it now ) and the flash
as that SH disappeared into a trout's mouth.

Soft Hackles
 

"JR" wrote


There are a gazillion variations, but I usually have these in my
box. Hard to find small SF feathers, but a hare's ear and
partridge in #18 can often work wonders....

- JR



So, stroke some of the fibers into reversed position, snip the entire 'tip"
off. leaving a "v" of fibers.

tie that "v" in facing forward, much as you might deer hair for a sparkle
dun, sizing "overhang" to hook

wind to rear, form body, pull those hackle fibers back and first a wrap or
two to hold them back then a wrap or two through the fibers to spread them
out, ( be aggressive, pull and push em where you want em ) and then a
finish wrap or two to form the final "angle back" look

the "fatness" or the individual fibers becomes the limitation to how small
you can go, not the fiber length ... you may not win "best fly in show" this
way, but it fishing well


and, of course, partridge is only one of many birds that have feathers
suitable .... quail, snipe, starling, and many others

... hell, come to the West again this summer ( you know you need it ... my
wife and I watched a movie last night set in Baltimore and I figured out I
left there in mid-1971 and I STILL shudder at the very thought of that
area )
... and visit BRF, best SH skin selection I personally know of .... ( I
bitched that the Partridge they had was too much brown feathers not enough
gray feathers one time ... Jackie shook her head, ( I'm a perennial pest )
and said, "Just a minute" and came back with a huge, yes HUGE, box of
skins, " look through these" )

Soft Hackles
 

Larry L wrote:
"JR" wrote

.... Hard to find small SF feathers, but a hare's ear and
partridge in #18 can often work wonders....

So, stroke some of the fibers into reversed position, snip the entire 'tip"
off. leaving a "v" of fibers.

tie that "v" in facing forward, much as you might deer hair for a sparkle
dun, sizing "overhang" to hook

wind to rear, form body, pull those hackle fibers back and first a wrap or
two to hold them back then a wrap or two through the fibers to spread them
out, ( be aggressive, pull and push em where you want em ) and then a
finish wrap or two to form the final "angle back" look

the "fatness" or the individual fibers becomes the limitation to how small
you can go, not the fiber length ... you may not win "best fly in show" this
way, but it fishing well

Yes, that's the method Nemes and others recommend, and I
sometimes resort to it, but I dislike it.... for reasons that
aren't well explained.... one of those visceral distastes, I
guess....

Usually I just pick the smallest of feathers from various quail
skins (Blue Ribbon Flies often has a good selection, for those
who don't hunt) and make do.

- JR

Soft Hackles
 

"Larry L" wrote in
:

the "fatness" or the individual fibers becomes the limitation to how
small you can go, not the fiber length ... you may not win "best fly
in show" this way, but it fishing well

Different feathers can tie down very small. Try using starling, for
example.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Soft Hackles
 

Joel *DFD* typed:
On Dec 8, 10:00?am, mdk77 wrote:
I've never fished them, and wondered if you guys do. ?If so, then
what colors and sizes are your favorites for trout? ?I think I'll
tie some up this winter.

The Soft Hackle King of ROFF is Tom Littleton.
If he reads your post you're in luck.
You'll get a wealth of information.

Yep - his Partridge and Yellow was contributed in one of the swaps, and
really fished well for me. Now I always keep a few in my box, both yellow
and orange.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Soft Hackles
 

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
Different feathers can tie down very small. Try using starling, for
example.

very true, Scott. Certain doves have great small soft hackles in a variety
of duns, bobwhites and some high quality partridge will tie down to #18 size
easily. Smaller
flies than that with starling, which can be bleached to a nice tannish
shade.
for the Original Poster:
As for bodies, the classic silk stuff works, and Dave is definitely a wise
old pirate with the Hares Ear and PT suggestions. Another variation I use is
called the Submerger, a flymph type soft hackle originated in PA by Bob
Sentiwany. As follows:
hook--#12-20 2xl nymph
thread--to match body
tails--3 or 4 mallard flank fibers, long
rib--very fine silver wire
body--loop-dubbed spiky hair with sparkle yarn.
I've used Hares Ear Plus, Sparkle Squirrel and
a home brewed Coyote Mask mix.

just tie in the tails, then the ribbing. Loop dub a loose, spiky body 4/5
of shank length. Rib with silver wire, several turns. Take no more than 2
turns of partridge and
tie of and finish neat head. These things seem to work well for emerging
caddis, some spinners in the film and who knows what else. Some folks cheat
and put weight in front of them and drift them deep. Try it and see if you
like it. If you just want to make a couple little batches, stash away a half
dozen each of a Tan #14 and an Olive
#16 and get back to me(these selections would be based on the Eastern US,
ymmv).
Tom
hackle--partridge,sparse

Soft Hackles
 

what happened to the formatting of that recipe, I have no clue. For the
Submerger, again:

hook--2xl nymph #12-20
thread--6/0 to match
tails--mallard flank fibers(3 or 4, longish)
rib--very fine silver wire
body--loop dubbed mix of coarse hair, dyed and
sparkle yarns.
hackle--partridge, sparse.

Tom

Soft Hackles
 

On Dec 8, 7:59 pm, "Tom Littleton" wrote:
what happened to the formatting of that recipe, I have no clue. For the
Submerger, again:

hook--2xl nymph #12-20
thread--6/0 to match
tails--mallard flank fibers(3 or 4, longish)
rib--very fine silver wire
body--loop dubbed mix of coarse hair, dyed and
sparkle yarns.
hackle--partridge, sparse.

Tom

Tom do you ever strip the hackle from one side of the stem before
wrapping?

TBone

Soft Hackles
 

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
On Dec 8, 7:59 pm, "Tom Littleton" wrote:

what happened to the formatting of that recipe, I have no clue. For the
Submerger, again:

hook--2xl nymph #12-20
thread--6/0 to match
tails--mallard flank fibers(3 or 4, longish)
rib--very fine silver wire
body--loop dubbed mix of coarse hair, dyed and
sparkle yarns.
hackle--partridge, sparse.

Tom


Tom do you ever strip the hackle from one side of the stem before
wrapping?

TBone



I tie in by the tips without a tweezer. (not sure what the tweezer is
for?) I strip the hackle fibers off the "inside" side of the feather and
then do two to two and a half wraps. For me, this results in a neater
and sparse look.

Willi

Soft Hackles
 

"Willi" wrote


I tie in by the tips without a tweezer. (not sure what the tweezer is
for?)


Just for "easy" I found a pair, with rounded tip, in a shop with the
A.K.Best name on them that have proved to be more useful for a variety of
things than I would have guessed. For the tip tie-in it simply makes it
easier to grip just a itsy bitsy tiny bit of tip ... not essential, just
nice to have. I "think" the ones I found are no longer available, but I
liked them so much and found so many little uses, I went back and got a
second pair.

Soft Hackles
 

In article ,
Larry L writes
"JR" wrote


There are a gazillion variations, but I usually have these in my
box. Hard to find small SF feathers, but a hare's ear and
partridge in #18 can often work wonders....

- JR



So, stroke some of the fibers into reversed position, snip the entire 'tip"
off. leaving a "v" of fibers.

Just moisten the pointy tip after pulling back the rest of the fibres -
this will make tying in so much easier. Don't clip off the stalk until
the last minute - it gives you something to hold with the tweezers.

Best wet hackles I've ever tied - hen hackles of course..
--
Bill Grey

Soft Hackles
 

"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message
...
Tom do you ever strip the hackle from one side of the stem before
wrapping?

TBone

no, but it does make a stylish fly. I tie in by the tip and wrap the whole
feather.
Tom

Soft Hackles
 

In article WT%6j.579$R4.171@trndny05, Tom Littleton
writes

"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message
...
Tom do you ever strip the hackle from one side of the stem before
wrapping?

TBone

no, but it does make a stylish fly. I tie in by the tip and wrap the whole
feather.
Tom



So do I Tom, but I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that I fold
both sides of the feather to one side - away from the eye of the hook
then start winding. This forms a great hackle for a wet fly. I always
tie partridge hackles in by this means.
--
Bill Grey

Soft Hackles
 

On 10 Dec, 20:00, "W. D. Grey" wrote:


So do I Tom, but I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that I fold
both sides of the feather to one side - away from the eye of the hook
then start winding. This forms a great hackle for a wet fly. I always
tie partridge hackles in by this means.
--
Bill Grey

I do about the same;

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/3672/part2fe4.jpg ( Bit more hackle
on these heavy bodied ribbed flies)

The "standard" dressing of a partridge and yellow;

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/2976/party1lr4.jpg

TL
MC

Soft Hackles
 

In article
,
Mike writes
On 10 Dec, 20:00, "W. D. Grey" wrote:


So do I Tom, but I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that I fold
both sides of the feather to one side - away from the eye of the hook
then start winding. This forms a great hackle for a wet fly. I always
tie partridge hackles in by this means.
--
Bill Grey

I do about the same;

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/3672/part2fe4.jpg ( Bit more hackle
on these heavy bodied ribbed flies)

The "standard" dressing of a partridge and yellow;

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/2976/party1lr4.jpg

TL
MC


If the hackle was nearer the centre of the body it would be spider
pattern. Nice and sparse.
--
Bill Grey

Soft Hackles
 

"W. D. Grey" wrote in message
...
but I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that I fold
both sides of the feather to one side - away from the eye of the hook then
start winding. This forms a great hackle for a wet fly. I always tie
partridge hackles in by this means.
--
Bill Grey


I do likewise, Bill, with the exception of very small feathers. I am
entirely too ham-handed to pull that off.
Tom

Soft Hackles
 

May be of interest;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqSs...eature=related

TL
MC

Soft Hackles
 

In article hjj7j.2316$1p.627@trndny01, Tom Littleton
writes

"W. D. Grey" wrote in message
...
but I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that I fold
both sides of the feather to one side - away from the eye of the hook then
start winding. This forms a great hackle for a wet fly. I always tie
partridge hackles in by this means.
--
Bill Grey


I do likewise, Bill, with the exception of very small feathers. I am
entirely too ham-handed to pull that off.
Tom



I don't believe you Tom - if I can do it I'm sure you can :-)
--
Bill Grey

Soft Hackles
 

Santa came early and I have a new book that talks about soft hackles.
It's "Wet Flies" by Dave Hughes. I already had a book by Hughes,
"Trout Flies - The Tier's Reference" that I REALLY liked. I can't
wait to read about the soft hackles in this new book by him.

This time of year, I really enjoy reading (and tying) and dreaming
about what to try next season :-)

Soft Hackles
 

mdk77 wrote:

Santa came early and I have a new book that talks about soft hackles.
It's "Wet Flies" by Dave Hughes. I already had a book by Hughes,
"Trout Flies - The Tier's Reference" that I REALLY liked. I can't
wait to read about the soft hackles in this new book by him.

It's a great book, and he shows a way of tying the hackles on that I
have used ever since I read about it. I don't think anyone mentioned
this method yet in this thread (though I'll admit I haven't follwoed it
really closely).

I'm working from memory here, but the way I remember it is he ties
the feather on parallel to the hook shank by the butt end (with the tip
extended past the eye in front) with the concave side facing the tier,
and strips the barbs off the top of the feather.

Then with the thread hanging just in front of the thorax area, he
takes a couple of wraps of hackle back towards the thorax, traps the
feather and then wraps forward through the hackle, being careful not to
trap any of the feather fibers.

This makes for a very small, neat head on the fly, plus it adds
durability.


Chuck Vance (I did a horrible job describing it, but you'll see
how easy it is in his pictures)

Soft Hackles
 

Conan The Librarian wrote in news:fjmcq0$mhe$1
@news.txstate.edu:

It's a great book, and he shows a way of tying the hackles on that I
have used ever since I read about it. I don't think anyone mentioned
this method yet in this thread (though I'll admit I haven't follwoed it
really closely).



Even more importantly, he describes a number of methods of fishing the wet
fly, which range all the way from the way we would fish an emerger all the
way to a quartering swing. It makes you less afraid to try different
things.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Soft Hackles
 

"Scott Seidman" wrote

way to a quartering swing. It makes you less afraid to try different
things.



It IS a good book and I don't really know why I'm going to tap this out

except that "the power of published" sometimes amazes me, including it's
"power to reduce fear"


In my own little field, I've known and worked with several people with
published books, or multiple articles, on training retrievers. Most were
mediocre dog trainers, at best. In several cases they paid me to train
their dogs because their own efforts didn't succeed.

Anyway it always astounds me how we all hang on the words of an "expert"
that has a book. My personal experience simply doesn't support the idea
that "published" and "knows a damn thing" always go together.

In fly fishing, almost all books are little more than a re-do of previous
books. The approach seems to be ... read five books ... pick a thing or
two you like from each .... rewrite those things ... and organize them into
a new volume. In Hughes' case, his co-authored "Western Hatches" series
really adds new knowledge to the angler's bookshelf ... new to angling,
moved over from the too damn boring entomology literature. IMHO, "Wet
Flies" is almost all re-hash and reading Lidy, Leisering, Polly, Nemes etc
in the originals might lead to more pleasure ( did for me ).



I sometimes wish I had less fear to try different things that MY thoughts
suggest, even if they aren't supported by the "experts." Indeed, I often
wish that I could wipe my mind clean, for short periods, of what I've read
about fishing, so that I'd be forced to be more observant and creative, not
just do what it says on page 39.



DISCLAIMER::: I own Hughes' book(s) and find them worth reading, this is
not about him or his work but about the whole idea that published = expert

Soft Hackles
 

On Dec 11, 11:47 am, "Larry L" wrote:
"Scott Seidman" wrote

way to a quartering swing. It makes you less afraid to try different
things.

It IS a good book and I don't really know why I'm going to tap this out

except that "the power of published" sometimes amazes me, including it's
"power to reduce fear"

In my own little field, I've known and worked with several people with
published books, or multiple articles, on training retrievers. Most were
mediocre dog trainers, at best. In several cases they paid me to train
their dogs because their own efforts didn't succeed.

Anyway it always astounds me how we all hang on the words of an "expert"
that has a book. My personal experience simply doesn't support the idea
that "published" and "knows a damn thing" always go together.

In fly fishing, almost all books are little more than a re-do of previous
books. The approach seems to be ... read five books ... pick a thing or
two you like from each .... rewrite those things ... and organize them into
a new volume. In Hughes' case, his co-authored "Western Hatches" series
really adds new knowledge to the angler's bookshelf ... new to angling,
moved over from the too damn boring entomology literature. IMHO, "Wet
Flies" is almost all re-hash and reading Lidy, Leisering, Polly, Nemes etc
in the originals might lead to more pleasure ( did for me ).

I sometimes wish I had less fear to try different things that MY thoughts
suggest, even if they aren't supported by the "experts." Indeed, I often
wish that I could wipe my mind clean, for short periods, of what I've read
about fishing, so that I'd be forced to be more observant and creative, not
just do what it says on page 39.

DISCLAIMER::: I own Hughes' book(s) and find them worth reading, this is
not about him or his work but about the whole idea that published = expert

In my case, I'm just beginning my journey into fly fishing. My entire
book experience is limited to 6 or 7 books at this point so I don't
have anything to compare with - good or bad.

I do like the way Hugh's books are simple for a guy like me to
understand (especially the "Trout Flies" book). I live in an area
almost totally devoid of fly fishermen (Central Illinois) so books
that I can understand have been really helpful. I think I've also
learned a lot from just "doing" the fishing and learning hit-and-miss
that way. It's probably not a very good way, but it's what I have
right now.

Other books that have helped me a lot a

"Fly Fishing for Beginners" (The Freshwater Angler)
by Chris Hansen

"The Orvis Fly-Fishing Guide"
by Tom Rosenbauer

"The Fly-Tying Bible: 100 Deadly Trout and Salmon Flies in Step-by-
Step Photographs"
by Peter Gathercole

"The Fly Tier's Benchside Reference"
by Ted Leeson (Author), Jim Schollmeyer

"Midge Magic"
by Don Holbrook

"Fishing Small Flies"
by Ed Engle

These books sure helped me this year. I envy you folks who have been
fishing for many years & who already know all of this stuff.

- Dave

Soft Hackles
 

"Larry L" wrote in
:

I sometimes wish I had less fear to try different things that MY
thoughts suggest, even if they aren't supported by the "experts."


I'm actually not this way with most books. The two "fishing", as opposed
to "tying", books that I really like are the one being discussed, and
Rosenbauer's "Prospecting for Trout". Hughes really expanded my concept of
what a wet fly is, and why we use them, and Rosenbauer gave me some early
insight about what to do when there's no hatch.

There are a variety of "experts" that certainly carry little sway on how I
do things-- some well published, and some self-appointed. For me to take
them seriously, they have to write well, and they have to have something to
say.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Soft Hackles
 

On 11 Dec, 20:09, mdk77 wrote:


These books sure helped me this year. I envy you folks who have been
fishing for many years & who already know all of this stuff.

- Dave

What is a wet fly? Well basically, most of the old traditional wet
flies are dry flies that don´t float very well!

Most of these flies, including very many soft hackles, represent dead,
or spent flies, and emergers. Some, (like those I showed), are
specific nymph imitations.

In a hatch, nymphs will be taken at any point in the water column, but
often just below or in the film.

I do use some of these soft hackle nymphs, ( the nymph 2 type) with a
couple of turns of lead under the thorax. This helps to ensure that it
penetrates the film well, ( "good entry") , but it wont usually make
it sink very far, and in medium to fast water hardly at all, unless
other steps are taken, ( mending) as that is dependent on the leader
set up, and how one fishes it.

The only reason I differentiate, is to suit the various stages of the
hatch, and also the water being fished. In fast broken water, a more
or less "standard" soft hackle will usually be most effective. The
calmer the water becomes, the better the imitation has to be.

Without movement, none of these flies will work very well. In fast
water, the water itself, and the drag on the leader provides more than
sufficient movement. In calmer water, one needs a better imitation, or
must supply movement by "working" the flies.That is the reason for the
various types. They are all "soft hackles", but designed to do
different things under different circumstances.

This is also why many of these flies will not be successful unless
there is a hatch!

Most modern nymphing techniques depend on getting down to the fish, by
using bead-heads, etc etc. and will work even when there is no hatch,
simply because one covers more fish at the fishes´ holding depth, and
few fish will pass up a serendipitous titbit in easy range, hatch or
no hatch.

These flies just don´t work like that. There are ways of getting them
down, using weight, and they will work, but you can not fish these
flies deep (and under control) without weight of some sort somewhere.
They are primarily designed to catch fish holding on the edges of fast
broken water, or in pocket water, and in relatively shallow water.
They work best when a hatch is in progress, the fish are feeding, and
the appropriate pattern and type is used At other times under other
circumstances, they can be quite useless! They are not a universal
panacea.

There are also times when a winged wet fly dressed and fished
correctly is a great deal more successful.

Sometimes, the only way to catch fish consistently is by"dredging" the
bottom, with some form of deep nymphing technique. At such times, the
soft hackles just wont work.

Something else of importance here, which is more or less universally
ignored, or forgotten nowadays. These and practically all other
traditional wet flies ( excluding fancies) are basically failures.

All the old literature constantly repeats that the best time for a
rise was when the dry flies first alighted on the water. Nymphs as
such were not used. This was also the reason for the extremely
frequent short line casting. The only really successful anglers were
those who fished upstream. If they could have gotten their flies to
float, then they would have done! They could not, so they designed
compromises. Those compromises are what we have now.

They were never designed to sink at all, and it was impossible to sink
them much with the gear in use anyway. They are the next best thing to
a floating fly. Namely a barely sunk fly. ALL the winged wet flies
were designed with this in mind, which is why they are very poor when
used as "swung" flies etc. ( There was never any sensible rationale
for this ). They were designed to be good imitations of FLOATING
flies.

The fact that they sank was a severe disadvantage to many anglers. So
designing them to sink as little as possible was the next best thing.
Other flies, for other hatches were designed to sink immediately and
imitate sunk spents etc.

These flies were used for hundreds of years, They represent adult
floating flies,practically WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!!! and WERE NEVER
DESIGNED TO SINK! This is a modern application.

The whole rift between wet and dry flies is basically nothing more
than a series of misunderstandings, and also explains why virtually
nobody knows how to fish wet flies properly any more. They should be
fished as dry flies, upstream and as accurate imitations of the hatch.

This is also why ALL!! the old literature specified cock hackles for
wet flies. It floated longer! The whole soft hackle movement was a
separate affair.

Having just re-read over a hundred and fifty of the older books, this
theory is borne out by every single one of them, and also accounts for
some apparently odd ideas, which in the light of what I just wrote are
not odd at all.

TL
MC

Soft Hackles
 

Mike wrote in news:e267f1a1-1403-4c1b-91d3-
:

The whole rift between wet and dry flies is basically nothing more
than a series of misunderstandings, and also explains why virtually
nobody knows how to fish wet flies properly any more. They should be
fished as dry flies, upstream and as accurate imitations of the hatch.

Yes, that certainly is one way to fish a wet fly effectively, but all the
old gents I know that tie on a cast of three or four winged wet flies (the
same three or four flies for one or two seasons!) who swing down and across
while wading downstream certainly catch many big fish-- and they work much
less hard at it than a nymph fisherman, certainly.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Soft Hackles
 

On 11 Dec, 20:49, Scott Seidman wrote:

Yes, that certainly is one way to fish a wet fly effectively, but all the
old gents I know that tie on a cast of three or four winged wet flies (the
same three or four flies for one or two seasons!) who swing down and across
while wading downstream certainly catch many big fish-- and they work much
less hard at it than a nymph fisherman, certainly.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Indeed, it works, but it is much more successful, ( although
admittedly a lot more work), upstream.

TL
MC

Soft Hackles
 

"Mike" wrote in message
...
On 11 Dec, 20:49, Scott Seidman wrote:

Yes, that certainly is one way to fish a wet fly effectively, but all the
old gents I know that tie on a cast of three or four winged wet flies
(the
same three or four flies for one or two seasons!) who swing down and
across
while wading downstream certainly catch many big fish-- and they work
much
less hard at it than a nymph fisherman, certainly.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Indeed, it works, but it is much more successful, ( although
admittedly a lot more work), upstream.

I think it possible that Scott's point was that in casts of multiple flies
at least all but the one closest to the rod were INTENDED to be wet
flies.....which is to say sunk below the surface.....in direct contravention
to the received wisdom recently imparted by an incontrovertible
authority.......who should have maybe read 151.

My own reading of vintage fly fishing literature reveals virtually
limitless, sharp and often and strenuously voiced disagreements concerning
such matters as whether one should fish upstream or downstream, what depths
to fish at, and virtually every other aspect of where, when, why, how to,
and with what to fish. Not surprisingly, the arguments presented on all
sides of all issues tended to be just about as vapid and safely ignorable as
those presented today by the heirs to the wisdom of yesteryear.

Wolfgang
go fish.......really, just go fish.

Soft Hackles
 

On 11 Dec, 21:10, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Wolfgang
go fish.......really, just go fish.

Well, as I am retired, I can fish, read, and cook, indeed I don´t do
much else, but thanks for the advice anyway Grandma.

MC

Soft Hackles
 

"Mike" wrote in message
...
On 11 Dec, 21:10, "Wolfgang" wrote:

Wolfgang
go fish.......really, just go fish.

Well, as I am retired, I can fish, read, and cook, indeed I don´t do
much else, but thanks for the advice anyway Grandma.

The suggestion was directed to those who might profit by it, rather than
sitting here and being bludgeoned by a never-ending stream of whacked out
gospels.

You want advice? Find someone to teach you how to use your computer.

Wolfgang

Soft Hackles
 

On 11 Dec, 21:25, "Wolfgang" wrote:

You want advice? Find someone to teach you how to use your computer.

Wolfgang

Thanks for even more useful advice Grandma.

MC