Charlie M wrote:
I read on the web recently that the color of dry fly wings doesn't really
matter all that much. The article stated that the 'footprint' of the fly
matters to the fish, the wing matters to the fisherman. This makes sense to
me. When I hold up a fly to see its profile I see shape not color. When a
fish sees a fly backlit from the sky it can't see too much color.

Which brings me to the question...does anyone here disregard dry fly
pattern's wing materials and just use a visible white or bold color for
better visibility?

I've been making deer hair types of flies lately, and the bleached hair is
sooo much easier to see than natural or dyed hair.

In fact, I find myself leaning more and more to the idea of flies being
either light colored, dark colored, or in-between grey.

Any thoughts? Suggestions? Flames?

This will sound like heresy to some, but I don't think
wings are necessary on a dry fly. I tested this hypothesis
over a two month period one summer in Yellowstone changing
flies, identical except for wings, every ten casts. The dry
flies without wings caught just as many fish as the flies
with wings. The hackle provides enough wing-like profile by
itself so that in most cases tying in a wing is superfluous.

It's at this point that someone always says You ain't never
fished the glass smooth, crystal clear waters of Some Creek
where the trout all have PhDs and eyes like microscopes. I
suppose there may be some circumstances where a dry fly with
a wing will catch fish where one without will not, but I've
quit tying in wings and I still catch fish.

--
Ken Fortenberry