Willi wrote:



My suggestion would be for example: a size 20 gray winged gray bodied
Mayfly.


and my request would be...tell me if it's a #20 parachute adams, a #14
ehc, etc. ... screw the fancy bug names, tell me about the size, the
color, and the flies you're using.

i might eventually be able to learn, remember, and spout the latin names
(mangled by southern speak), but what's the point? i'm fishing, trying
to catch fish, not presenting a lecture or trying to wow anyone with my
knowledge of latin bug names. i have a real fondness for fellas like
warren, makela, walt, pj, wayno, you, wolfgang, etc. who probably know
the scientific details but simply say those bugs look like a griffith's
gnat might work or a 16 humpy or something like that. perhaps you're
just making accommodations for this nitwit or others like me, but in my
ever-expanding experience, latin ain't the universal language of
flyfishers. for whatever reason, i've never thought being able to name
the bug meant as much as an ability to simply find the artificial (and i
don't know all those names either) that best mimics whatever the fish
are eating or might eat. whatever gratification the ability to identify
a bug by its scientific name provides, it's a pleasure of very personal
and limited utility among most fisher folk. for me, it's in the doin,
not the sayin.

one of the best examples i remember was the salmon fishing on the rapid
about 3 or 4 years ago when peter charles and daytripper and 3 or 4
others tied up some 24s and 26s to imitate the tiny little nit the fish
were gorging on - i called it a peter's nit. no one identified the bug
as a chironomid, ephemerella, or whatever latin identifier they probably
knew. instead, it was "looks like a 24 or 26, dark body, black, with a
wing". they went back to the cabins, tied some tiny flies they thought
would do the trick, and we had a fishin fiesta. that was fun.

jeff