Dry Fly Only; 150yrs old this coming June.

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
Richard, it would appear that you missed my question over in the Cut Fly Line thread the other day..

James Ogden... He was the man who among other things was the first to tie flies deliberately to float

The first to do it, or the first to claim it?

PS Hope the party went well.
 

BobP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
8,609
Location
Wiltshire
One thing is for sure, dry fly or rather floating fly, was not invented to make fly fishing more difficult. So it rather begs the question as to why those protagonists of dry fly fishing claim that it IS more difficult?

Just between you, me, the gatepost and the dog next door, it isn't.
 

andrewparkeruk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
2,449
Location
Manchester, UK
BobP, on a day when there is no hatch to match, no terrestrials dropping onto the water, dry fly is likely to be less productive than other methods.

Couple 'dry fly only' with 'no wading' and you have a recipe for a testing day!

Andrew
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,555
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
One thing is for sure, dry fly or rather floating fly, was not invented to make fly fishing more difficult. So it rather begs the question as to why those protagonists of dry fly fishing claim that it IS more difficult?

Just between you, me, the gatepost and the dog next door, it isn't.

Who are these folk that claim it is more difficult? More difficult than what?

The only thing with regards to the operation of fishing the dry fly, which is required over and above other methods for the best chances of success (sometimes spectacular success) is that the Dry Fly angler needs to pay attention to the insects and to work out what the fish are feeding on. That is not to say it is necessary to be an entomologist but it is necessary to match the hatch if the best results are to be obtained. Matching the hatch might only be a matter of choosing a fake of suitable colour and size and (sometimes) shape. It also helps if the angler pays enough attention to spot when the fish stop eating one type of fly and start on another.

None of this is necessary in the other disciplines of the Sport.

richard
 

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
The only thing with regards to the operation of fishing the dry fly, which is required over and above other methods for the best chances of success is that the Dry Fly angler needs to pay attention to the insects and to work out what the fish are feeding on.... Matching the hatch might only be a matter of choosing a fake of suitable colour and size and (sometimes) shape. None of this is necessary in the other disciplines of the Sport.

Sorry, Richard, but that's complete tripe. 'Matching the hatch' (''choosing a fake of suitable colour and size and (sometimes) shape''), is as critical to the dry fly angler's success as it is to the nymph angler or wet fly angler: seldom critical, usually a good idea, but more often than not, totally unnecessary. And that goes for both rivers and stillwaters.
 

BobP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
8,609
Location
Wiltshire
So, perhaps Richard will enlighten us as to what "hatch" just about the most effective modern dry fly - the Klinkhamar - is supposed to match? Or the F fly for that matter?

How about that good old traditional dry fly, the Wickham's Fancy? I can't recall ever seeing a natural fly with a bright gold body. That doyen of dry fly anglers, F. M. Halford reputedly refused to use a Gold Ribbed Hares Ear because he couldn't decide what it was supposed to imitate. It is a very successful fly, but what DOES it imitate?

There are scores, if not hundreds, of dry fly patterns that don't imitate anything in particular but are still successful flies. Size, shape and above all, presentation are key factors, not exact imitation.
 
T

troutbum67

Guest
Firstly any fish caught from the bank are worthy fish , guys like myself who can wade rivers are in a better position to present our flies and move away from bankside obstructions .

When there is a hatch on it gives the angler a advantage , a example early spring I would say 20 plus fish when LDO are on the water , now that number could go up or down , this depends on the condition of the river .

Hard conditions on the river are when the river is low and gin clear , hot and bright sunshine make the conditions rock hard . Combined with no hatch ,just the odd rising fish . As the weather cools down and the light fades it can be game on again for the river angler .

Some of you may have read some of my posts some not , I can have red letter days , I will explain how this is done .

When the river starts to drop the fish can go on the feed and on the fin . Only a few days ago we were fishing low and clear rivers and the fish were spooky . All the pools open up , depth and width , the fish are happy to be in this water , they are often happy to be shoaled up just like grayling . To give you another example I will give you a few river readings or river levels , 0.34 and below are very low summertime levels , the fishing will be hard for me today , 0.38 and up to 0.48 are perfect levels , 0.44 up to 0.48 are when these red letter days are expected , its happened on to many occasions for it not to be a coincidence . Above 0.50 the river can change and although its fishable different methods are called for , big flies , Pink Shrimps and San Juan Worms . Anything above 0.60 and I could be wasting my time .


I suppose all anglers have there favourite ways of fishing , the rules of the Peacock part of the Wye are dry fly only ,plus no wading , so the fishing is demanding , I guess observation may be the key element .

I myself love the method of upstream nymph fishing , it suits the rivers I fish , 6 years ago I met Stuart Crofts , a very gifted angler , before I met him I would catch 5 fish a day , after a session with Stuart my experience and presentation improved , we got talking about his life stories , one particular story was when he went to the Czech Republic , he advised me to Czech nymph for 2 years .

Over the last 5 years I mainly fished with nymphs , Some of you will remember old apprenticeships , 5 years to become a skilled tradesman , I have learnt a very lot of nymph techniques over the last 5 years . I admit I can struggle with dry fly fishing at times , still willing to learn and advance , so the question is its only easy when you know how , some anglers learn quicker than others , during 2010 and up to 2014 I would be on the river 7 days a week , thousands of hours learning on how to nymph fish .

So it is hard to say which is the easiest ,dry fly or nymph fishing , I would assume its all up to which one you use most . Of coarse we have those anglers who are good at all types of fishing , dry ,wets ,spiders and nymphs , rivers and Still waters . These days I keep a open mind .
 

warrenslaney

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,959
Location
Youlgrave
One thing is for sure, dry fly or rather floating fly, was not invented to make fly fishing more difficult. So it rather begs the question as to why those protagonists of dry fly fishing claim that it IS more difficult?

Just between you, me, the gatepost and the dog next door, it isn't.

Robert Nesfield, the Dukes Steward, asked Mr O to demonstrate his flies because the anglers of the time were fishing live flies on a dap. This was proving fatal to the larger population of trout in the river which were being caught easily and killed. DFO was introduced here in place of dapping to enable the fish to have a more sporting chance- make it more difficult. Modern materials and equipment have swayed the advantage back to the angler. I only fish DFO when I fish anywhere. To me its far easier than nymph fishing or wet fly fishing. Someone who is used to fishing nymphs may find DFO much harder- especially when you cannot wade in a river, where the weed grows well and many currents occur across the channel.
 

BobP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
8,609
Location
Wiltshire
warren,

Nice story, but that is what it is - a story.

Dapping on a river will only work when you have a breeze in your favour and when there are large enough flies to impale on a hook ie mayflies and possibly sedges if you're active enough to catch them. Rod & line casting made life easier because you were no longer at the mercy of the elements.

Dapping, as on the Test where that method ruled long after dry fly was introduced, will limit the fishing activity to a short period in the season. A shorter fishing season means fewer fish caught.

Mr. O saw that his fishing season could be extended by fishing with imitations of other flies that are present outside of the peak season. I dare say he trialled his ideas without saying anything about it and refined his fly patterns until he got some that worked well enough to be launched onto the unsuspecting public. This may well have taken two or three years before he was satisfied that he had got it more or less right.

The only way in which it was more difficult is because it was a new method that required different tackle and a whole new set of skills and approach which most anglers of the day simply did not have.

Once they had got their heads around this new idea and acquired the tackle, flies and skills necessary to use them the trout mortality would have rocketted until some form of sensible limit was imposed in the form of restricted fishing hours, number of days on the water,number of rods permitted or number of fish permitted to be retained.

I don't think that there is a single method that was invented to make the catching of fish more difficult. That simply isn't in the human psyche. We are always looking for ways to make things easier for ourselves.

Dry fly ruled for some considerable time until a certain Mr. Skues came along and saw that trout ate a considerable amount of their food sub-surface and set out to catch them. That he was successful at it resulted in the most awful furore, the rumblings of which can still be felt today.

Later on we had Mr Sawyer who decided to weight his flies so he could catch trout feeding deeper in the water - fish that had hitherto been too difficult because it was not possible to get a fly down to their level. Sawyer created flies that would and then those difficult fish became easier.

No, Mr. Nesfield may have thought he was making life more difficult and possibly he did in the short term, but in the longer run of things the anglers got the better of him.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
39,934
I don't think that there is a single method that was invented to make the catching of fish more difficult

Fly fishing does.

I think you don't fully grasp the context of the time.
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,555
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
Sorry, Richard, but that's complete tripe. 'Matching the hatch' (''choosing a fake of suitable colour and size and (sometimes) shape''), is as critical to the dry fly angler's success as it is to the nymph angler or wet fly angler: seldom critical, usually a good idea, but more often than not, totally unnecessary. And that goes for both rivers and stillwaters.

Tripe eh? I suppose if I'd said what you were claiming I'd said it would indeed be tripe, complete tripe even.

You've misquoted me. You missed out "best chances of success"... and instead brought in your own word to disprove = "critical"

richard
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,555
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
So, perhaps Richard will enlighten us as to what "hatch" just about the most effective modern dry fly - the Klinkhamar - is supposed to match? Or the F fly for that matter?

How about that good old traditional dry fly, the Wickham's Fancy? I can't recall ever seeing a natural fly with a bright gold body. That doyen of dry fly anglers, F. M. Halford reputedly refused to use a Gold Ribbed Hares Ear because he couldn't decide what it was supposed to imitate. It is a very successful fly, but what DOES it imitate?

There are scores, if not hundreds, of dry fly patterns that don't imitate anything in particular but are still successful flies. Size, shape and above all, presentation are key factors, not exact imitation.

I believe Hans Van Klinken's creation was intended to mimic an emerging sedge fly as opposed to a hatched fly. It doesn't figure in dry fly fishing as it is an emerger. You'll have to ask the creator of the F Fly what it is based on. I wouldn't know. I've never used one. I bought some CdC at the Fly Fair some years ago now, but have never used it.

It could help you if you disregard what a fly might look like to us and instead consider what it looks like to the fish. My own PPS looks quite different to us but the fish definitely see it as a spent sherry spinner.



You might believe that those hundreds of successful dry fly patterns don't imitate anything in particular but you can bet your house that when a fish eats one of them that fish recognised it as something in particular.

Size, shape, colour AND presentation are more than key factors, the sum of them results in imitation that IS exact enough to be accepted as the real thing.

richard
 
Top