FLYMPH FORUM

wsbailey wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:17 pm Gary Borger book "Designing Trout Flies" has a section detailing the colors of feathers on a number different game birds. He has diagrams showing the locations where you can find the various feathers on a bird. One downside is the colors are keyed to the "Borger Color System". Years ago I asked Gary where I could get the book. He gave me a lead to a fly shop and I got their last copy. A dedicated online search might turn up a copy. The color descriptions are usually sufficient though.

Ken Callahan had one in his catalog this month.

I would grab it!

You can buy designing trout flies on EBay for under 10 bucks,

The last time I saw “Borger Color System” it was $50. You don’t see a copy available very often. That’s the downside.

I always presumed that those feathers were used precisely because they came for free with the dinner, or, were there for free after shooting the "vermin". And from that I assumed that I was free to use feathers from the birds I ate.
>oh I don't believe it's considered a "new pattern" until it's published or sold in quantities. if small variances make "new pattern" each of my flies constitute a new pattern.

Mr. Smith. I appreciate the historical perspective and your personal experience shared in this topic. This forum has such a great knowledge base to draw from and am grateful to those like you who share this knowledge. I came to this hobby relatively late in life, and well after the opportunity to obtain many of the original materials. I should add, that I tie flies for my own fishing, and doubt whether the fish I catch give a hoot about the bird whose feather I've used. As long as the fly entices the fish to eat it, I'm satisfied that the fly is a good one.
On the other hand, I do appreciate that many of the tiers on this forum go to some lengths to keep alive the old ways, materials, methods, and presentations of wingless wets, flymphs, and soft-hackled flies.
I know for certain that my attempts to mimic the old ways and utilizing the wet fly methods have improved my fishing and my enjoyment of the sport.

" . . . the wider question is, should we be constrained by the use of the prescribed correct hackle in a traditional fly dressing or have latitude of substitution?

Member GlassJet answered that well with:

We need to keep a sense of humour and a wry smile regarding our search for fly-dressing "authenticity".

Thanks for starting this very interesting thread, John.

After the Audubon Society successfully lobbied congress to write laws prohibiting the sale of many bird feathers, Leisenring wrote to Pete Hidy (Jan 29, 1942):

Have you noticed in our Book how few Bird feathers are needed? If you have not you had better read it. If it comes down to it I can tye all the flies in the Book without any Bird hackles at all and they will be nearly as effective if not altogether so.

Since we are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction, and, within our lifetimes have seen alarming reductions in global wildlife populations, our art has taken on a new significance. We represent a time when wildlife seemed plentiful, and animals were considered to be there for our consumption at will. Furs and feathers were ours for the taking—and fish as well. Those days are gone forever, as John suggests.

Very interesting thread fellows! It gets me a-wondering about the skins and furs that I have accumulated! I will treat them more gently than before and I will keep in mind their rarity in today's world! Wow! This is really interesting reading and very informative! Thanks guys!
Dougsden

Do you think that if nylon thread was invented in, say 1880, that Leisenring would have used it?
I have always thought that the tyers of wet flies were pragmatists, using the feathers from their supper (or the laird's supper) and thread filched from the sewing basket. I have imagined that if they had had barred rock hens two hundred years ago that most wet flies would be tied with grizzly hen. I believe they used silk because that was all they had or could get.