Hey, you have the same problem too? There is a cure. Just become a writer. Then you can put everything you need down in a book, and your problems are over. Until you put the book on the shelf and can't find it. Danged thing has to be around here somewhere...Roadkill wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:14 pm Anherd
Good to know, I have spent countless hours trying to find an old fly I think of just in my small library of fly fishing books .
IMGP9948 by William Lovelace, on Flickr
I can't imagine the scope of your "problem"!
North Country spider article
Moderators: William Anderson, letumgo
Re: North Country spider article
Re: North Country spider article
Mr Herd, a wee question from the bottom of the world where wets and soft hackles are, alas, as rare in most angler’s flyboxes as dodo quill....
You mention in the article:
“....Today the custom is to tie these game hackle patterns very sparsely, with the bodies as thin as possible whether silk or dubbing is used, with a hackle wound once, or one and a half times at most. However, the old masters didn’t lay down any firm rules, and tied their flies to last. The result, as a friend once complained to me, hardly looks like any kind of fly at all, but believe me, they work, and they get better the more hackle the fish chew off....”
Most pics of old flies I see ( and happily a few that I have) have a lot more hackle than that. I’d suggest two three or Sometimes even more turns ?
So. If more hackle turns was the norm back in the day,( if that was the case) when did that change and why?
Cheers!
You mention in the article:
“....Today the custom is to tie these game hackle patterns very sparsely, with the bodies as thin as possible whether silk or dubbing is used, with a hackle wound once, or one and a half times at most. However, the old masters didn’t lay down any firm rules, and tied their flies to last. The result, as a friend once complained to me, hardly looks like any kind of fly at all, but believe me, they work, and they get better the more hackle the fish chew off....”
Most pics of old flies I see ( and happily a few that I have) have a lot more hackle than that. I’d suggest two three or Sometimes even more turns ?
So. If more hackle turns was the norm back in the day,( if that was the case) when did that change and why?
Cheers!
Re: North Country spider article
That was my point. You took Smith to task for concentrating on the Wharfe, but not Edmonds & Lee.
Again, I thought this was a minor nit, and I always enjoy what you write.
Bob
Re: North Country spider article
Hard to pin an exact date down, but none of the nineteenth century dressers gave much guidance at all on the subject—you are quite right, in order to produce longer lasting flies, they made the bodies fairly thick and used a lot of hackle. There is another piece in the pipeline about this, but the change happened later than you would imagine. I went through literally hundreds of old angling magazines with a fabulous guy called John Austin and we eventually pinned it down (as near as we could) to Roger Fogg's A Handbook of North Country Flies. In his book, Roger wrote that, “One turn is enough, and one and a half turns certainly is the maximum”, but when I spoke to him on the phone not long ago, Roger confirmed that it was no more than his personal preference for tying North Country patterns. His one and a half turns went viral because there was no other advice around at the time, and even I think it looks better than tying the whole hackle in. Yet, just about the only nineteenth century tyers who said anything were Jackson, who tells his readers to use the entire length of the hackle, and Wade, who says, “Twirl it around twice, or thrice”.Johnno wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 1:20 pm Mr Herd, a wee question from the bottom of the world where wets and soft hackles are, alas, as rare in most angler’s flyboxes as dodo quill....
You mention in the article:
“....Today the custom is to tie these game hackle patterns very sparsely, with the bodies as thin as possible whether silk or dubbing is used, with a hackle wound once, or one and a half times at most. However, the old masters didn’t lay down any firm rules, and tied their flies to last. The result, as a friend once complained to me, hardly looks like any kind of fly at all, but believe me, they work, and they get better the more hackle the fish chew off....”
Most pics of old flies I see ( and happily a few that I have) have a lot more hackle than that. I’d suggest two three or Sometimes even more turns ?
So. If more hackle turns was the norm back in the day,( if that was the case) when did that change and why?
Cheers!
Re: North Country spider article
Re: North Country spider article
Thanks for that!
I guess it’s a classic example of how one persons thought, idea or opinion can change everything!
In this case how many hackle turns are required... but a minor detail ...
I guess it’s a classic example of how one persons thought, idea or opinion can change everything!
In this case how many hackle turns are required... but a minor detail ...
Re: North Country spider article
Dr Herd. “The Fly” has given me many hours of enjoyment, so many thanks for that.
I am under the impression that the Lister manuscript (c. 1712) and all those that followed are dominated by hackle patterns at the expense of winged flies. If that is true, then how to explain Pritt’s statement (1885) on this issue: “In one important matter the fancy of Yorkshire anglers, and indeed of anglers all over the north of England, has undergone a change during the past twenty five years. It is now conceded that a fly dressed hacklewise is generally to be preferred to a winged imitation.”
This seems to suggest that soft hackled flies only became the dominant style circa 1860. If this is true then perhaps the ancients were not as influential as we had thought. Pritt would have been in a good position to know these things, but perhaps he was exaggerating for whatever reason. Having never seen the manuscripts I can only wonder which is correct. Are soft hackles the products of Romans and monks or did they develop in time alongside dry flies?
I am under the impression that the Lister manuscript (c. 1712) and all those that followed are dominated by hackle patterns at the expense of winged flies. If that is true, then how to explain Pritt’s statement (1885) on this issue: “In one important matter the fancy of Yorkshire anglers, and indeed of anglers all over the north of England, has undergone a change during the past twenty five years. It is now conceded that a fly dressed hacklewise is generally to be preferred to a winged imitation.”
This seems to suggest that soft hackled flies only became the dominant style circa 1860. If this is true then perhaps the ancients were not as influential as we had thought. Pritt would have been in a good position to know these things, but perhaps he was exaggerating for whatever reason. Having never seen the manuscripts I can only wonder which is correct. Are soft hackles the products of Romans and monks or did they develop in time alongside dry flies?
Re: North Country spider article
I have seen how you self gloss on FaceBook. I am pretty sure you and Mr. Herd are the same person. In any event, it is entertaining to see you two throw temper tantru....... Uh, point out each others lack of knowledge. Good stuff carry on.RobSmith1964 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 10:31 pm Is he the Halford to my Skues
I’m not an expert by the way, I’m an enthusiast!
Re: North Country spider article
Perhaps he is the Skues to your Halford.... ?