Black Gnat

[Soft-hackle]

William got me thinking about the Black Gnat. I remember, years ago, before I got into wingless wet flies, tying a wet Black Gnat with a black hen hackle tail, Black chenille body, Gray duck quill wings and black hen hackle-oh black thread, too. These flies were usually tied on size 12-14 hook. This famous and popular wet fly, to me at least, looked nothing like a real gnat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnat

After discovering Leisenring, I realized that his "Black Gnat" much more closely resembled a real gnat, and I have caught many trout with this pattern. I never leave home to go fishing without having a few handy. I once tied up a few for a student of mine. He actually fished them off a bridge using a light spinning outfit and a casting bubble. He took his limit-which was ten trout at that time-using the out fit and the Black Gnat tied on a size 14 Mustad 3906.

Since then, I have added a very fine green wire rib for strength. To me it mimics an iridescent gnat body.




This one-tied by me and photographed by my friend Bob Petit

I really like Williams as well!

Mark

[Roadkill]

Nice flies!!

[redietz]

Coincidentally, the Pennsylvania Fly Museum had its annual Heritage Day last Saturday. This is the badge that they used to show that you'd paid:



I didn't think to ask who tied it.

[William Anderson]

Mark, Bob, I like these patterns very much. Why not put them in the dressing section? Anyway. When I think of gnats they seem like#20s at the largest. I thought they may have been stonefly or any other med sized dark/black bugs. these are tied pretty full compared to the one I posted. It wouldn't be a bad idea to cary these in a couple sizes and a couple profiles. Looks like a pattern that can't miss to me. Would be a very convincing iso or stonefly in the right proportions. Black quills too. Paraleps too on small holds with a slender body.

One of the the things I found mist interesting about the historic literature is the inclusion of a pattern over a couple centuries, all similar but each a little unique to each author. They are quite specific in terms of which feather or silk, but quite vague in some ways as well. Even with a picture it is just one mans understanding/biases and personal style which doesn't hold a lot of weight.

I love these posts for comparisons sake. Its much more useful. I wish sometimes our dressings posts would spin into, "here is a pattern I tied, please make a comment and post your own version" for comparison and conversation. I would be very inretested in that. May make that the focus of my new site. What a cool resource that would be.

Having said all that, how many times did you read the importance of having the underbody or silk show through and compliment the over body? Especially leisenring and hidy. Thoughts?

W

[CreationBear]

Very nice photos: is there a discernible difference between crow and the turkey feather sub? (I mention this since Mr. Petit's tie has a starling-like sheen.)

At any rate, I'm an inveterate freestoner, so this pattern fairly shouts "terrestrial" to me. William's tie automatically made me think of a little-known place here in the Smokies called the "Blue Hole," which is unusually deep by our standards (at least 15 feet or so) and that is protected on each bank by fast runs that sweep around the pool on both sides. A big birch tree hangs out above it, though, so if you can manage a bit of a hero cast and put an ant or beetle in there, you'll see trout rocketing up from the bottom--can't wait to try it with this pattern.

[Soft-hackle]

CB,
Both of these flies were tied by me. The hackle is starling as Leisenring suggests. While he listed crow for the body of the Black Gnat, I use natural turkey tail. On Page 58 of my copy of Leisenring's book, he mentions the use of Turkey for gnat bodies. At the top of the turkey tail is a v-shaped swatch of very dark brown or black herl. This section does, on more mature feathers, have a beautiful metallic sheen to it. To me, this more easily obtainable than crow, and produces excellent results.

William,
I guess I fall into the category of an American Fly tier. It seems we often use more hackle on flies. I think it comes from my previous experience of doing a lot of tying of more traditional American wet fly patterns (like the old Black Gnat I mentioned) years ago. This is not to say that I do not appreciate or misunderstand the effectiveness of using less hackle fibers. Just old habit, I guess, although I am getting better. These two flies were tied specifically for a couple articles I wrote some time back.

The idea of twisting the herl in the tying thread surely strengthens it. While Leisenring does put forth the idea of tying thread showing through dubbed bodies, I just think that this idea for the gnat carried over from Hidy. I guess because it is in parenthesis, like it was added. I think Big Jim would have just written the technique into the instructions without parenthesis.

Mark

[CreationBear]

Excellent, thanks for elaborating: time to hunt up my turky feathers.

[Ruard]

One of the the things I found mist interesting about the historic literature is the inclusion of a pattern over a couple centuries, all similar but each a little unique to each author. They are quite specific in terms of which feather or silk, but quite vague in some ways as well. Even with a picture it is just one mans understanding/biases and personal style which doesn't hold a lot of weight.

W

The only book I know is the book of J.W.Hills: a history of fly fishing for trout. He describes for a few patterns the history and the evolution: febrary red, grannom, olive dun, yellow dun, march brown, iron blue, stonefly, mayfly, red spinner, black gnat, red sedge, alder. And then he has a chapter about dressing flies in the course of time.
The dictionary of C. Williams gives us also something of the evolution of flies but not as an histocan but more variations that he liked himself.

Greeting

[William Anderson]

This is a wonderful thread. Some of you know I have been reading about these wingless wets with some interest for a few years now and I'm looking for unique, informative and entertaining content for a new site that I plan to direct toward just this kind of discussion. Give a dday to get home,a day to mull it over and a day to fine tune a working plan. I would love the help of this 300+ group of elite folks ro create something special. Stay tuned.

Didn't mean to side track the thread. Carry on.

Thanks for the references,Ruard.

W

[willowhead]

William, you say: "just one man's understanding/biases and personal style which doesn't hold a lof of weight." i would beg to differ, in that if you really look at the spirit of fly fishing for what it truely is............what could possibly carry more weight? We need to teach youngsters to discover for themselvs and not over-rely on the past and the discovires of others.....to be good students they should find ways to lead and not always settle for simply following in the footsteps of others. Not to take away from the knowledge or discoveries of the past.....but just the opposite, to enhance it, and extended it, by pushing the boundries......"one man" at a time.....such as yourself for instance.

Bob, you got a phone number for the PFFMA (i'm sure i do "somewhere" ).....i'd really like to get one of those badges.....ya think for a donation.....? Incessent collector......