Dark Watchet techniques?

[letumgo]

As I read thru the various responses to this post I find that the dialogue has taken on a very negative tone. We have been down this road before, and I don't want this getting out of hand, with members getting upset or banned. As one of the sites temporary moderators, I felt the need to step in. I respectfully request members to please be civil in their replies. By all means, please keep the discussion open, but please do so in a polite and respectful manner.

[North Country Angler]

O.K. chaps whilst you seeking to crucify me having an opinion about the quality of several posts in this thread. Let answer some of the statements.

Otter
“If he was slapped by his teacher for using too much dubbing then his teacher needs a good slapping for failing in his task.
As to his finished Partidge and Orange I can find no flaw in it and would happily place it neatly in my fly box under the heading of possibilty as Fat juicy sedge pupa, I doubt though that a fat juicy sedge pupa was the intention. His watchet is equally a masterpeice in how to make a simple job difficult. That however is his affair and it is the finished fly that we must concern ourselves with and not his tying techniques. If his Watchet is intended as an Iron Blue imitation the Iron blues on his water must be overfed brutes for my experience of them from observation on the water and from literature leads to me to consider them as dainty fragile creatures.”

You say that it is the finished fly we should concern ourselves and not his tying technique. Does not the tying technique impinge on the finished fly?
Otter
“The problem with all of this sort of stuff is as age old as angling itself. Fly fishing is such a wide and varied experience that trying to place everything neatly in a box is fraught with danger, where does one draw the line. Where does one draw the line in time to say that this is the definitive north country style for within such seemingly narrow focus there will still be variation. Where does the evolution of a north Country Flies stop ?.”

It is quite clear to anyone that the definative North Country spider features key elements such as the use of game or songbird hackles coupled with slim short bodies. If the evolution encompasses these key elements then the evolution continues. If these key components are not present then the fly is no longer within the boundaries of the North Country Spider. One could also add fishing techniques in tandem with the materials and dressing style.

Otter
“The ability to fish a particular type of fly properly so that it behaves in the correct manner, at the right time on the right water as a representation of a natural is of far greater importance than whether or not the silk creeps past the barb.”

I never said it wasn’t ,I merely pointed out that Dr Herd was espousing to dress the fly in the correct manner of North Country spider when his video shows different.

Otter
“If you stop at the barb on a normal shank hook and I stop at the bend on a short shank hook are our flies intrinsically different to a trout ?, would they fish differently ?. Surely the body of a fly should work within the parameters of the body length of a natural where you believe the length of a body to be of importance. If you were to say however that a normal shank hook fishes these style of flies better than a short shank that would be an alltogether different matter.”

The materials used and the manner in which the fly is dressed has a direct effect on how the fly behaves and how the fly is effectively fished. This is why various schools of fly tying exist. In the case of North Country spiders the shortness of body is intrinsic with the dressing style which is why short shank hooks have been used for centuries.

Otter
“Of more fundamental importance to all of this is that one mans Watchet may differ greatly from anothers and if both gain equal success with their watchets then either the Trout does not mind or that they fish them in a different manner or the nature of their river negates the flaws in either Watchet to make them seem as food to a trout or indeed that one mans watchet represents a different stage of the Iron Blue. Neither may of course be the ultimate Iron blue wet and both may fall slightly short of being so. Yet should they work on each mans river when Iron Blues are on the menu and catch the angler a few trout then both patterns have fullfilled their obgligaion to their master. “

Philosophical nonsense. I could easily say that the fundamental importance of all this is that a fish is caught , I could dispense with the fly altogether and use a worm.

Otter
It would seem to me that most desirable knowledge of the lineage of these flies is in the understanding of what each represents and how and when best to fish them and on what types of water they fish most effectively. Kwowing who wrote the first list while a noble bit of information will not yield me or anyone else a single trout.

It is obvious to any who have a knowledge of these flies, what they are tied to represent and how best to fish them and on what type of water. It is out there for everyone to read. How would the lineage of a fly, tell you how best to fish it?

CreationBear
“I like Otter's take: it reminds me of G.K. Chesterton's famous "fence;" i.e. if you find one across the road you want to travel, don't be to quick to knock it down unless you are quite sure you know why it was put there in the first place. Part of the fun of tying traditional patterns, I suppose, is learning who put the fence there and why.”

How can you like Otter’s take; When Otter is clearly arguing for no fence to be placed in the road. However he does later he does back track a little with...

“Who put it there is nice to know and some detail may be important. The WHY , now that's the bit really worth understanding. i strongly suspect though I may be wrong that the answer to the who and the why is not a simple one but that many of the styles and patterns are a culmination of an evolutionary processes from a lot of anglers over a long enough period of time - finding a productive method for the nature of their water and formed fly's using easily available inexpensive materials.”


William Anderson
“It is sad to me to see this negative and rigid attitude in a community that I find insightful and tolerant, even pleasant and supportive. I love the soft-hackled flies that we tie, fish and share. I find the diversity more interesting than the demand for any rule on the matter of any detail. The general attitude exuded by Bob Smith in this thread takes the joy out of the rich and varied history of the North Country flies for me. Historic information is interesting, even on a subject so insignificant in the world we live in, but community, courtesy and generosity are far more important in every regard. The discussions, posts and sharing of information here is to be a source of enjoyment, never hostility or slander. It's unfortunate that Mr. Smith has some information to contribute but has missed the point of this community completely. This is disappointing on several levels. “

William may I suggest you go back and re-read the entire posts on this thread. I stated that Dr Herds example was the perfect one of how “not” to dress a North Country spider. I was later ask why, and gave a list of examples to back up my statement.
I later stated that Otter’s and CreationBears further statements were ”hot air” A statement I stand by on the grounds that their posts have added nothing to the thread other than contradiction.
I note that the pleasant courtesy you speak of, is missing from Roadkill’s later post. Which is a childish and cowardly way of attacking me. To use your words “This is disappointing on several levels”
I have a feeling I now know why Mike C keeps leaving, he is probably bored of the lack of incisive and informed debate. This forums seems to be a place where only banality exists. If this forum feels that the term “Hot Air” is too strong then, you need to seriously think about what role you have in life.

[Otter]

I have a feeling I now know why Mike C keeps leaving, he is probably bored of the lack of incisive and informed debate. This forums seems to be a place where only banality exists. If this forum feels that the term “Hot Air” is too strong then, you need to seriously think about what role you have in life.

Bob , that is an extremely cheap and inaccurate shot.
Mike left because he was attacked in a very precise and orchestrated manner. Attacked because he contributed too much and knew too much and stole the limelight from one who did not like the limelight being stolen. No doubt many of us bored Mike, but he was above all that, he sought to freely give of his time and of his knowledge to assist fellow anglers without getting nor expecting any reward in return.
The members here have skill levels ranging across a wide spectrum and if some of us blow hot air then that is simply the way it is. The first day I joined this forum , Mike welcomed me with words along the following lines " this is one of the best forums on the internet, the only one I now participate in, a friendly bunch of people" - are these the words of someone that was bored by having to converse with less skilled or knowlegable anglers, I think not and it is an insult to us and to Mike to suggest so.

In the interest of this forum as I feel a red mist descending I will withdraw from this thread and direct my hot air elsewhere.

[willowhead]

Classy move Norman.....

[letumgo]

Robert - Although I am not a historian, I too, share your passion for these simple, yet elegant flies. I am not able to discuss who tyed what, a century ago, but that does not mean that I do not enjoy reading about it. These simple flies have required me to learn new techniques, and they always put a smile on my face when they bring a fish to-hand, which is not nearly as often as I would hope. I am getting better at catching fish, as I incorporate the knowledge that others have freely shared on this site - yourself included. Mike C. was a valued member of this community, and I miss his informed posts. So long as we remain focused on our shared interest, I think we can all find common ground for open discussions.



Specifically, I am wondering if both strands of silk should be waxed before lightly dusting them with mole fur? In this case, I chose to only wax the purple strand of silk. The orange silk (tying thread) was left unwaxed. I chose to do it this way to minimize the amount of wax on the abdomen of the fly. I find that waxing both strands results in a body that is sticky. I have personally find that the mole dubbing and some of the hackle fibers get mated against the body of the fly, if too much wax is used.

I am sure that a solution to this problem has been found over the past centuries. Now could you tell me how I can do a better job tying this pattern, closer to the historic Watchet pattern? Honest feedback is genuinely welcome. Seriously.

[hankaye]

Howdy All;

I wrote the posting below this morning. copied/pasted and saved to see if my opinion might be swayed...
It has not been. So, I'll post it now.

I do remember a post from eariler this year, think it was posted by Bob Smith.
Went something like this; One can say alot to a Yorkshireman, one just can't tell him anything.

As in most anything, there will be an imperfection.

There are, in groups such as this, one or two folks that seem to feel that their opinions are the BEST and the ONLY correct opinions. They have a way of being snobbish to the point of vulgarity. They support any and all decisions that they pass as being absolute and Has to be correct because of the massive amount of books they have or secret manuscripts that only they are privy to. Generally they come into a conversation with a loud thump as the tombs hit the ground. In the world of Historical re-enactment those folks are known as the Historically Correct or Period Correct Police.

That’s nice to know the historical information. However, when they start to say that such-in-so is ’THE ONLY WAY’ to do, wear, or make something and leaving things open to interpretation isn’t possible because this or that BOOK says so leaves me to believe ( this is MY OPINION and yes I do have an a**hole as well), that they have a very narrow mind. Those books that the person is referring to are also the opinion of the author of that particular book.

The human mind is a fantastically inventive organ. Improvisation and imagination flourish within each of us. As circumstances dictate to each of us individually we do such things as tying a fly a bit differently. A historically correct Iron Blue Dunn may not fish well for me in my river, but if I modify it in some small way and it works well for me then that is my version of the Iron Blue Dunn. Why on Earth would I choose to fish a fly that I won’t catch?

I don’t think I’d like to fish with someone that isn’t flexible in thought nor as it appears attitude. Nor do I think I would I choose to read his book.

I'm done now.

hankaye

[CreationBear]

Otter--

Is that "red mist" anything like this?

Before going into combat Cúchulainn goes through a transformation known as his ríastrad [battle fury, battle frenzy, contortion, warp spasm, etc.; gen. ríastarthae]. When this overtakes him, he becomes a fearsome figure such as has never been seen before. Every particle of him quivers like a bulrush in a running stream. His calves, hams, and heels shift to the front, and his feet and knees to the back, while the muscles of his neck stand out like the head of a baby. One eye is engulfed deep in his head, the other protrudes, his mouth meets his ears, foam pours from his jaws like the fleece of a three-year-old wether. The beats of his heart sound like the roars of a lion as he rushes to his prey. A column of dark blood spurts forth from his scalp and scatters in four directions, forming a mist of gloom. Then a projection emerges from Cúchulainn's head, like a horn but the size of man's fist; it is the lón láith/laíd [light of the hero (?)], which signals that he is ready to figh

I get that sometimes.... Damned annoying, as you might expect.

[hankaye]

CB, Howdy;

You get that too? Thought I was the only one wiff that affliction...



hank

[Roadkill]

NCA

If it is childish to know that there is more than one way to skin a cat or tie a fly I plead guilty.

I guess part of that comes with answering childrens' questions while teaching them how to tie that cause me to reflect on how I do things in tying. I have a sense of childish wonder when I learn something about tying from someone who has little or no experience making a fly but sees things through different eyes. When I am too old to learn I will probably quit tying or flyfishing as the joy will have gone out of it for me.

In an 1854 edition of Bowlker's Art of Angling I read Charles Bowker's fly tying advice which I think still holds true today.

No directions can well be given for making a fly,
the way in which it is done varying according to the
fancy of the artist ; yet these instructions, with a
little practice, will assist an ingenious angler. It is
strongly recommended to the young angler, attentively
to watch some skilful fly-maker, and in the
progress of his work, make such inquiries and observations
as he may deem requisite ; from which
greater facility and neatness are to be acquired than
from any written description whatever.

[willowhead]

That'll work..... ................and don't ya'll forget..............Mark doesn't need any b.s. goin' down on the site right about now............you dig?

or any other time for that matter.....