Dark Watchet techniques?

[North Country Angler]

Letumgo,
There are many responses to your question regarding the tying of the Watchet, I find it better to just wax the orange thread which then negates the use of a head cement. The best way to dub the mole fur is simply to hold the two silk strands as taught as possible and touch dub with the mole fur. Bring the two strands back up the hook body until you reach the point where the hackle is, if you have tied in the hackle first. Separate the silks and trap down the purple with a couple of wraps of orange. Then wrap the hackle and trap down with the orange silk. It goes without say that the use of a good wax is important when dubbing flies, you don’t want it too sticky but at the same time you want the fur to adhere to the thread correctly. Have you ever noticed that the same wax can have a different effect on different silks and threads? My older silks react different manner to my new silks when using the same wax.
Of course according to the gospel of Otter it is irrelevant whether you find the dubbing and hackle matted together as it has no importance.
So your quest for a better dressed fly is a pointless quest.

I will ignore the asinine ramblings of hankeye, Roadkill and Willowhead

[DNicolson]

This has been a very interesting string, I came to it rather late, about an hour ago.
I rather tend to read the last posting on a long string like this, and then if I am interested,
I go to the beginning and read all the posts back to the last.
It is odd, but I am sure there have been some changes since my first viewing of those last posts.
Ah well, must be old age.
Anyway! I rather agree with some of Bob Smith's opinions on Doctor (Mr) Herd.
He (Dr. Herd) has not impressed me very much with his wet-fly opinions.
I will not dispute the southern chalk stream, as I have not much experience with them.
Although I have had some disagreements with Bob, I generally agree with him about
Yorkshire Spiders, which are not necessarily the same as Border Spiders.

I rather missed what happened with Mike C., but I have known Mike (via the internet)
for a good number of years and I have great deal of respect for his knowledge of the
wet-fly and fly fishing in general. He can be rather hot tempered, usually with good reason,
and goes off, rather than get into more strife.
He was always extremely helpfull to me. I could ignore some of his rather dogmatic attitudes,
as this was just an aspect of his character that did not bother me. Sorry he has gone.
I also find nit-picking arguments rather a bore, but sometimes good info can be
had from them, taken with a large doze of salt.
One thing to remember, the wingless wet-fly, spider or whatever you want to call
it was not invented in Yorkshire or the Scottish Borders. The earliest literature was
probably in the North of England, but the flies had been fished in all these places
for long before that. I have tried with some difficulty to keep this post from seeming
to attack anyone directly. I don't know if I succeeded, I really am too old to be bothered
if I haven't.

[North Country Angler]

Donald your assumption that the wingless wet-fly is not a Yorkshire creation is probably correct, from researching the various forms of spider for want of a better term. My theory is that this type of fly was brought in to the country via Europe possibly with the spread of Christianity. Durham with its large cathedral seems a likely starting point, and from here the knowledge of the flies spreads through the northern counties via the monastic routes. Yorkshire and the Dales being a particular transit point. Later the Monks and Pilgrims were replaced by Jaggermen who used these old monastic routes as trading routes, thus not only spreading the flies but also the materials.
There are however separate schools and traditions within the wet fly movement. From evidence I have gathered it points to the Yorkshire school being the oldest and closest to the original. Some people with point to Chetham of Manchester as being the precursor to Yorkshire spiders, however if your browse the two editions of Chetham you will see that his fly list changes. This is because as Chetham states, he was given his original list just as the book was about to be published. The second edition has a fuller list as he had more time to prepare. These flies are now known to be from Yorkshire. The name William Lister will not be familiar to anyone one on the web, and certainly not to Dr Herd, but it is William Lister who is the key to all spider patterns ,as it is his manuscript that pre-dates all others by over a century.
My main problem with Herd’s tying is that his website is dedicated to angling history, and informs us of Yorkshire spiders, using two patterns as an example and then goes against historical text in dressing his flies. If he had said “This is my modern interpretation” I would have said fine. But he went against the whole point of his website. It may seem pedantic to some, but accuracy of dressing is important when taking a historical stand.

[DNicolson]

You are probably right Bob, there was also a lot of monasteries on the Scottish
side of the Border. Tweedsdale was rich farming and sheep area.
The wool clip was very large and was shipped out via Berwick.
Unfortunately they got thoroughly wrecked in the Anglo/Scottish wars.
But never-the-less the Border Spider owes a lot to the monks.
There was a Hospice (Traveller's rest) at Soutra Aisle, so the north/south
route was well established.
I agree with you about Mr. Herd, he makes a lot of statements
as if they were carved in stone.

[daringduffer]

I have not been posting - or reading - lately, for reasons of lesser importance. The last couple of days I've been trying to catch up reading and stumbled upon this thread which I find interesting in many ways. I don't know if any posts are deleted and am coming in sideways with just one eye open.

To me Bob Smith/NCA is a rude boy with a respectable cause. He is trying to protect something of great importance to him - the facts and history of North Country Flies. I suppose he is very disappointed when he finds that Andrew Herd - in spite of being an historian - is somewhat careless and easygoing. AH is not stepping on Bobs toes but on his heart and the reaction is understandable although a tad immature. Reminds me of the danger in critcizing someone elses dog. The response can be fierce.

To some of us this forum is our living room where we expect people to be polite and honest. To others it can be just a source of knowledge and inspiration. I want it to be both, but I have a soft spot for knowledge and am able to accept this even with rough edges if I have no other choice. I am eagerly awaiting the Bailey/Smith book, hoping it will be filled with knowledge without arrogance. I also expect mutual respect to be high on everyones agenda on this forum.

I miss Mike C. a lot, not for his manners but for his knowledge. He is one of my modern time heroes...

PM is an excellent method to keep the forum clean BTW

dd

[fflutterffly]

I'm a simple gal when it comes to this type of thing...fly tying. This forum has taken 1st place on my morning read, leaving behind some very excellent forums. As I love to fish the wets and flymphs, I doubt any of my less educated Sierra trout can count the wraps of hackle or body. I simply want to tie and experiment, without judgement or reproach. This is not to say I don't want input. I have a solution to what seem like aggressive debate. Let me explain my suggestion. I would like to suggest that we have a section called The Traditionalist. Everything here should be done according to historical information. Details can be argued in peace for those who want only to follow the line and letter of tying such flies. For me information is fun and the basis of my experience as a fly fisher. The element that drives me to come to this forum each morning is the expertise I find. People who are well versed with passion on a given subject. Please continue.

[hankaye]

Howdy All;

I feel that had a statement such as what I have quoted from NCA below been posted nearer to the beggining of this thread then a considerable amount of negative sentiment may have been avoided.

My main problem with Herd’s tying is that his website is dedicated to angling history, and informs us of Yorkshire spiders, using two patterns as an example and then goes against historical text in dressing his flies. If he had said “This is my modern interpretation” I would have said fine. But he went against the whole point of his website. It may seem pedantic to some, but accuracy of dressing is important when taking a historical stand.

I for one am willing to extend an olive branch to Mr. Smith at this time. No strings attached.

hank

[North Country Angler]

DD,
Yorkshiremen by our very nature are forthright in our opinions, to some this could be seen as arrogance and rudeness. But as everyone is below us, we don’t care.

fflutterffly,
I don’t like the idea of a traditionalist section as I feel it will be a lonely place there. With only me and occasionally Mike C bickering between ourselves it might start to turn in to some form of therapy session.

Hank,
I gratefully accept your olive branch and extend one back, I am never one to bear grudges or act with duplicity. I simply give my opinions honestly and plainly, if people disagree with them that is their choice. However I would appreciate some posters answering my points raised before weighing in to me. It is quite evident from some of the later posts that my original comment has not been read.
I could go in to the explanation of my comment “Hot Air” in regards to Otter’s post, but it will serve no purpose. By the way I thought “Hot Air” was polite, you boys should have seen the other words I deleted first. The spell checker on my laptop will never be the same again.

[hankaye]

Howdy All;

Bob/NCA;
Accepted.

Everyone else;
Looking back thru the thread I can see several points that were made by both Otter and NCA.
The points are the same. The words used are different and can be, when read in hast, impart a different
thought and meaning to the reader yet are in and of themselves the same.

I have been guilty of this in the past with different spouses. The phrase I use to describe it is;
Traveling down the same path towards a common point . Just approaching it from different directions.

That’s all I got to say for now.

hank

[CreationBear]

Well, as your fellow (almost) Yorkshireman once said, America is a country that was born old and became young, like a snake sloughing its skin, so most of us here in the States are not qualified (and/or interested enough) to adjucate such disputes between subjects of 'er Majesty the Queen. (Myself, I find the whole idea of the Catskills school rather romantic and improbable, and it dates back to, what, only the middle of the 19th Century?) There may be a "North Country Spider" division of the National Measurment Office ("down the hall to the left, past the Ketchup Advisory Board and across from the Ministry of Silly Walks") but deciding whether you or the honorable Dr Herd represents the true nomenklatura will take a little persuasion on your part.

At any rate, even though traditional fishing where I'm from is rather more like this (NSFW, language)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAgw6d3kLPI

I'm certainly looking forward to your book and your sharing that matrix of information you've seem to have put together. Otherwise, while it's usually wise to remember Lawrence's other famous dictum about the American character (i.e. the " hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer" part)--at least if you're talking to folks born west of the Mississippi--hopefully this kerfuffle has ended up better than it might have otherwise:

[urlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eT33eT30Uc][/url]