FLYMPH FORUM

Well, you'll probably like the sequel as well;

http://www.amazon.com/Flytiers-Companio ... 0883171481

better description here;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fly-Tiers-Compa ... 1853100854

The book was published with various covers in various places.

TL
MC

Domo.....a very good buy for many.

Mike Connor wrote: As somebody recently asked me about the "Hare lug and plover" ( The Dotterel is in fact also a plover), and the use of Golden plover. In my opinion this is the same fly, but using Golden plover as a substitute for the Dotterel. So questions about who invented a particular fly are moot.

TL
MC

Mike if you had read Kirkbride's book you would have found the Hare's Lug & Plover under the dressing called "The Golden Plover Fly" on page 30. So it is clear that the Golden Plover is not a substitute for the Dotterel in this respect and so can not be the same fly. If it was, then why has Kirkbride listed the Golden Plover Fly as a separate pattern when he could have mentioned Golden Plover as a substitute under the Dotterel dressing. There are also several other Dotterel flies in other early books and manuscripts and yet none mention the substitution of a Dotterel with a Golden Plover.

North Country Angler wrote:

Mike Connor wrote: As somebody recently asked me about the "Hare lug and plover" ( The Dotterel is in fact also a plover), and the use of Golden plover. In my opinion this is the same fly, but using Golden plover as a substitute for the Dotterel. So questions about who invented a particular fly are moot.

TL
MC

Mike if you had read Kirkbride's book you would have found the Hare's Lug & Plover under the dressing called "The Golden Plover Fly" on page 30. So it is clear that the Golden Plover is not a substitute for the Dotterel in this respect and so can not be the same fly. If it was, then why has Kirkbride listed the Golden Plover Fly as a separate pattern when he could have mentioned Golden Plover as a substitute under the Dotterel dressing. There are also several other Dotterel flies in other early books and manuscripts and yet none mention the substitution of a Dotterel with a Golden Plover.

I have read a lot of books, including that one, usually a number of times, some a large number of times. When the dotterel was plentiful there was no reason to use substitutes. That golden plover feathers were also used is a given. However, when the dotterel became more or less extinct in Britain, the plover feathers were substituted for dotterel.

Several points arise here. Another gentleman quite recently claimed to have invented the "Hare Lug and Plover". At the time I listed as many dressings as I could find that were even similar, ( including Kirkbride's "The Golden Plover Fly"), which I also indicated was the same fly, apart from the fact that the hare's ear used was dyed yellow. This was disputed. If it was not called a "Hare Lug and Plover", and used ordinary hare's ear fur, then it wasn't one, I was told. I refrained from any further comment on the matter.

Recently I was asked some specific questions on the matter, and I offered my opinion here as well, as it might have been of interest. I did not quote or even try to describe my complete research on the matter, nor all the instances of such patterns of which I was aware, as there was little point in doing so. It is not of any interest to most people anyway.

However this may be, if you happen to disagree with my opinion on anything at all, then that's just fine with me.

All these feathers have been used for many things for a very long time. Lots of names and descriptions have been used as well. One finds all sorts of stuff when one researches. It can be very interesting and informative, but it's not a matter of life and death. Neither is it cause to make insulting posts.

Your opinion as to whether I would or should have reached various conclusions as a result of reading any particular book, or whether I read it at all, ( which is a bit silly considering I posted links to it), is not actually germane to anything at all. So, I will once again refrain from any further comment.

TL
MC

Perhaps you missed the relevant post?

http://www.flymphforum.com/viewtopic.ph ... 209#p23723

TL
MC

Peter O Reillys Trout Flies of Ireland stands out in one respect above many others that attempt to list flies as used in any particular locality or area or country or style.

Many of the flies that he lists he gives several dressings and states that they are attributable to a particular tier. I think that this is quite a clever approach as it allows for the diversity that exists within the tying of particular patterns. For hundreds of years writers, tiers have tried to be precise in producing de facto lists. Personally I don't believe that this excercise is achievable as it attempts to deny the versatility and adaptibilty that fly tiers have excercised for generations and continue to excercise. Availability of materials also changes over time.
Seeking universal agreement on the precise tying of particular patterns is at least to my mind clearly a nonsense, there will always be dissension. Also the writer will always be strongly influenced by his own experiences, his own fishing style and the behviour of trout and insect life his own waters.

I would disagree with you Mike on the Hares Lug and Plover, I care not who invented the fly but would give credit to the person who came up with the name - wonderful name I think however that it is clearly unwise to take up arms in defence of who invented what fly - we are after all simply trying to catch a fish and it is not a life and death situation.

I have no doubt whatsoever that many fly patterns all evolved from scenarios such as this. Norm ties up an Olive pattern that works very well, shares it with his friends who also find it to be a good one. Norm's Olive becomes widely used on his local river then starts to travel to other rivers and again works quite well. Over a period of time it spreads to many rivers , maybe across country boundaries and eventually it will arrive to the fly box of a wannabe author who has never heard of Norm. The author will tweak the pattern slightly, give it a proper name and present it in a magazine article or book and its popularity will explode. Off course Norm will be long forgotten, as will his friends who may have tweaked the pattern slightly. The author will be credited with his invention and will defend its integrity for he must do so to keep his reputation intact. Flies are invented by those that shout the loudest and no one can convince me otherwise.

No Mike,
I read your post and found it quite ludicrous that you could state that a Golden Plover was used as a substitute for a Dotterel, you state that “However, when the dotterel became more or less extinct in Britain, the plover feathers were substituted for dotterel” and yet do not supply any evidence to support your claim.
The vast majority of North Country dressing which use Dotterel call for the feather to be taken from the outside of the wing, Kirkbride doesn’t say from which part of the Dotterel he takes his feather, however as most of his patterns come from other sources it leads us to believe that he too took the feather from outside of the wing.
Now looking at these two photos there is no way you would substitute a Dotterel for a Golden Plover.





Show me a stated example of a Golden Plover feather being used as a substitute for a Dotterel.

Skues wrote in “Silk Fur and Feather” that the shoulder and neck hackles were the substitutes generally used.

"Dotterel (Dotterel Plover or Foolish Dotterel). - The hackles from the shoulder and back of this bird are perhaps the most highly prized of all of all the feathers of the fly dresser. They are a sort of pale brown dun (coffee and milk colour, with plenty of milk ), with a fine rim of yellow round the edge of the feather, so that every fibre is tipped with a yellow point. They are the model of a honey dun. These feathers are also remarkable for their susceptibility to the slightest motion of air and water and, doubtless , in rapid and tumultuous streams, they give the fly a vivid appearance of life. The two great patterns are Dotterel and Yellow, and Dotterel and Orange. Hackles from breast, neck and back are also used and present much the same characteristics. The bird is now a rare one, and the angler is driven to the use of substitutes - the honey dun feather under the starling’s wing, the gold plover’s shoulder and neck hackles, and the curlew’s shoulder hackle being the substitutes generally used. Of the other feathers of this bird a cursory notice is only necessary. Jackson wings a Yellow Legged Bloa with “inside dotterel or teal” by which one gathers he means the secondary feathers. There would seem to be no reason why the hackle under the wing should not be used, and the primaries are named by some writers for winging purposes.".

For "The Golden Plover Fly" Kirkbride specified a back feather;

http://www.archive.org/stream/northerna ... 0/mode/2up

I already posted that information once in this thread.

As I wrote, you are perfectly entitled to disagree with whatever you want, or to find various things ludicrous. Nothing I can do about that, even if I wanted to.

TL
MC

Glad to see you doing well Norm............

willowhead wrote:Glad to see you doing well Norm............

Subtle ...