Rene, I was thinking Dry fly only. The fly could be a klinkhammer, parachute, Winged Wolf, Winged Adams or any other winged Dry fly. I would also be hoping to have flies due by the end of March as we are all have Caddis coming out of our ears. I'll put you on the List Rene. Any other takers out there???????
Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rene Zillmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 9:37 PM Subject: Re: [VFB] To Wing or Not To Wing > Kevin, > > I would be interested in such a swap. But as being in the caddis enterprise > I would like to have a late due day for your swap. > > Do you think about dry flies only? There are a lot of winged wets as well. > The mallard series, the grouse series atc. Guess you know them. > > Rene > Cologne, Germany > > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Kevin McClean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2002 15:11 > Betreff: Re: [VFB] To Wing or Not To Wing > > > >To all interested in winged flies. I really like tying winged flies wether > >it be a post or a parachute fly. My favourite is tying split wings from > >either Starling or Mallard. I would like to host a winged fly swap. I > >think you can't get enough of these flies and it seems to me that more and > >more people are leaving them out of their flies. All those interested let > >me know. I would like to leave lots of time for tying the flies as I know > >that sometimes they can take a while and you have to be in the mood for > some > >of the patterns. I would be thinking of 20 tiers with flies expected here > >in Ireland middle or end of March. Let me know what your preference is and > >we will go with the majority. > > > >Kevin > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Wally Lutz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 12:46 AM > >Subject: Re: [VFB] To Wing or Not To Wing > > > > > >> Hello All, from the oblivion of "Distant Lurking" please allow me to add > >my two > >> cents. > >> > >> My confusion starts with the "wingless" fly. It was said here that the > >hackle only > >> imitated the bug's footprint in the meniscus and the fish didn't see much > >more, > >> this vision inaccuracy was then corrected. On this point I believe the > >fish's > >> excellent vision is only part of the picture: the hackle also imitates > the > >flutter > >> of a bugs wings and gives the motion of life to a "wingless" fly. > Variants > >or > >> American Spiders, for example, are hackle only flying or fluttering > >imitations. If > >> this is true then we have no truly wingless flies: unless it's not a dry > >fly. > >> > >> We have several different types of two winged flies: traditional quill > >segment > >> winged flies, and No Hackle Duns. Both are used for those fish willing to > >take the > >> drifting insect. > >> > >> Rolled wings: made from hair, feather, or synthetic materials, with > >divided or > >> single wings are also an imitation of wings in motion. Perhaps the > >winging method > >> for those fishes that require the inducement of wing movement to provoke > a > >take. > >> > >> Wingless or winged: is this presentation vs. imitation theory? Each > school > >of > >> thought serves its purpose, to ignore one or advocate one over the other > >will > >> limit our growth in this sport. By combine the schools into the > >"Behaviourist's" > >> school of fly-fishing that Leonard M. Wright, Jr. in "Fishing the Dry Fly > >as a > >> Living Insect" introduces, we glean the best of it. We don't argue with > >fish: > >> wingless and winged flies are both successful. No doubt, they're fly > >construction > >> techniques that trigger or induce fish to strike. > >> > >> Like the man said, "We've all watched 'em come up to the fly, inspect > it, > >and > >> disappear." > >> What are ya gon'a give 'em next, eh? > >> > >> Calm days > >> Wally Lutz > >> > >> Edson AB > >> Lifetime TUC Member > >> > >> http://www.telusplanet.net/public/whlutz/index.html > >> > >> " The wild fish were as the wild air, no mans possession but the free > >gift of > >> God." > >> > >> > >> Arthur Ransome > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >> > I know I am going to cause a heavy debate with this one so here it > goes. > >I > >> > know when we tie in wings on or dry patterns it makes the fly look > >better and > >> > in some cases I can see how it would make it float better. Here is the > >> > question I am asking; trout do not see the top of the fly all they see > >is the > >> > "footprint", so why put wings on them? The Adams has wings but the > >Flightless > >> > Adams does not and it is just as effective as its older brother and > tied > >the > >> > same way with the same materials. So again I ask why wings? The > Mosquito > >> > pattern calls for wings and to be honest I have tied them with and > >without > >> > wings and have had better luck with the wingless variety, and only use > >one > >> > hackle in the process too. Hmmmmm, one material fly swap, sounds > >intresting. > >> > Might have to host that one after the Pet Hair Swap. Folks I would like > >to > >> > hear your thoughts and comments on this question. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Bart > >> > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ > >Do You Yahoo!? > >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
