Way to deep for me Murf,
I am still trying to figure out woman with no joy...;-)
Jimi
If the following epiphany or revelation of mine doesn't make you sit up and
take notice, either I'm whacko (you can vote later) or there is something to
my madness. Many of you have discussed parts of this at length over the
years or possibly the entire trail to its logical conclusion. I'm very
interested to hear what ALL of you think about this (LURKERS, come out and
weigh in).
While searching for info on a pattern, I came upon upon the following
article on the demise of Mayflys, the effect on trout diet and how all of
this affects our hobby. Of particular disturbance is
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0121_030121_hatchmatch.html
regarding trout chasing non-specific imitations versus imitations of
"naturals" such as Mayflys. How many here think it sad that we have
digressed away from the need to "match the hatch" VERY SPECIFICALLY in
waters we have thought of as sacred almost? Another article spoke of a
stream which became devoid of Salmon-Flys in the 60s.
These articles got me to thinking about why we tie what we tie now versus a
few or more years ago. The idea of us tying flys with increasing focus on
"attractor" traits rather than natural traits hit me like a sledgehammer.
Here I am, one who has promoted fly patterns which utilize "traits" of food
items rather than focus on imitating specific foods which occur naturally.
Let me put the point out for discussion and have YOU tell me your thoughts.
First, I'll state the "Myth" thought of the subject line so you get an idea
of what end this took me too. I tried it out on my wife and she reached the
conclusion I did before I finished my case.
"Myth Theory on Purpose of Feather-Wire by Earth Dwellers of Second
Millenium"
Article, Future Press, Dateline; May 23, 2634: "Professor Theo Gordon,
XXXIV published a theory today regarding an alternative explanation of the
trinkets found on Earth from the time before the historical "Chicken Virus".
Gordon asserted that certain "fishes", especially salmonids (ref; Earth,
Nuc/Bio-Haz Era), actually subsisted on invertebrates known as insects based
on review of ancient artifacts. Long believed traditional jewelry utilizing
curved sharp barbed metal wire indicative of a society which revelled in
piercing and tatooing the body, Gordon's hypothesis claims these items were
tools used to obtain food (see diagram labeled "Fly Fishing"). Scientists
scoffed at such an absurd theory siting historical proof of advanced farming
overlapped the dating of Gordon's ritualistic and barbaric samples. Gordon
included life-cycle information on all species supposedly interacting but
hydrologist Dr. Henk Vershoor, XXXIII indicated water could not have
supported insects later that 2009 due to a combination of highly acid Ph
levels combined with a toxic brew of chemicals common to all untreated water
on the planet.... (end)"
As aquatic food sources such as the Mayfly disappear and other environmental
changes occur, fish will need to be maintained artificially and eventually
mutate to adjust to man-made environments. The logical conclussion is for
many life-forms to be domino-effected and cause all sorts of harm but....
we'll try to stay on-topic regarding Fly Tying.
Consider most of us are familiar with streams which exhibit(ed) somewhat
predictable hatches of particular flys within a date range (we sometimes
discuss particular visual traits of insects but recently more discussion on
general ways to imitate life by new tying techniques, materials or
presentation methods seems dominant) yet even certain specific locations on
streams I fished for years are producing "mutant" insects. When I got into
flyfishing, my mentor admonished me with statements like "the X to Y section
of Z Run ALWAYs produces a prolific hatch of #18 Sulfurs which are best
imitated with a white wing, yellow dubbing #65 and #17 orange thread.." yet
now that same section contains Dorotheas with a cream wing and the size is
almost a #16. No, these are not Rotundas, etc... things have changed.
So... are we evolving as tyers with new ideas or has nature been tampered
with so much that our tying reflects what we observe and what the fish react
to? Consider Great Lakes steelhead, every year they seem to hone in on a
new pattern much different that last. Almost all are hatchery fish 2 years
or more in an eco-system which evolves unnaturally. What do YOU think? Is
it the tyers or environment which drives the newest patterns? What is the
future of fly tying?
