Was the original Wooly Worm as heavily hackled as we frequently see it portrayed?
In the past I recall that while Palmer wound it was much more sparse. Is this "evolution"?
Thanks.
Printable View
Was the original Wooly Worm as heavily hackled as we frequently see it portrayed?
In the past I recall that while Palmer wound it was much more sparse. Is this "evolution"?
Thanks.
I say the same thing about the Griffiths gnat. I feel it's the quality of today's hackle, in regards to today's saddle hackle you can make many more turns than the stuff I used 35-40 years ago.
Gene
I agree, I think it's the hackle of today. Yes, everything I see from the older pics was far less hackled. I think it looks nicer in todays form....but we ain't catching fisherman. :)
Speak for yourself......Quote:
Originally Posted by NJTroutbum
LOL.....well, most of us anyway. :)
Yeah the old Woolly Worms were less hackled. I do not know why the hackling increased as time went on. One thing I learned finally after almost 30 years of tying is that I tye them to look closer to the real ones that do drop into the water from the tree's. Woolly worms are really cool looking critters and are extremely easy to imitate. Now the griffeths gnat I like to not over hackle this fly. I feel the over hackling just eliminates the peacock herl all together and makes the fly a little less effective. I prefer to tye with less in wraps and other materials when I can get away with it.
At the first trout fishing / fly tying seminar I attended the main instructor made a point I have remembered.He said “You are trying to make a fly that looks like somethingtrout eat, not some other guys’ fly.”Quote:
Originally Posted by Fontinalis