Thin Goddard Caddis

[Byron haugh]

I have tied the Goddard Caddis, but don't often fish that pattern. I tend to go to the X-Caddis instead.

This is the Goddard Caddis sold at Blue Ribbon Flies. I thought the narrow body and sorta extended wing section make this old pattern a little more interesting?

[johnstoeckel]

I like the Goddard style caddis as it floats well and is quite visible. I usually omit the antenna and go a little sparser on the hackle. I also like to add some color on the underside with a permanent marker to imitate the body color of the naturals and sometimes trim the hackle flush on the bottom.

[hap]

Goddard standard form is just about my favorite dry fly to tie and fish... something about it just works for me...

[AlanB]

I must admit that I wouldn't recognise that as a G&H. No sign of the dubbed arc chrome wool under the body, hackle not trimmed, then there's that body shape. Not at all like a G&H. How many changes can you make to a pattern before it's no longer the pattern? Missing out a material that forms a major trigger point on the original fly is perhaps a change too far.
Cheers,
A.

[Allan]

I must admit that I wouldn't recognise that as a G&H. No sign of the dubbed arc chrome wool under the body, hackle not trimmed, then there's that body shape. Not at all like a G&H. How many changes can you make to a pattern before it's no longer the pattern? Missing out a material that forms a major trigger point on the original fly is perhaps a change too far.
Cheers,
A.

Alan,

Reading your comments, I was reminded that the belly of this fly is a separate material then the spun/clipped body. So I just looked up the pattern in a few books and in one, there was a letter to the author from either Goddard or Punyens. The letter mentioned that a pen could be used or a dubbed thread and seemed to imply that either was optional. I did not see any plate or photo of the pattern with the hackle trimmed though. Also, the triangular shape of the original pattern, a caddis with its tent wing in the down position, is a key element. The one in the initial photo is not even close to correct. It's cylindrical or maybe just poorly trimmed? Lastly, I completely agree when you say, "How many changes can you make to a pattern before it's no longer the pattern?" I believe the answer is, when you don't recognize that it is what you are told it is. If you know what a pattern is supposed to look like and you have to do a double take or have a fly identified for you, then that fly is not the same pattern. Example - Change the body of a Red Quill from stripped hackle to stripped peacock and you now have a Quill Gordon.

Allan

[Byron haugh]

Here is a Goddard Caddis as tied by Andre Puyans. He. Was visiting Goddard and Henry when they developed the G&H Sedge. He , being a Western style tier, was much better with spinning deer hair. He offered suggestions on how to modify the original G&H Sedge and came up with this, which he named the Goddard Caddis.....

So, just so you know, the Goddard Caddis is slightly different from the G&H Sedge.



Below is what I believe is the Stillwater version of the original G&H Sedge.
If you look closely, you will see the green fur as the belly of the fly.

[AlanB]

That's, the one, with all its problems. Wasn't aware they were different patterns. I often wondered what Cliff Henry had done wrong!

Cheers,
A.