'Triggers'

[Allan]

No! Not the horse. The term that many fly tiers use to bolster their claim about a fly pattern or design that they have 'invented' (or whatever word you want to use) and causes the trout to hit that particular fly pattern. Now, do trout strike because: of 'triggers'; the 'impression' of the fly; the 'imitative' likeliness of the fly; the 'presentation'; color; size; shape; All of the above. None of the above. Some of the above?
Why is it that at the same location, on the same river, on two succeeding days with almost the identical weather pattern and river conditions, at the same time, same hatch, same flies, etc. you have great success and then get skunked?
I'd really like to hear if anyone really thinks that a particular 'something' works as a trigger. And if it does, why does it not work all the time. And lastly, if you're that sure about 'that 'trigger', then there's only 1 reason to have flies that are another design - you don't really have that much faith in that 'trigger' now do you?

Sorry, but this is a subject I'm always interested in and have found it interesting to discuss, especially with fly fishers who strongly agree with the concept yet, have several hundred or more flies in their vest.
All the above written in good humor and opinions are just that.

Allan

[NJTroutbum]

I fee; certain patterns are effective because of particular "triggers" within their design. However, I don't think that the trigger is always what the fish want on a given day. I think where folks are led astray is when they feel that the pattern itself is what made the fish eat it. I would suggest that they only eat a fly when you get lucky and give the fish what THEY want. Regardless of what fly it is.

Fish quite often make us look brilliant.

[WarrenP]

I do incorporate a "trigger" in my nymphs but the "trigger" is not the pattern. While fishing late one evening, a mayfly hatch arrived and they were everywhere and I caught one and noticed that their head/eye had an orange pink tint to it plus there was a tint of it in the body. I guess it was not really a strong orange color and maybe a little orange/pink cast to it. I started using orange thread on my nymphs for the head. I would complete the fly and do a whip finish using whatever color thread I used for making the fly and then do another whip finish over the first one using orange thread. It may make no difference but I have more confidence when fishing them.

[whatfly]

Of course there are triggers...we just don't know what they are, hence why we constantly generate new fly patterns in the futile but fun quest for the one magic pattern that works always. Some tire of this game and simplify their patterns to basic generic patterns (refer Bob Wyatt's work for example) but even those souls follow a design philosophy that emphasizes what they think is important. This is as much as part of the sport, as casting, and to me one of the more fascinating and intellectually stimulating aspects of fly fishing and tying. What one must wonder would happen if one were to someday discover the perfect pattern? Despite being the implicit quest of all fishers, it would really make the sport a less satisfying endeavor in my mind.

And of course, "Happy trails, to you..."

[planettrout]

No! Not the horse. The term that many fly tiers use to bolster their claim about a fly pattern or design that they have 'invented' (or whatever word you want to use) and causes the trout to hit that particular fly pattern. Now, do trout strike because: of 'triggers'; the 'impression' of the fly; the 'imitative' likeliness of the fly; the 'presentation'; color; size; shape; All of the above. None of the above. Some of the above?
Why is it that at the same location, on the same river, on two succeeding days with almost the identical weather pattern and river conditions, at the same time, same hatch, same flies, etc. you have great success and then get skunked?
I'd really like to hear if anyone really thinks that a particular 'something' works as a trigger. And if it does, why does it not work all the time. And lastly, if you're that sure about 'that 'trigger', then there's only 1 reason to have flies that are another design - you don't really have that much faith in that 'trigger' now do you?

Sorry, but this is a subject I'm always interested in and have found it interesting to discuss, especially with fly fishers who strongly agree with the concept yet, have several hundred or more flies in their vest.
All the above written in good humor and opinions are just that.

Allan

Try some of these and maybe thy faith will be restored..."Subtle, yet definite sparkle is one of the keys to this fly. I really like this fly..."

http://www.charliesflyboxinc.com/flybox/details.cfm?parentID=97


PT/TB

[AlanB]

What do people mean by "Triggers"? Dick Walker (one of the most innovative anglers ever) proposed a theory about how trout identify food. He said it is in a similar way to how we recognise cartoons. He used a cartoon like this to make his point.

It doesn't look like a Chinaman but when we see that the character has a wide face, slanted eyes and a coolie hat we think Chinaman. Dick Walker proposed the theory that the trout use similar kinds of "keys", as he called them. This would, he said, explain why the things that are out of character are ignored. So long as we see enough key points in a cartoon we recognise it despite it not looking anything like the real thing. In the same way tick enough of the food boxes and you will get a take. No matter how many other details have to be ignored.

If you are calling these "keys" trigger points then I can see the point. If by triggers you mean something else then I don't know.

Sometimes the fish just are not feeding. Also there are things that we just can't imitate with our flies. I have had trout take midges off my size 28 Griffiths Gnat. The midges were using the fly's imprint on the surface to crawl through the meniscus. They wouldn't take anything larger, and no one makes hooks that small. On the R. Wharfe one day I arrived to find Mayflies (E.Danica) riding the current on the far bank, and trout going mad rising under the trees where the mayflies drifted over them. I went through every large dry fly in my box. I could not get a rise to any of them. Eventually I tried a Female Adams, with a greenish yellow tag. Bang! Every drift I had rises. Eventually I worked it out. They were taking aphids that were falling off the trees, and had keyed in on the green. The rest of the size 12 fly was being ignored because there was a tiny touch of green in it. I had fish to both wet and dry aphid imitations and a caddis pattern with green in it. Green was the key. It isn't often that we can spot what the trout are using to identify food, but when you crack it it is very productive.

Strange that in relating my experience I have also shown that colour can be of importance in a dry fly.

Dick Walkers theory may not be 100% but it is useful in that it helps me catch more fish.

Cheers.
A.

[NJTroutbum]

I think a trigger point is more of an attribute to a particular fly, that is not meant to resemble an attribute of the natural explicitly. Such as adding a strip of flashabou flashback to a wing-case of an otherwise perfectly impressionistic pheasant tail nymph. Or a new dubbing such as Ice-dub to an existing fly adding flash. Or adding a colored bead head to a nymph that is not a normal color within the ecosystem. When these types of additions work and cause fish to take the fly noticeably over the closer to natural pattern, most label that flash or color as a "trigger point".

[Allan]

Here are a few 'triggers' that I've actually seen trout take with consistently: Cigarette butts tossed off of a bridge; While standing on a bridge/overpass, a bunch of flies all types, sizes and patterns flew out of a fly box and into the water. As they floated down the river, unencumbered by any attachment, every one was taken; I've watched underwater videos where trout take in all kinds of debris. If, after all these observations I had to identify 1 'trigger' it would be that the food source, whatever it was, was completely free in its float and looked natural to the trout. Had nothing to do with 'bubbles', or wing height, or footprint, or brightness/dullness of the shuck, or any proclaimed 'trigger'. Think not? Get a bunch of old - even used flies(but take any tippet off the hook). Toss them in a water where you know there are trout and see what happens.

[NJTroutbum]

I agree, drift/presentation is probably "THE" most important factor of all. But trying to pidgeon-hole an attribute of feeding among trout is like trying to get water to only go through one hole in a strainer.

[mr. blur]

ed engle lists four "triggers," three of which i've included in this soft hackle...

.P8300002.jpg