Hi,

It's not clear to me what people mean by immitator and attractor. I think we all get the idea of what the distinction is, but from some answers here, I think we draw the line in different places in the sand. For example, I think of an immitator as a pattern that is supposed to immitate something alive. So, an Adams would be an immitator, even if it's a pattern that is intended to immitate a wide range of species. An attractor, however, is something that is not supposed to be "anything", but rather, the idea is that it will just induce a strike for reasons known only to the fish (but we usually go with the "out of aggression" explanation). A Parmachene Belle, for example, has always struck me as an attractor pattern despite the historical record indicating it's supposed to immitate a trout fin (which was used as a popular bait). I can't see the resemblance, hence, I can't see it as an immitator.

In other words, I see a lot of immitator patterns where some might seen only attractors.

Now, with that in mind, I still can claim I fish both because I have some patterns that I fish that immitate (or are supposed to immitate) specific mayflies, and ants, etc, and others that are just bright and flashy. Where they change, well, I don't know.

- Jeff