Easy question which do you prefer to fish with?
[b]Attractors
[/b]
Same for me:
Attractors.
even during a hatch?
Too easy - both. Leave it to the fish to decide, because…
Yup, both. Sometimes an attractor just won’t get it done, and sometimes you can throw anything and they’ll take it.
Probably 75 to 80 percent of my fishing is done with attractor patterns (preferably dries) unless there is actually a hatch to match. Some of my favorite dry attractors are the Parachute Hare’s Ear (doesn’t really look like anything but looks a little like everything) and the Stimulator, which is a great fly to drop a nymph off of. For nymphs, I like the Soft Hackled Hare’s Ear and A.K. Best’s Tri-Color Nymph.
-Darryl
Oh dear, I’m outta the loop it seems. My enjoyment of fly fishing most often involves a knowledge of some aquatic insects actions at the moment. My fly therefore most often represents in some strong way said bug. My preference also is to the floating presentation and thus I find I offer an imitator of the dry fly vain. I never studied the art of the nymph and only go ‘down & dirty’ when I lay a solid herring style streamer precisely into a tide-drift vain in the near-shore a feeding seam of Salmon.
yup gotta go with both
I tend to be more with JC. The game is to fool the fish. Start with something that looks like what he is eating at the time, switch to something that looks like something he might want to eat, and resort to Claymore’s if none of that other stuff works. Oh, and don’t forget the good old wimph (worm).
Realisticly, I rarely fish anything but imitators except for steelhead and nite browns. There is almost always something hatching. Watch the birds. They will tell you. And if not, just enjoy the stream. #2 muddlers can rightly be called an imitator weather you are doing minnow, sculpin, mouse, or frog with them. Truth known, I don’t use explosives or bait either though I have felt the urge.
Bob
Subsurface I am almost always fishing an attractor of some sort except when I know there is specific insect activity that should be imitated.
On the surface with dries it is always an “imitator”. I own three Adams dry flies which I never fish and that is extent of my surface attractor flies.
Geez. I just love these ‘Either / Or’ preference hypothetics.
Dub
After much thought, I’d have to answer…Yes…
I would have to say imitator…
I fish mostly drys when I can and enjoy “trying” to match the hatch.
If no hatch is evident I will then go to terrestrials…
Bill A
Daz, … we don’t match the hatch here, … there are NONE!!! The fish don’t eat anything anyway!!! (Atlantic salmon !!!)
I’ve never seen a mayfly, minnow or tereestrial with a monstrous big hook under its abdomen, so I guess all I fish are attractors.
I’ve never seen a mayfly, minnow or terrestrial with a monstrous big hook under its abdomen, so I guess all I fish are attractors.
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
Very early in the year naturals more than attractors.
But some of my attractors are very effective later.
Rick
Jeff and all,
An intersting read, if you are so motivated, would be Gary LaFontaine’s “The Dry Fly New Angles”.
Gary spends ALOT of time discussing attractors vs imitations and why/when each works. I’m not saying he’s right but as with most things GLaF, you’d have a hard time proving him wrong. It’s a convincing story and a fascinating perspective.
Even goes so far as to design and test the ultimate attractor(my paraphrase), the Double Wing.