Fly makers - your input please

FAOL Community Fly Anglers Online
1

Hi all,
As most of you know I am trying to organize stuff on this site.
The archive pages are my next project in the metamorphosis of FAOL.

For you fly tying types I have a request / assignment.
It comes in 2 parts.

PART ONE…
When I catalog all the fly patterns I want to make the archive page a functional item that is searchable and usable.

Ergo…
I need categories that you would want to see that can be used to limit the view of flys so you can find what you are looking for…

Let’s assume you are looking to tie a fly for a specific purpose.
FAOL may have 1, 2, 3, or 10 flies that fit the bill, but good luck finding them.
So what selection criteria should I have?

If it were up to me I would do stupid choices like.

  • pretty blue flies
  • ugly flies
  • difficulty level - impossible
  • looks like a worm to me…

Since that’s about useless… WHAT DO YOU THINK should be the categories?
Keep in mind… PART 2 will be to get a panel of volunteers to actually go through EVERY FOTW and select which categories each one qualifies for.

Thanks.
–Ron–

2

Go to www.westfly.com & click on “Fly Patterns”. This may give you some good ideas.

Thanks, Tim

3

Regarding the link…
While the pull down selections are nice, from a beginner standpoint it doesn’t meet FAOL design criteria.

And as such I submit a category for your consideration.
Difficulty Level: (With 4 choices)
[ol]
[li]Beginner[/li][li]Easy[/li][li]Experienced[/li][li]Expert[/li][/ol]

And another possible…
Fly Type: (with 2 choices)
[ol]
[li]Wet fly[/li][li]Dry fly[/li][/ol]

I’m trying to avoid (by request) fly good for rainbow trout, vs … vs…
It would be nice to have an interface that shows a scrolling list of thumbnail pics for instance. and the list narrows as you select criteria that is … shall we say less subjective …

Then again… I have no clue, this is YOUR resource people. How do you want to narrow your search when looking for a fly to tie?

In short assume you are a beginner as well as a veteran fly tier. You want to tie a fly to go for fish X. Think of a couple scenarios. Then if I was the keeper of patterns, you would tell me you want a pattern for a fly that … and … and … replacing the … with the criteria you need. In the end I would then tell you that I have say 3 flies that meet your requirements. THAT is what I envision. If that can be done with your help that is.

4

Ron,
I appreciate your efforts to improve the site. Sorting fly patterns is a challenging task, but very helpful. I love FAOL, but the search function does need help.

One way to sort fly patterns could be with category/tags, like blog posts.

Here are some ideas:

Difficulty:
-Easy
-Moderate
-Advanced

Fly Type:
-Dry
-Nymph
-Streamer
-Terrestrial
-Emerger
-Soft Hackle
-Classic Wet Fly
-Salmon Fly

Target Species:
-Trout
-Panfish
-Warm Water
-Steelhead
-Salt Water

Style:
-Attractor
-Caddis
-Mayfly
-BWO
-Stonefly
-Terrestrial

Depending on whether you are a “lumper” or “splitter” you could have more or fewer categories or subcategories. And of course the interface method is a programmin question, but needs to be intuitive and easy to use.

Good luck with your project and thanks again.
Rex

5

Ron -

I suggest three main sections for cold water, warm water, and saltwater.

Within each section I suggest separate categories for dry flies, wet flys, nymphs, and streamers. Another separate section on terrestrials is optional. List the flies alphabetically within each category, and some flies will belong in two of the main sections, not likely all three.

If the search function will handle it, search could be done, e.g., on main section ( cold water ), category ( dry flies ), and fly name ( parachute adams ).

John

6

John, the problem with separating flies into warm water and cold water categories is that so many flies work very well in either environment.

All, perhaps categories with sub-categories would work:

Dry:
English
Catskill
Variants (wingless)
Caddis
Cripples
Midges
Roy Christie :wink:
etc…

Wets:
Classic, winged
Traditional soft hackles/spiders
Wet emergers
etc…

Thanks,
Ed

7

I like this idea best, and would add a Saltwater/Warm Water category.
Species-specific classification doesn’t make sense to me because I have caught trout on a Crappie Candy and bluegills on classic wet flies.

8

ITS ALL GOOD GUYS…
I’ll be pulling from a database for this.
Ergo each fly will be marked to all areas it fits.
The DB will eliminate duplicates, and make the search MUCH more intuitive/flexible.

So if fly #1234 works in Fresh AND Salt water, is a Salmon Fly AND a nymph, and is EASY to tie that becomes a better search.

The user will be able to find the fly based off original FAOL publish date, name, author, and criteria we decide on. Or ANY combination of all of the above.

This will be a bit of work, but will be OH SO NICE when done.

Think along the lines of a computer mfg site.
You are looking for a computer amongst hundreds they sell,
You want it < 1000, it narrows the field…
You want an INTEL processor, it narrows the field…
You want a Core 2 Quad processor, it narrows the field…
and suddenly you only have 4 choices that meet your criteria…

9

How about a Listing by the fish they are tied to catch. Break that down to

surface & subsurface. You can add the species for trout flies ( Mayfly, Caddis

etc.) Add a separate section for Classic & realistic ties.

10

Ron, what you are seeing so far is the same as you’d see if inspected our fly boxes. You’d see them organized in many different ways.

Given what you’ve described as the search process you are building, it might work best if we started with Rex S’s list and then build on it.

For example, I’d add salmon and large mouth bass to the species and midge to the style. I fish for trout in streams, though, so I don’t know what warm and still water fishers would add.

11

I was hoping to stay away from the category of this fly is good for brown trout - because it might work in the west in June, but not the rest of the country in July…

This is your sorting mechanism though guys, so I will accommodate as I can.

The bigger issue with so many options becomes maintenance, and usability.
SOMEONE has to go through roughly 600 flies of the week and over 480 old flies; and categorize each one for fitness in each category we come up with. Plus someone needs to categorize all new flies that we publish. That isn’t me guys… They all look like cat toys to me.

I can put a BB section online for every fly for reader comments, similar to the articles in readers voice. That way we can comment on the areas that don’t make the official list, and casters can give feedback on issues tying the thing or fishing it.

I’ll take everyones comments and distill them for usability.
We don’t want to scare away a newbie… We want to make them elated that they found a site that caters to the needs of the fisherman / fisherwoman.

And after reading recent posts, I must say (FIRMLY) that no category under any circumstances will categorize the flys on this site as to efficiency against sea kittens. Don’t even go there!! :mrgreen:

12

OK so lets attack this in a second direction too.

As you know, I am ignorant on fly fishing.
Suppose you are trying to teach me how to become one.

We are going to start by setting up my tackle box. And I am going to tie each and every fly in that box. So…
You will teach me to fish later, but what do I need to tie? Why that fly?
What other flies would I need to be successful?

Now take those answers and formulate them in a category manner…
How should I compartmentalize them in my tackle box? and why?

That might automatically determine how to make a search mechanism…
or not… I’m only the techie here.

13

If you’re categorizing the flies, then I like something along the lines of Rex S’s suggestions. Yes, we might expand on those some as oldfrat said (and for the same reasons - I don’t know salt or warm water flies).

But, if I’m going to teach you to tie then I’m more likely to talk about easy vs hard… and techniques to learn (like upright wings, furled bodies).

I personally like species of fish as a category for my flies.

As long as the search can have multiple selection criteria then the real difficulty is in categorizing the existing recipes.

Cheers!
John R

14

Ron -

Clearly, the VERY FIRST THING we have to teach you is - fly fisher people don’t use TACKLE BOXES.

I think your new way of asking the question will just get back to the same answers.

There are three major interests - cold, warm and salt.

There are several kinds of flies for each. Lots of the flies can be used in cold and warm water.

I definitely agree on not making the selection process keyed to species. Also, I think keying it to a ( subjective ) standard of what is easy or difficult ( and everything in between ) to tie goes more to FLY TYING than it does to FLY FISHING, which is most likely what the person searching for flies is really interested in.

John

15

I’m caught up in the mechanics of the site right now.
Is there an existing article on FAOL that would inform a person on how to choose a fly? I get the feeling from reading the new stuff to put it online there is a lot of bug science involved.

But if there were a good piece on how to choose the fly to use, that would go well in my layout. If not… Who’s up for it?

Better yet before you head out I assume you take only a part of your fly collection. HOW do you choose what you think you might need before you go out and see what the fish are actually eating that day?

And John… if you have a funny hat full of flies, I’d call that a tackle box too :slight_smile:

16

Ron, let me try to explain why I like Rex’s system.

Where I live there are times of the year when dry flies won’t work at all. There are a few short months when terrestrials are highly effective. There are times when nymphs are the only way to catch a trout. Etc., Etc. So knowing the type of fly is useful in the search

Based on the time of the year and the stream, the fish will be keyed in on a specific type of insect. So being able to search by insect type is useful – e.g., caddis, mayfly, midge. But my guess is that all other flying insects could be lumped into “Other Dries”. For crawling insects (hoppers, beetles, ants) I think lumping them together in “Terrestrials” would work fine for search purposes. “Miscellaneous sub-surface” might be another good category for things like worms, eggs, etc.

I think trout and smallmouths hit the same flies, though I don’t know much about smallmouths. I don’t know what flies work for panfish -somebody who does can chime in here. I do know that largemouth bass take flies that are much different than trout generally do. The one time I fished for salmon, the flies I used were way different than I’ve used for trout. I have yet to flyfish for carp, but may some day and, if so, it would be neat to do a search to learn what flies would work for them. So maybe there is search value in categorizing by target species.

Personally, and others clearly see this differently, I don’t see a lot of search value in defining ease of tying. I’ll look at the instructions and judge for myself if it is something I can tie or not. Also, assuming you keep Al Campbell’s tying instructions pretty much as is, they give lots of flies in a sequence that not only goes from easy to difficult, but also in an order that builds on skills taught in his prior lessons.

When it comes time for you to categorize the flies, I suggest you make that a group effort asking that folks only participate if they are certain of their answers. Maybe number the flies and then have letter codes for the various search categories. I could then write in something like “35-brq” to tell you that fly number 35 is a dry fly imitating a mayfly and useful with trout. Somebody else might tell you “35 -brw” telling you it is a dry mayfly that works on panfish. You’d then have accurate information that is more complete than either of us could have given you individually.

Hope this helps

17

First - thanks for all the input.
Coming at this project from several angles helps define an interface that works for more than one segment of FAOL members.

Once I come up with a system I will put up a page that everyone can input on by filling out a form. Perhaps on the archive page it may show how many people provided feedback for each fly. This would allow a novice as well as a pro to rate the tying difficulty for instance. It would also allow all members to rate aspects of the flies and allow someone to rate a couple flies now, and a few that have low feedback on them later… This could work similarly to the ticket system on the drawing but with 1000 “tickets…” Hmm even a rating system on the top 10 FAOL members that have provided feedback…

This is a great process in determining a good UI.
Keep em coming, and thanks again.

18

If you’ve got the database skills…why bother trying to classify them? Just use a tag system much like many blogs use to search for entries. For each fly, have a set of tags that describe it in all areas, then, on the search page, just have a single input box where the user inputs search criteria and the computer pulls all entries with matching tags.

For example:

Lets use the woolly bugger.

Its tags might look like this:

wet, streamer, nymph, palmered, hackle, chenille, marabou, trout, panfish, bass, coldwater, warmwater, 2 (a difficulty rating out of 10), easy

Now a fly tier, Sue, logs on, and does a search. She enters:

easy trout nymph

Those three tags will basically whittle the entire archives down to only the flies that have those three tags, and the woolly bugger will be on that list of search results, along with things like the AP nymph, hare’s ear, soft-hackle, etc.

Basically, each fly will have a certain number of tags, corresponding to the different parameters you wish to sort by.

19

When I was given permission by Deanna, to do a FAOL CD for the Al Campbell Memorial Bench Fund, I had just about all the fly patterns (at that time on one CD, using PDF.

For the Fly of the Week (I did it using three folders; by year, by tier, and by category.

Here is the listings of the categories that I used.
Christmas Flies
Dremel Flies
Dry Flies
Emerger Flies
Midge Flies
Nymph Flies
Popper Flies
Presentation Flies
Salmon/Steelhead Flies
Saltwater Flies
Streamer Flies
Terrestrial Flies
Tube Flies
Wet Flies

I have all the fly patterns in PDF (adobe reader) for those that would like a download, very easy to use on a backup compute in your fly tying area or laptop when you are on the road.

I also have all the other fly patterns from Al Campbell Series, Our Man in Canda Series, Just Old Flies, Warm Water Fishing, and other fly patterns scattered thoughout FAOL’ archives.

I also have PDF download of the Du Bois & Walt Dette’s Hackle Gauges available.

So if the connection is lost on FAOL, until it is corrected you can contact me for the article… ~Parnelli

parnelli@comcast.net

20

I don’t know, I kind of like the “looks like a worm to me” category myself. I think I’d stay away from type of fish categories and stick to ones that describe and classify the fly itself (i.e., difficulty, fly type, materials, etc.) Cold’s idea is interesting, also.