Everyone and anyone can apply some philosophy or theory to the why’s, wherefore’s, etc of fly fishing and trout. That is part of what makes fly fishing what it is.
The title, ‘What the Trout Said’, actually says it all. Regardless of what Mr.Proper wrote, the trout, any trout, has yet to utter word one! Until such time that he (the trout) actually speaks, we will continually express our interpretation of what we believe he is saying. Cut hackle; ‘foot prints’; stiff hackle enabling the fly to sit off of the water; soft hackle so that the fly sits in the water; no hackle; parachute hackle; wings; no wings; upright wings, clump or split; spent wings; and on and on.
Let me ask you: If trout are discriminating, sensitive and particular about what they see and eat at any given time(colors, shapes, sizes), why do they take an imitation that has a bent non-natural hook clearly visible? Why do they take flies that look like nothing in nature? Why, if you study the stomach contents of trout do you find twigs, pebbles, foreign objects even cigarette butts?
We will continue to express our reasons and numerous theories for as long as there is trout fishing. They will remain that - theories. Some may be generally more reasonable than others and accepted by many. However, in the end, we will be no closer to a definitive answer. If we would, what we call fly fishing would simply become fish catching. Perhaps the best part of fly fishing are the unknowns. And ain’t that great!
My point was really much more narrow. I’m really just interested in JC’s views of the Perfect Dun.
I readily agree that trout take lots of things that don’t look real (hot red indicators come immediately to mind). No one will ever know why.
As for the hook (or leader for that matter), I’m partial to the positive/negative theory. Trout look for positives (i.e. what does the artificial fly have in common with the real thing) rather than the negative (what are the differences). We’ll also never know if this theory is correct either.
You remember Tom Baltz? I believe he learned the thorax dun from Mr. Marinaro. As I recall from talking with Tom, the proper way to tie the pattern was with no body, with the understanding that the body was not visible on the natural since it rode above the surface. The hackle was tied in an “X” fashion and was very open on the bottom, so that the angle created by the hook shank and the hackle was very sharp when viewed from the side. Tails were not to ride on the surface, as well.
Hans, I tie and fish the clipped hackle duns all the time. Wing shape is what I like the trout to see. In real fishing conditions, I can’t see the hackle not penetrating the surface. I’ve long felt that what we see in a controlled environment (the aquarium) isn’t always easy to repeat consistently on the stream.
Ladyfisher, taking the position that a properly tied Marinaro thorax dun has no body, I have not. I’ve tied duns according to the instructions in the book, and fished them, as recently as last season. I must admit to tying with one hackle instead of two.
I have a very limited, & dangerous knowledge of the insects that trout eat. Don’t have a slant tank, don’t go underwater, etc. But I have noticed that some days compara duns or hackle stackers are the only answer, other days parachutes are the answser, and other days the traditional ties seem best.
All work on the same hatch on different days!
Each pattern style would seem to me to represent a slightly different stage of the the hatch from just after the adult sheds his shuck to just before he flys away.
Why it is different on different days of the same hatch, no one has ever explained to me. I think that it is just different days have trout keying on different things.
Have been away from FAOL for 10 days working, it has been terrible, shakes, sleeples nites, headaches etc. ;-).
In my experience and in the images I am aware of there is generally (always?) a part of the dun’s body resting in the film. Smaller and more slender species, like for example Baetis, can elevate themselves more and it is just the thorax portion, while with larger species (E. Guttulata, or Green Drake) the body indent is substantial.
I understand and accept that others have made different observations. There does not seem to be a single answer, no one size fits all
