I know there has been much discussion on this board not trying to open up a can of worms. Buuuuut I cannot sleep, its 1:30 and this will be somewhat of a rant.
This past summer I’ve studied and totally focused my tying efforts to that of the traditional catskill style of tying as described by Harry Darbee. I visited the Catskill museam not long ago and really studied the dry flies on display there, I also baught flies from Mary Dette’s shop. And I have some flies tied by her parents. Anyway the thing that I think is key to tying these patterns is the short body. Does anyone agree with this or notice that the bodies of flies tyed by some of the older “masters” have a short, stubby looking body?
To me the smaller body allows for the hackle to be more midway down the shank and therefore exposing a small part of hook shank just before the eye. I’ve heard all the theories on why thats there and I think, or in my flies anyway it helps with the proportions and performance of the fly.
I guess my main questions here is does anyone else feel the way I do about the short body? Am I wrong and the body should be long and slim?
Thanks and hope noone is too sick of talking “catskill tradition”
Paflyfisher…
Can’t say why the old timers used short bodied flies but I know why I do. I have a tough time tying small flies now because of age and eyestrain. So when I get down to 18s I tie a short body on short shank hook with undersized hackle. About a #20 to #22 fly on an 18 short shank hook. I use fine wire hooks. The resulting fly is a size 20 to 22 with a wide gap (gape).
The space between the head and eye has several purposes (my understanding…don’t really know). Some leader knots are tied through the eye and around the shank (turle) for one. The little space accommodates this knot. The center of buoyancy (near the hackles on a tailless fly) falls more closely over the centre of gravity making the fly better ballanced and stable on the water. Some tyers continue the old thinking and use the old methods because they perceive them to be better…and others are following tradition or both.
If you have further interest join the Cattskill Flytiers Guild in Roscoe. You’ll find all the reasons for all the vagarious notions there are, some old and some new. Its only $10.00 per year!
I never get tired of talking Catskill stuff! There is a similer thread going on at another site right now. All about hackle size,hook style,tail length,etc.
I also tie mine with a short body,and start the body slightly forward of the barb,[Mustad 94840]My tails are slightly longer than total hook length,and my wing is hook shank length.The hackle is what I initially started the post about. I also have some Walt D flies,and the hackles are clearly 2 hook gaps long,as opposed to the typical 1 and 1/2 hook gap.Everybody has his opinion of how they should look,I just tie mine how I like them. Have fun,CJ
Here is a Catskill fly.
Tail: hook shank or just a hair longer
Body: start at barb or a hair before bend
Hackle: stright fibers, that are very stiff, they have just enough hackle to stand them up on the Dette gauge it is one size above hook size
Wings: clean with not lose fibers wings are above hackle, Winnie did her wings longer then Walts as a rule on the Dette gauage they are about 2 sizes bigger then the hook but they can be a hair smaller.
Head:the head does not need to be build up, many would do there whip finish before cutting the hackle feather tip off. there does need to be a gap of bare hook before eye.
This has all been taught to be my Mary Dette and many other of the best modern Catskill tyers.
The Catskill style is just a style not a set of rules. I know that will upset many people but each tyer has there own was of tying. To look at Gordens, Crosses, Darbee, and Dette flies you will see each has their own style. It was just the way they learned, and most learned by making exact copies of someone elses flies.
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with the proportions as you describe they were taught to you by Mary Dette. I’ve watched her tie and listened carefully as she described proportions.
As far as ‘modern Catskill fly tyers’, some tie smaller proportions than others. Some have varying opinions of what ‘sparse’ means. Catskill ‘style’ is a generality because, as you say, there is no set of rules. It is a guideline and your size 12 Hendrickson compared to the same pattern I’d tie would look different. One time a group from the Catskill Fly Tyer’s Guild watched a demonstration by a ‘Catskill Tyer’, who supposedly learned at the knee of Harry Darbee. He used 2 full lemon woodduck feathers for wings on a size 14 Red Quill. Many of us watching thought the result was way too heavy, both visually and actual weight.
Hi Allan,
Joe’s comments on proportions are dead on.
That is the Exact Dette Formula.
Keep in mind though that it’s impossible to get each fly exactly to those proportions.
The size of the hackle dictates the size of the other components with the tail the least important part of the equation, meaning it could be a little longer than the wing.
Let’s say that the hackle doesn’t quite make the ideal size, a little short , fine, then the wing has to be tied in a little short also, the same “missing” amount.
The hackle used can be shorter then the ideal hackle size , up to almost a full hook size, if that’s all that is available and you want to go fishing. But generally never longer.
The Dettes and Darbees used double slip wings.
Mary uses two wooduck feathers for her wings, even size 14 and 16, she dosen’t use the whole feather though, just enough of the center to get the look she wants.
Doug
Perhaps because of “oversized” hackle the body appears “Small”.
Take care,
Jim
Guys, some of these discussions, while interesting, are going nowhere. There is a ‘style’ pure and simple. However, that ‘style’ is a general rule of thumb and certainly open to slight variances.
Jim - Respectfully disagree. In spite of what I just said, I think there are some aspects that fall beyond that rule of thumb. A couple of your comments fit that bill. Examples:
“The size of the hackle dictates the size of the other components with the tail the least important part of the equation”
> I beg to differ. (all this is according to Mary Dette) The tail is the first part measured and tied to the hook. It is the full length of the hook from eye to bend. The wing is next and the hackle last.
“The Dettes and Darbees used double slip wings. Mary uses two woodduck feathers for her wings, even size 14 and 16, she doesn’t use the whole feather though, just enough of the center to get the look she wants.”
> Can’t speak RE Darbees. Mary does not use the center of the woodduck flank. She removes it. She takes 2 matching flank feathers and uses the side of one and the corresponding side of the other. Or, she will use the 2 lefts and the 2 rights for the wings. She chooses which method depending on the size of the flank feathers.
“Let’s say that the hackle doesn’t quite make the ideal size, a little short, fine.”
This doesn’t happen very often because the hackles are generally plucked and pre-sized. Within these sizes are feathers that fall within a range per the Dette gauge which is based on the Mustad 94840.
Here are some exact measurements of Darbee and Dette flies. I did not want to guess the hook size so I measured the Gap. I hope this comes out readable:
Da = Darbee, De = Dette
All sizes are in mm and refer to length.
GAP Shank Hook Tail Body Wing Hackle
Da #1 3 8 11 10 5 8 7
Da #2 4 9 12 13 5 12 11
Da #3 5 9 13 13 6 11 10
Da #4 5 11 13 12 7 12 7
Da #5 5 10 14 16 6 12 9
Da #6 5 10 14 12 5 11 10
De #1 3 9 12 11 5 11 7
De #2 4 9 12 12 6 11 9
De #3 4 8 11 11 5 11 8
De #4 5 8 12 11 4 10 10
You can see a lot of things with this information. Among them:
The tails were always longer than the shank and about hook length.
The wings were, except Da1, always longer than the shank and about the same as the tail.
The hackle length was inconsistent but, more often than not, 2x or 2x+ the gap.
Similar results were found on flies tied by Steenrod, Cross, Christian, Flick and Davidson.
I will chew a bit more on the data you collected, but this aspect jumped out at me:
The hackle length was inconsistent but, more often than not, 2x or 2x+ the gap.
I am left wondering whether this is the result of what the tiers considered the desired barb length for the size hook and the pattern tied, or whether this is simply the by-product of using the quality (or perhaps better stated: lack of quality) of hackle available at the time? Would the tiers have used shorter barb feathers, is available?
(I fully appreciate that also 50-60 years back there was some good quality hackle too, such as the Miner strain, but we are talking commercial tiers here using commercial grade and quantity.)
Hans - You raise a few good questions and I am not about to hazard a guess to the answers. The measurements I took and the statistics I gave are accurate for the flies I was able to examine. As far as coming up with some rationale or drawing any conclusions, I’ll leave that to anyone who cares to try. As Sgt. Friday used to say, “Just the facts mam. Just the facts”.
Not getting into this fray but I believe that the reason for the little bit smaller body is that the flies body is tied smaller to leave room for tying the knot on the shank of the hook. Thus the whole fly sets back a little on the hook.
I see people tying what they call Catskill style flies and they have a big head on them that is right behind the hooks eye. Nope not in my book. There has to be a space for the knot and the head should be very small. Just my opinion. Ron
Ron
I’ll repeat my question from the discussion we had on this subject some 2 years ago. It wasn’t answered then. Perhaps it will be this time.
If the reason for the exposed gap at the head of a dry fly is to accommodate the turle knot, why is it not found on wet flies and nymphs from the same tiers during the same time period?
Yes, it’s trick question. No, I don’t know the answer with certainty.
Why do you always ask questions that cannot be answered. They wouldn’t even be allowed in a court of law. Allan did a very good job of answering that question, and the questions you ask could only be answered by an opinion or hearsay.
How could Allan (or anyone) possibly know for certain, whether tiers who are long dead, from an era that is long past, would have used shorter barb feathers if available? You have always had a habit of asking questions that can’t possibly be answered with any degree of certainty.
I think he did a splendid job of answering the question as best it could be answered because he is in touch quite often with probably the closest link to tiers from that era that still ties…Mary Dette, daughter of Walt and Winnie Dette.
Later, RW
“We fish for pleasure; I for mine, you for yours.” -James Leisenring on fishing the wet fly-
Slw- I tried to answer the question as to why the bodys are shorter on this style of dry fly and I believe I did?
As to why it is not the same on the nymphs all I can say is that I remember seeing some nymphs tied that way.
Please remember that I am try to remember from 40 years back. I do remember seeing some nymph’s tied that way but I sure can’t remember where I seen them? I know that they were for sale in a shop but I just can’t remember were or which one it was. Getting to dang old I guess?. I think that people tying them that way just disapered over the years. Sorry I can’t help more with your question. Just to dang many years ago. Ron
Ron
My question has less to do with body length and more to do with the “…clean, thread free head.”… as Leiser described it in his book with and about the Dettes.
You have an advantage on me in that you’ve seen more Catskill area tied flies in person than I have. I have to rely on the fewer flies that I’ve seen in person and what I’ve seen photographed.
Based on what I’ve seen, I’ll state that by and large the thread free head is absent from most wet flies and nymphs tied in the Catskill tradition, and grant that there are or may be exceptions. How’s that for covering my butt? :-)))
Assuming that I’m correct, I’ve wondered why that might be. If it’s to accomodate the turle knot, one must assume that fishermen in the early 20th century and later used a different knot for wet flies than for dry flies. I think that’s probably not the case, but have no way to prove it. I think there was and is something more going on.
Based on my observations I think the origin and continuation of the “thread free head” lies in two sources and that it has become an icon of flies that are supposed to represent the Catskill tradition:
Perhaps an over attention to weight and balance. (My first choice of reasons)
Perhaps a short cut in finishing the fly amoung commercial tiers in the Catskill region. (My second choice of reasons)
Evolving from 1 and/or 2, into a “signature” of sorts for some Catskill tiers.
Trust your memory. It’s probably better than you think.
Why do you always ask questions that cannot be answered. They wouldn’t even be allowed in a court of law. Allan did a very good job of answering that question, and the questions you ask could only be answered by an opinion or hearsay.
Opinion is exactly what I am after. Having and voicing, argumenting, an opinion is generally considered a key ingredient to conducting a fruitful discussion.
How could Allan (or anyone) possibly know for certain, whether tiers who are long dead, from an era that is long past, would have used shorter barb feathers if available?
For certain? Not likely. Impossible to formulate a position on the issue? Very possible.
As to the specific question I posed:
You tell me how the availability of genetic hackle (Metz, Hoffman, and those who followed), alongside the ‘classic’ Chinese necks, influenced and altered your own dry fly tying. I know what it did to mine.
You have always had a habit of asking questions that can’t possibly be answered with any degree of certainty.
See above.
I think he (Allan) did a splendid job of answering the question as best it could be answered because he is in touch quite often with probably the closest link to tiers from that era that still ties…Mary Dette, daughter of Walt and Winnie Dette.
Interesting you bring Mary into this. I concur that she is perhaps the best living link to that era. When I spent three days this past January with Mary in her house in Roscoe, photographing and documenting the Dette archive (over 700 flies, spanning some six decades of commercial tying in the Catskills by a dynasty, whose members were right in the thick of it), Mary and I had quite intensive discussions on this favorite subject of this week. Hearing it from her own lips offers a unique slant on the matter, and one I found entirely rivetting
I’m not a long-time tyer, I’m not trying to stir the pot, I’m not trying to get anyone’s goat. So concludes the disclaimer…
Has anyone ever considered the possiblity that the style came more from the fact these were tied by hand on/in the stream? Would it be fair to consider this? I’ve never tried to tie without a vise, but I just might one of these days… Could be interesting.
Take it away, next in line…
There’s almost nothin’ wrong with the first lie, it’s the weight of all the others holdin’ it up that gets ya’! - Tim
You’re not stirring the post and you raise a legitimate question. However, the answer is that the commercial tyers of the 20’s and forward used vises and did their tying, at least the commercial end of it, in their homes.
My humble opinion about why Catskill tiers had thread-free head for dry flies, but not for wet flies and nymphs is that high-floating Catskill dry flies needed thread-free head to prevent knots from negatively influencing the high-floating position of dry flies on the surface film and to ensure better balance for drag-free drift while subsurface flies did not pose those kinds of concerns. The difference between high-floating dry flies and subsurface flies is my guess.
