A searching pattern is one that you use when you have no idea what to use… A Woolly Booger is a good choice.
Are you therefore saying that if the river is very smooth, you cannot see any insects, and there are no actively rising trout or sipping trout, then whatever fly (regardless of catagory type some may place it in) you guess may be good and put on is a ‘searching pattern’? Or, you see trout rising and they do not rise to your fly, (assume good presentations, etc.) even though it may be an ‘immitation’ of the hatching insect, so you put on something else. Is that something else, even though it may also be an ‘immitation’, also a ‘searching pattern’?
Aren’t we always searching for the pattern that will work and therefore all patterns are ‘searching’. I guess I don’t understand what that specific word means. What does it mean when used grammatically as a noun? When used as a verb?
Lastly, nice philosophical babble but who really gives a s— what it’s called? LOL.
Allan
Yup. You just figured out the ugly secret…they’re all searching patterns…until something bites them.
Sounds a bit like you care?
Yes, I care when braggard types try and impose their high and mighty, although often erroneous, points of view by pointing out a few inconsistencies, falsehoods and dogmatic comments that have been expressed in this topic. If the shoe fits … and all that jazz.
I always thought that a searching pattern was something that was a pattern that didn’t represent a specific creature (i.e. insect, fish, etc) but was suggestive of a number of real “things” or “creatures” (i.e. small black insect, etc). This is different from a pattern that is meant to imitate a specific species of insect. The term searching was to indicate that, because it represented a wide variety of stuff, it was good to use if there wasn’t a specific hatch going on.
In contrast, an attractor, was something I thought was not really supposed to represent a living creature, but rather, was something that was flashy and garish, and tried to get a strike out of aggression, or some such.
So, both are good to use when no specific hatch is going on, both can be used to “search” for fish, etc, with the difference (as I thought people used the terms) was in whether or not the pattern was meant to immitate a living thing of some sort.
Also, as with so many things associated with the jargon of fly fishing (or any activity), the terms have subtle differences of meaning depending upon locality.
- Jeff
Jeff,
If I copied this correctly, it is an interesting explanation of an attractor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qhTAxTgjb0
Granted, everyone has their own opinion on things, but I found this interesting.
One of my favorite dry fly attractor/searching patterns:
Hi Byron,
Interesting. That’s a use of attractor pattern I’ve not generally heard. Of course, I tend to think mostly of wet flies, and generally quill winged wets, where things like parmachene belle would be an attractor (yes, I know, some say it was modeled after a brook trout fin, but it’s pretty impressionistic if it was), while a march brown would get called a searching pattern (a general representation of a bunch of insects; although again, I think it was originally a representation of a specific insect hatch). In the end, I think they are terms that have taken on a lot of local dialect, with no universally accepted definitions for either.
- Jeff
Absolutely!
When I first started fly fishing I never heard the term “searching pattern”. I heard “Attractors” a lot. Now, it seems the term “searching pattern” has taken over.
I wonder if it’s regional? When did you start fly fishing? I’ve heard “searching pattern” since I started in the early 60’s. It may also be a function of which magazines you read, and what the editor of those preferred.
Was skimming through the book, Quill Gordon by John McDonald last night. Gives a good overall history of fly fishing going back to Dame Juliana. I believe that I saw that the terms ‘gaudy’/‘fancy’ were used and defined in relation to a type of fly because of the way it was dressed. They seem to be synonymous for ‘attractor’. I think the description in McDonald’s text was taken from the writing of Skues.
Maybe it would be interesting to see specific examples/references of how some authors actually use these terms in the context of their articles or books. Like ‘Bob’ wrote above, maybe its a matter of the regionalization of magazines and authors?
Just sayin