With no fishing available at present why not read all about fly selection.  Another amazing amount of b+++++++t by Paul Gaskell Wild Trout Trust.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's interesting (to me at least) is that there are examples in all different "schools" of river fishing that conform to near universal rules - but they are normally presented as a series of facts.

Bob Wyatt's stuff goes a lot further towards providing a framework - and I enjoy and agree with much of what he has written. In this respect it is very different from the magazine article (and many books') approach of presenting bald facts with little/no backround, broadly transferable principles.

However, there are really interesting departures and caveats beyond Bob W's writings (the plasticity of prey-image and changeable unconscious select/reject criteria according to situation and motivational state of the fish for one example) which also interest me greatly.

Particularly on waters that see lots of angler visits...

Also - the notion to "imitate" is in there as a consideration within tenkara (for example) but it is the "just sufficient" imitation that they are after (much like Sawyer's approach). There is far more importance placed on the functional aspects of each fly.

So, whilst the DHE is a great example of a generalist "fish will take it for what they want it to be" design - there is still a much broader framework that will tell you (for example) why and when you might want to use a WET fly that is hackled with a short, stiff cock hackle versus a soft hackle.

Conversely, when and why short and long soft hackles will produce the most effective prey image.

What the functional difference is between "anti camouflage" and "super normal stimuli" etc. etc.

I would also like to point out that the "perfect" fly selection is defined according to the best available prospects on each day i.e. how to make the best of all but the most-dire situations. On some days that might mean catching one fish.

It isn't a promise that you will go out and have 100 fish days every time out.

It is a promise that, when those kind of experiences are on the cards, you will understand how to get the best out of them (whether you choose to catch just a few "select" fish or fish for short, productive periods between conversation/contemplation, or go for that red letter day if you like catching lots of fish).

So, what if we had managed to get even 50%, 70% or 95% of the way towards achieving that goal of teaching optimal fly choice? Wouldn't that be worth knowing? (especially considering that, beyond fly choice and the way you'd ideally like to present it there are so many other things to "muff up" before you actually catch a fish!)

We believe (again based on tested experience) that we have the information and ways to convey it so that we really do get more than 90% of the way there (and we are still learning and working). There are lots of things that all kinds of experts can teach us (from top European comp anglers to specialists like Paul Procter to Japanese masters of their chosen craft) - what we are saying is that "hey, we've found something interesting and proven that nobody is writing about or sharing".

It is up to you to decide whether that is of interest to you or not - if you are, great, we are happy to generate and package that information. If not, no worries, the best angler is always the one with the biggest smile and we have absolutely no interest in mis-selling something so that the recipient is disappointed.

That doesn't help anyone.

• Share
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 

__________________
Catch More Fish at Discover Tenkara

This was one of the answers to the above post;

I honestly don’t think I have a clue what you are on about. I don’t mean that to insult you, honest… I have no idea what you mean by a “framework” and I won’t even begin to guess.

However, I suspect this “framework” approach is being over intellectualized unnecessarily to bolster a commercial venture. If you really believe you are on to something, why don’t you simply start a blog and have all the information and new ideas free online for all and sundry?

I’d proffer that successful fly selection is covered by no more than three factors: size, colour and style; and the success of such a selection could possibly (and I say possibly, because after forty-years of fly fishing I’m still trying to work it out) depend on a combination of two or more factors, but never just one. If the work is trying to say anything beyond that, I’d suggest the use a nose clip.

This was another;

"The title of this thread sounds like the subject of a research project conducted under the horsepisses of the visiting professor of Japanese Mysticism at the University of Clacton-upon-Sea. 

I'm reminded of an old gent featured in T&S some years ago whose fly box was full of about 50 flies of one pattern only. When asked about his methods, I'll mis-quote him as saying something along the lines of: "..something brown, shaggy and about half an inch long usually does the trick".

Although I do remember him saying that he was always careful to align his rod based upon the principles of feng shui. So, unlike me, not a total philistine then.

Better than the telly isn't it -oh and by the way there is a BOOK on the way out in respect of this framework.!!!

• Share
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 

• Share
  • 
  • 
  • 
  •