Years ago I toyed with the idea of fishing all season with only one kind of fly. Back then it was a soft hackle, but I seem to remember stumbling on this idea pretty much every winter, and wonder a little about what it means.
The world’s simplest, most effective fly? (Hare’s Ear soft hackle)
Is it my subconscious taking a stand for minimalism? The emerging presentationist in me who thinks good casts belie the need for five boxes of flies?
Or just a lazy fly tier looking to dodge the shame of woefully understocked fly boxes?
I’m not the only crazy.
In the November/December issue of Fly Rod & Reel, John Gierach mentioned that his friend Mike Price fished most of a season with only Royal Coachmen and Gray-Hackle Peacock patterns.
Noble, but that was in the context of small, backcountry streams, where the named flies would probably work about as well as anything.
Still, when I mentioned this idea to my friends, some would just nod like they’d had the same idea themselves, but others just looked at me like I’d suggested dynamite as a reasonable alternative to the Adams.
I know what I was thinking with the “soft hackle” idea; it could be fished as a nymph, swung like a soft hackle, and even fished in the film like an emerger.
I didn’t know if adding a cdc loopwing behind the hackle to help it float better (and make it more visible) was cheating or not, but I probably would have made that agonizing moral decision after seeing if it worked.
I might have done it if I could have figured out what to do in pocket water, but at the time, I was pretty sure of a couple of things.
First, at the end of the year I’d probably be as good a soft hackle fishermen as I’d ever be.
And second, I liked my dry flies too much to give ‘em up.
Different Year. Same Madness.
The recent “Best fly tieing book” thread here on the Underground got me thinking about all the flies I had to tie for Fall, and the next thing, I’m off on a “one fly” jag.
This time, I had a better idea; instead of one pattern (a pointless exercise when you sweat it out over more than one body of water), I’d stick to one family of flies made from fly tieing’s equivalent of pine two-by-fours.
Hare’s Ear.
Between the hare’s ear nymph, hare’s ear soft hackle, hare’s ear parachute, some kind of hare’s ear x-caddis and a hare’s ear midge pupae, I’d pretty much have it covered.
A #20 hare’s ear midge pupae. OK, maybe this one’s the simplest to tie…
Actually, I’d have it nowhere near covered, but – despite the insanity of the idea – you can probably also see the beauty of it. Five patterns in a half-dozen different sizes each (and maybe eight different materials) and you’d be out the door and fishing the river without a care.
Would the winter trout mistake a #20 hare’s ear parachute for a baetis? Would they think a #10 was a Green Drake?
Until now, nobody’s been insane enough to find out. And since I’m much better at writing about this kind of thing than doing it, it’ll probably remain a mystery.
Still, is anyone out there tempted by a one-fly season?
[tags]hares ear, soft hackle[/tags]
My pick? Trout Flies: The Tier’s Reference by Dave Hughes. His philosophy emphasizes “buggy” flies over exact imitation, and his approach to fly tieing is to strip away the window dressing, focusing on what actually catches fish.
Recent comments