Davy Wotton's Fishing Report
February 2010
Food for Thought
For those of you who tie flies, l guess you take it for granted that there is likely to be an endless supply of materials out there for you to use. In the case of synthetics or any other man made fiber, that is true to some extent. But bear in mind that product lines change and in many cases these products are by-products used for reasons other than fly tying. Sometimes they are further processed and dyed to suit our needs.
In the case of natural materials, each year we see further legal restrictions that apply to import and expor
t laws, further control of the trade related to specific species and the ever increasing issues of disease that limit the availability of feather products: imported poultry necks, marabou turkey strung hackles and peacock, almost all of which are imported from Asian sources. Most of the control here in the US is under the jurisdiction of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, who is responsible for both import and export to other countries of natural materials we use for fly tying. Likewise there are similar regulations in other countries regarding import and export of those products.
Will we see a day that the vast majority of products we now take for granted are no longer available? The probability is yes. Now you may assume here that we have an endless supply either from raised poultry or wild animals that are legally harvested with by-product that is available to us for fly-tying. Here again poultry breeders that raise genetic hackle are only going to continue to do so if they can raise the product at a viable cost for what the market will bear, and it is not as large as you might believe it to be. Natural furs such as possum and squirrel are a by-product of the fur trade. Once again they are only viable products if those who trap the animals can justify the costs involved in doing so. Deer hair will likely always be in plentiful supply. But bear in mind not that many flies use deer hair in the first place.
When l learned to tie, there were very few synthetics around. Come to think of it, thread, floss and tinsels were the only examples. After that, l honestly cannot bring to mind any others l used in my days as a commercial fly tier. Go look at a book that describes material used for flies pre- 1970s, and l doubt you will find many that used synthetics, other than thread and floss.
So what does this all mean at the end of the day? We know that many good fly patterns can be crafted from synthetic material and many that we use are in that category or close to it. Midge and caddis patterns, streamers and eggs are just a few examples. Do we have synthetics that can replace all the natural materials we use? Not really. Some are close, but not close enough. Will this make a difference to our catch rates? Most certainly it will, if you take stocked trout out of the equation.
Are there synthetic alternatives for natural hackles? Well some are close in the case of material that has uses for larger streamer bait fish type patterns. In the case of soft hackles, wet flies, and dry flies, no there is not. Will there be? No one knows.
To date, man has not really been able to duplicate the elements that nature affords to living creatures. Sure we have synthetic dubbings. An interesting point here is the reason why l developed the SLF products because seal fur was banned and it was a primary material used for dubbed bodies. There were still available sources of natural fur from Hare, Rabbit, Mole, Squirrel, and many other fur bearing critters. The problem was they were not furs that were translucent and could be de-pigmented sufficiently and then dyed to exhibit high definition colors. More to the point, all others had a very different texture not even close to seal fur. SLF as a synthetic was about as close as you could get. Albeit some of the ranges l blended with natural material to produce different ranges and those required for species copy.
Hackles from whatever species they come from. As we know Partridge is very favored for soft hackles. Very specific colors of both hen and rooster are used for specific fly patterns. Many hackles, such as those from game birds, have a very definite structure that suit particular types of flies. Dry fly hackles differ from soft hackles In many cases, many of these dry fly colors are hard to come by now days since they are not those raised in genetic hatchery farms. Therefore, what is the alternative? l guess, do the same as l do. Raise your own rare breeds. Is it cost effective? Maybe not. Bear in mind that high end genetic necks can fetch over $100 bucks today. No bird l have ever raised cost me close to that amount. I do not need to kill them. The loss of a few feathers is no big deal as they can grow them again. And they are easy to hatch and raise. Build a vermin-proof pen, with shelter, feed and water; and that's it.
In the case of tying flies, there are learning curves. It is my opinion and always has been that natural materials require higher skill levels than the overall use of synthetics. For many of the obvious reasons including selection, preparation and the techniques needed. Synthetics are a very different matter. They also require selection, preparation and techniques of use all major difference at the end of the day. Yes, it is a new learning procedure compared to use of natural material. There is also the difference between tying practical fishing flies and those more suited to a display box. That is more a process of construction, which l might add l also enjoy.
In the case of a hackle taken from a neck, correct choice and size/ definition has to be taken into consideration for the fly being tied before you pull the hackle. Then you have to prep it. In the majority of cases, synthetics are cut from spools, hanks and packaged lengths. Dubbing is, of course, an exception here.
There is also the question of fishing flies that contain all natural material, combinations of both natural and synthetic and those that are all synthetic. Natural and synthetics differ in many ways including how they react above and below the water surface. A synthetic version of a soft hackle is a very different fly. It’s more or less impossible to duplicate the delicacy of a natural spider hackle wind. Try to duplicate a hackled dry fly with synthetics. It can be done to a point, although here again, it will be a different fly. So there is a learning curve so far as fishing synthetic fly patterns. They differ.
Let me pose you this one. If we no longer have marabou, what would you use as an alternative? Sure there are some synthetics you can use. To date, l have yet to see one that duplicates the action of marabou. I use this as an example. There are many others.
Food for thought.
Davy
Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Report
Archive of Fishing Reports