Which is the best fly?

[Otter Spotter]

Absolutely Moggie!
I have been fishing in a boat with a partner many times. There have been occasions where one is consistently catching and the other is not, simple solution is that you are fishing different flies, right? Pass your rod to the boat partner and take a shot of theirs who catches then? The times I have tried this its the angler who was catching that continues to catch in spite of the rod swap. It seems to me that there are days when your style is just more tuned into the fish and it doesnt really matter whats on the business end. Of course there may be a bit more 'science' involved when matching the hatch on rivers but I'm not convinced. Any perceived need to match the hatch is in my opinion more likely to be down to angling pressure rather than the need to exactly match the hatch, though I'm sure haresear, Alan or Deergravy will probably have a different view, (thats why they are excellent river anglers and I am not!).
When I go to a loch, if I know there are fish, there I am pretty confident I can catch one - I usually do. However put me next to a river and I get the cold sweats, I know what I should be doing but dont feel confident in my abilities - I usually blank.

[Fishtales]

The one common denominator in it all is the angler. It is easy to blame the weather; the fish; or any one of a hundred things but the most blame is put on the wrong fly and yet if two people stand side by side fishing the same fly why can one catch and the other not? It has to be the way the angler fishes, there can't really be any other explanation.

[Wildfisher]

Do you not think that the angler has a lot do do with it?

More than any other factor. I sometimes fish with anglers who are far better than I am:  haresear and  hopper to name but two, guest is a much better loch fisherman than I am. I could go on.

Fly choice is important but it is well down the list compared to other factors of which the absolute number 1 is not scaring the fish. Rivers and lochs are also a completely different style of challenge each with their own special requirements.

[Traditionalist]

Reading through that and various other threads where it has been discussed it all comes down to ..

a) the angler

b) the style or technique used

c) whether the fish are feeding or not

The fly would appear to be well down the list of being successful.

Matching the hatch may catch fish, or it may not as has also been stated in previous threads, if the angler isn't up to it; he is using the wrong technique; or is matching the wrong part of the hatch, he still wont succeed as often as someone using all his knowledge and technique while using a non-descript fly.

Broadly speaking yes, however, under various circumstances the fly and the way it is being fished  become more and more important.  In quite a few cases, unless you have a really good matching artificial fished in a specific way you will catch less or often no fish at all.

March browns, Iron Blues, and Grannom are all examples of this.  Artificial duns are often useless, although you might get the odd fish on them.  For consistent success you need an emerger pattern or a nymph fished just below the surface in a particular way because that is where the fish are taking them, and they will usually completely ignore anything else.

[otter]

The one common denominator in it all is the angler. It is easy to blame the weather; the fish; or any one of a hundred things but the most blame is put on the wrong fly and yet if two people stand side by side fishing the same fly why can one catch and the other not? It has to be the way the angler fishes, there can't really be any other explanation.

That off course is the logical conclusion and quite likely the correct conclusion in most circumstances.

I do not buy into any concept of best fly, best method,  best line, best anything.

To consistently catch a lot of trout all the various parameters over which you have control must come to-gether in unison and whilst you can look over your shoulder at others as long as you are consistently catching the only way you can only reach a tentative conclusion on anything is by comparing your results to your results when you make changes to any of the parameters.

You as an angler can only control certain things. you cannot control the water, the weather, the hatches or whether the water was flogged to death by a hatch of beginners half an hour earlier.

The biggest problem in discussing this sort of stuff is that everyone tends to have already made their minds up based on their own perception of where the goal posts are and these may be worlds apart from others as may the types of water they fish.

My own personal goal post is a belief that in MOST circumstances there is a limited number of possible options that will attain good results. Its about using intuition and experience operating within the limits of your ability to maximise that attainment for each situation. 

I believe that in many hatch situations on rivers, which after all is when the trout feed most agressively that their focus on self preservation is slightly diminished and  the pattern that we fish, the way we fish it is of paramount concern.  This is of course always important , but in a hatch its importance becomes more acute.

In my experience many anglers that consider matching the hatch as a load of nonsense do so for various personal reasons but that is poor reason for believing it to be a nonsense.  I prefer using different terminology from matching the hatch, "Taking best advantage of a hatch " is my only goal for whatever seasons I have left. To achieve that goal means been open minded and pretty focussed on certain things.

It is just as important , if not more so, to understand why certain things dont work in certain situations. Hatches on rivers can last as short as ten minutes so your decisions have to be well made to take advantage of the hatch. Why bother you may ask, well its simple really, thats when the better than average trout comes out to play. 

[Fishtales]

Broadly speaking yes, however, under various circumstances the fly and the way it is being fished  become more and more important.  In quite a few cases, unless you have a really good matching artificial fished in a specific way you will catch less.

The point is though you will still catch. Spending time repeatedly changing flies trying to find the 'exact match' when I could probably catch the odd fish by persevering with the flies I have isn't my idea of fishing. I do realise that there are a lot of other anglers who are quite prepared to do this and they do catch fish, whether they catch more or less than me is irrelevant as long as we are all enjoying ourselves. I don't go to a river or loch and stand about for hours waiting for a hatch or rising fish so I can find out what they are taking and then go through my fly box to match the hatch, I just pick a likely looking spot and start fishing As far as I am concerned I am already matching the hatch. I have a surface fly for any fish that is looking for surface food; a wet fly for those fish eating drowned or hatching flies under the surface; a nymph for those fish eating nymphs, grubs or beetles nearer the bottom.

During early spring when I see Claret Duns hatching I know the Iron Blue Dun wet fly and the HillLoch Nymph will catch. It happens too many times for it to be a coincidence. Those same flies will catch during a hatch of Olives throughout the year. They also catch in rivers as I have proven on numerous occasions over the years. I am not saying someone going through their fly box and matching the flies to what is hatching wont catch any more or less than I do but it isn't something I think about.

[Traditionalist]

I don't spend any time at all changing flies. As soon as I realise a hatch is in progress, and often before, based on the likelihood, I have the right fly on. I have only found the right flies for some things after years of experimentation and trials. 

[Fishtales]

I believe that in many hatch situations on rivers, which after all is when the trout feed most agressively that their focus on self preservation is slightly diminished and  the pattern that we fish, the way we fish it is of paramount concern.

In my experience many anglers that consider matching the hatch as a load of nonsense do so for various personal reasons but that is poor reason for believing it to be a nonsense.  I prefer using different terminology from matching the hatch, "Taking best advantage of a hatch " is my only goal for whatever seasons I have left.

On the lochs and rivers I have fished if the fish are feeding aggressively then they will take just about anything that comes within range.

I don't consider matching the hatch as nonsense I just don't believe it is the main concern when I fish. In my eyes getting a fly over that feeding fish, as long as it is fished and presented the way the fish recognise it as a food item, is just as important. When I am fishing a loch or river and I see a fish rise my only concern is to get my flies into its feeding area. The last thing on my mind is standing about looking to see what it is eating so I can change my flies to match it exactly, by that time the fish could be at the other end of the loch or moved to another lie in the river.

[Traditionalist]

That obviously works to some extent for you on the waters you fish. It wont work on some heavily fished waters of various types.  I have been watched often by various anglers in some places who have marvelled at my seeming to get a fish a cast,and usually good fish, while they could not even get one. On occasion I have given anglers one of the flies and quite a number of them then manage to catch a fish. By no means all though, with some it doesn't matter much because they do something else wrong, very often lack of stealth, or poor casting. However, there is no doubt at all in such circumstances that the right fly is essential. Of course there may be other possible "right flies" in such circumstances.

When fish are actively  feeding on top or in midwater they are less wary of possible food but much more wary of their surroundings. One reason deep nymphing is often so successful, the fish are not so easily spooked.

What I consider the "right fly" in such circumstances is one that works about 80...90% of the time.  That means at least eight fish out of ten casts.

[otter]

Where I fish it is often completely different.

As an example, at dusk last week of june into first/second week of August during normal conditions on my river the trout will be focussed on BWO's and Caddis. Experience has taught me what to expect and my preference at dusk is to fish a single fly as more than one causes problems I would rather avoid.  If I chose my preferred pattern for eitehr bWO's or Caddis on a preferred piece of water then I would without fail catch fish for at least an hour and a half. There would be periods where I caught few and then intense periods of regular hookups and all would be well. If however I recognised that the trout had switched from BWO to caddis then apart from the 1 minute to change pattern it would be pretty intense fishing.

Apart from proving that I am greedy   :roll:,  it certainly proves to me that if you match the trouts expectations they will respond in kind.

Many anglers that I know happily fish caddis all evening, catch some trout andgo home just as content as I do - simply their goal post are different, no big deal really.