USD Flies *

[Traditionalist]

Hi Mc , sorted it, i was using rabbit body fur by accident, didnt read the packet, then i used hair body fur and found that they didnt retain water like the rabbit and floated properly also think i was piuting to much material in the tail. What hook type would you reccommend .

Most rabbit fur ( especially domestic rabbit) will not work of course.  There are several hundred types of rabbit fur! Although wild rabbit fur usually will. Use hare or squirrel. There are other furs which also work.

You MUST!! remove all underfur from the wing bunches!

And you MUST also brush out some dubbing on the  thorax. It is also better not to use any underfur in the dubbing if you want a high floater.

You can use any hook you like, but hooks with a straight ( and round of course) bend and barb are better, ( i.e. Not "reversed" or "kirbed") The offset hooks will still work, but they tend to tilt the fly a little to one side. because of course the weight distribution is different. I have used ordinary Mustad hooks and even some heavy wire hooks with no problems, but light wire dry fly hooks are definitely better of course.

Having said that, I have not tried all that many hooks really, so this is an area where some experiment is required. If somebody finds a hook for this with a bend that they really like, ( wing angle etc ), then please let me know.

Straight eyed hooks are definitely better for these flies!

TL
MC

[Traditionalist]

If you want an emerger pattern with a sunk abdomen, then you may be better served with one of these;

Mike,

Is there anyway you could use the material you use for the detached bodies to "hybridise"  with the USD dun to  produce a sunk   abdomen style emerger pattern with no subsurface hook to act as a negative trigger ?  Or is that just too complex?

If you want an USD sunk abdomen fly then use quill or very sparse ( touch) dubbing on the body, and dont gink it. You may also tie a hair hackle around the base of the wings, ( and the hook of course),  and you have a  USD sunk abdomen fly in "Reverse klinkhammer " style. It works exactly like a klinkhammer, but the hook is hidden. Of course you need to fish a sunk tippet with this fly, and this will pull it under more quickly.

Here is an ( EXPERIMENTAL!!!!) fly with an "extended head". I have not tried these, and I don?t think they will be very successful either, but one never knows! I have merely rotated the vice between shots here.









I know it is somewhat annoying that the photos are all different sizes, this is because I adjust focus, zoom etc for the best detail in each shot. This of course results in variously sized photos. Of course this is not professional.  That is mainly because I am an amateur!

TL
MC

[Traditionalist]

You may of course dress these flies in "comparadun style" if you wish. fan the hair wing so that it forms a semicircle. This works perfectly well. I just prefer the "V" wing, I feel it looks and behaves more naturally, and it works!  I have not tried the comparadun style extensively, ( actually, hardly at all) although I dressed a few. If any of you do try them successfully, please let me know.

One advantage of the comparadun style, is that the fibres at the lower extremity of the fan work like outriggers, stabilising the fly even more.  No reason not to do this if you wish. It can be a bit fiddly getting the hair to fan exactly as you want it to.

TL
MC

[Traditionalist]

Hi Mc. Would hare dubbing looped then clipped to shape to form a fly similar to the G&h sedge work. I like the G&H sedge but found it to be a clumbsy hooker i would imagine a  softer hair bodied version would solve this. Have you any sedgy type flies which uses hair?

Yes, it works perfectly. I have several such patterns. You can also "stack" hare fur, so you don?t have to pratt about clipping it.  I have to go and do some shopping now, but when I get back I will post a few designs and patterns for you.

Here is a size #8 clipped hare fur "hatching sedgewaker"  I just knocked up quick;


This will float all day and is more mobile and transparent than deer hair, also it "collapses" when the fish hit it, just like the real thing, so you rarely get "missed" takes, and you get more takes anyway, as the colour is more like a sedge than the deer hair flies;



Of course you can easily clip it to any shape you want. Hare fur is a lot easier to clip and manipulate than deer.  This is also the first time this pattern has been published.   Is incidentally an absolutely first class "bob" fly for traditional loch fishing. If you don?t clip it, it is a first class dapping fly. It is of course quite indestructible as well. I have one of these flies  which has caught over sixty fish, and it does not look any different, except the point and barb are smaller as I have sharpened it a few times.

I have a lot of pattern designs for various things. Sorry, but I don?t have any romantic or exciting names for my flies.  I just design them, and I know what they are for, so I don?t bugger about with names at all usually. We can call this one the "Fish Wild Clipped Hare Caddis"  if you like!


TL
MC

[Traditionalist]

Hey - -   Whats wrong with Haggis mould?

Just took an hour nearly to tie one of those bugger things with a bit out of my wifes
sink plug chain.  Will have to try and master this split thread thingy.  I'm struggling
with splitting size 6/0, I don't know how you cope with size 14/0.
You have been a breath of fresh air Mike. Thank you.

PS   Salmon season starts tomorrow on the River Ness hee hee, will try the bugger thingy.

Davie

By the way, for tying bugger thingies you should use a  loop of thread, not a split thread.  The split thread technique is only useful for small flies.

TL
MC

[haresear]

If you want an USD sunk abdomen fly then use quill or very sparse ( touch) dubbing on the body, and dont gink it. You may also tie a hair hackle around the base of the wings, ( and the hook of course),  and you have a  USD sunk abdomen fly in "Reverse klinkhammer " style. It works exactly like a klinkhammer, but the hook is hidden. Of course you need to fish a sunk tippet with this fly, and this will pull it under more quickly.

I spent Sunday tying experimental USD sunk abdomen flies in different styles. The one I found worked best was pretty much as Mike described above.
A single wing (snowshoe hare) tied as in the tail position. (i.e. in line with the shank)
I wound a grizzle hackle wound at the bend, as in the Leckford Professor recommended by Fishtales on another thread. Thrown up in the air, it landed correctly every time and floated arse up. I don?t know how it would behave attached to a leader as yet. I'll check this out and post again.

Alex

[Traditionalist]

If you want an USD sunk abdomen fly then use quill or very sparse ( touch) dubbing on the body, and dont gink it. You may also tie a hair hackle around the base of the wings, ( and the hook of course),  and you have a  USD sunk abdomen fly in "Reverse klinkhammer " style. It works exactly like a klinkhammer, but the hook is hidden. Of course you need to fish a sunk tippet with this fly, and this will pull it under more quickly.

I spent Sunday tying experimental USD sunk abdomen flies in different styles. The one I found worked best was pretty much as Mike described above.
A single wing (snowshoe hare) tied as in the tail position. (i.e. in line with the shank)
I wound a grizzle hackle wound at the bend, as in the Leckford Professor recommended by Fishtales on another thread. Thrown up in the air, it landed correctly every time and floated arse up. I don?t know how it would behave attached to a leader as yet. I'll check this out and post again.

Alex

Nice to hear you are trying things out.  The snowshoe hare is great stuff, ( So is seal fur), but it is a bit pricey. I use the ordinary hare fur for experimenting, and when I find something I really like, I will often do the same pattern using snowshoe hare. This usually improves the pattern, as the snowshoe floats even better than the ordinary hare fur, although this is quite adequate.

I have a couple of dozen feet in various colours. Really good for matching wings on duns.

TL
MC

[Traditionalist]

This is the result of ongoing discussions elsewhere, but I would like to keep you abreast of developments, and get your input as well, as the fly was first published here.

My thoughts were primarily on the design of a no hackle dun. and I wanted to conceal the hook as well.  I had tried various other designs, and for one reason or another they either  did not work very well, or were too fragile etc.

I think it is probably mainly taken for a crippled emerger, or a trapped dun ( body on or in the film). ( This is often the case with many other flies anyway, as most do not float as high on their tails and hackles as people like to imagine! =)  )  This gives you at least two shots at a specific hatch though, and precisely those stages most vulnerable to fish, which they are likely to concentrate on.

It certainly works exceedingly well as a generic pattern, when dressed with hare fur, in various sizes, but it is not a "one fly solution" by any means.

I am happy that the basic design works, is easy to dress, is very robust, and up to now has proven very effective for a range of things, but I can not tell you precisely that it imitates some particular stage specifically.

One can alter some aspects to make it do certain things. If one uses a quill or thread body for instance, the abdomen sinks,  ( on a degreased tippet),and one has a classic emerger. Normally I would however prefer a klinkhammer or similar for this.

If one uses a well defined guard hair bunch ( dubbed and brushed out) for the thorax, then it sits like a classic dun, except for the "wing forward" attitude, but the fish don?t seem to care much about that. It also seems to offer a better footprint than standard hackled flies. At least I have had very few refusals on it, when casting to rising fish. Very many fewer than with "standard" hackled dry flies.

Varying the wing shape ( and bulk) also affects how the fly behaves. If one fans the fibres more in "Comparadun" style, and uses either a very lightly dubbed or smooth abdomen, the fly sits like a dun with a slightly  sunk bum! =)  The wings are then more upright,and the fibres at the bottom sides work like "outriggers" to stabilise the fly.

There is obviously still potential for a lot of experimentation here. One can make the basic design do a lot of things, but I have only tried a few up to now, so I can?t really give you any precise information.

My original objectives were to remove negative triggers. Where I think the objective is largely resolved, I have simply put "OK" after it.I can explain why as well if you wish.  To whit;

Conceal the hook.   OK

Either severely reduce, or remove the hackle entirely. No fly has a hundred legs sticking out of its head, and this has always bugged me.  OK

Conceal or make the tippet less conspicuous.  OK

Secondary ( but still important!) objectives were;
Must float well.             OK
Robust.                       OK
Easy to dress.              OK
Easy to dry!!!!              OK
Must not twist leaders.   OK

The final objectives were.

Be a good imitation ( Of?)  OK but unexplained!
Be adaptable to suit various stages and circumstances. Not yet resolved.

The last two objectives are only partially resolved.  The fly catches fish well, but I don?t really know exactly why it does so in any given circumstance. Although I can say that about many other flies as well.

One incidental positive objective which was obtained without it actually being a target ( it only became apparent after using the flies) is the attitude of the fly when casting. The wing is always opposite to the direction of casting. Trailing as it were, and is not subjected to being crumpled or otherwise deformed.  It is also very much easier to cast into wind, excepting for the last stage of turnover, when a little extra power is required to turn it, as the wings are then facing into the "wind".

Hmmm..............  I could go on, but I would like some input from others on the matter first.  Quite a few people are now either testing or preparing to test variations of the basic design, and we will know more after some have been using it for a while.

To summarise the matter briefly, I think the design is 95% resolved. 

Some of the reasons for the effectiveness are not resolved. ( But as long as it IS effective, this is hardly a problem as such. I don?t KNOW why a woolly bugger works either, but I know that it does!).

Various possible adjustments, and specific pattern adaptations are not resolved.

TL
MC

[haresear]

I'm pretty sure you have come up with a winner Mike. Certainly sounds as though it produces plenty of fish for you and that is the only criteria that matters.

Hopefully in a few weeks, we'll be basking in warm April sunshine :? and giving thanks to you for giving us a new weapon in the armoury. Roll on the Dark Olives and the March Browns.

Alex

[Traditionalist]

Ah well, I do hope it is a winner for you, and anybody else who uses it, but people like to know as much as possible about these things.

I certainly achieved the majority of my objectives, and I really am quite pleased with myself on that score, but the fly has to prove itself for others as well. 

TL
MC