red hackle

[tidewaterfly 0]

My apologizes! My response was more so to what Bruce Derington had posted. I misinterpreted part of your post too. If the original poster only changes the tail color to black on a Green Butt, then you're name would certainly apply. Capt Mel, I fully agree with you about only the name changes and not the function of the fly. However, my point was only that if material changes are made to the pattern, and someone still wishes to identify the pattern based on a name, in the case of this pattern, the name should be reflecting the original "Skunk" not one of it's many variations. In other words, to use your example, changing the Butt color to orange, does not make it a variation of the Green Butt, but instead another variation of the original Skunk pattern. Otherwise, we end up with names that are variations of variations, which becomes very confusing, particularly to those folks who are not as familiar with such patterns as you are.

[Capt Mel Simpson 0]

Yes, very good tidewater. Here is an example of a version of the Skunk called the Deschutes Skunk, of the Don McClain era probably early 70's. He added natural deer hair as an underwing to the calftail (that had become a preference over bucktail), thus causing the fly to once again have surface action. The calftail had changed the fly's action with the change from bucktail.

[imx 0]

interesting thread about the material list of flies and how they have changed from the originals.

 

i too have an in depth knowledge of the skunk fly, my great grandmother mildred krogel was the originator of the skunk fly back in 1938. the recipe(s) that are listed today are far different that the originals, the color scheme is somewhat the same but some folks would most likely cringe at the thought of having to collect the original material..its not called the skunk fly just because it was black and white .

 

when i look through grandpas fly box there are many of the originals in it. for what its worth...some have tails and some don't, some have a different wing material, and none of them are tied on the hooks or with the porportions that the fly books call for.

 

now that grandpa don and uncle clete are well into their late 80's and hunting and fishing exploits are becoming more memories than they are plans made for the next season i've come to realize this, they have forgotten more than i will ever know about flyfishing in oregon and when they tell me to ty a fly a certain way there is 140 yrs combined knowledge, photos and fishing journals to back up their logic.

 

regards,

imx

[Capt Mel Simpson 0]

Well sence you're from Roseburg, where I think the Skunk originated, that gives you creedance in my book. But you know some pictures of those old flies would sure be nice. Wow, that puts your Grandparents and Uncle in the Clarence Gordon era and Frank Moore's early days of owning the Steamboat Inn. I'm not 80 but I did fish for steelhead in the Crooked River long before the dams on the Deschutes maybe early 1950's. I'm trying to remember but I think my father showed me the first Skunk that he tied around the time I graduated from high school in 1960. But I'm pretty sure he didn't use polecat for the wing. All this is good stuff, thanks Mel.

[imx 0]

i'll see what i can muster up..i will have to ask granpda don out of respect if he will let me take a photo of some of the some originals.. as with many of us some things are still a family secret

[mikechell 0]

What if you are a terrible tier like me and you use too much material and it doesn't look good ... and the hackle was from some road kill?

Couldn't I call it a Black Tailed Big Ugly Stinky Butt Skunk (That Probably Won't Catch Fish)?

[bocamike 0]

I haven't been fly tying long enough to develop any strong opinions or experiences with materials or colors, but in a recent fly-tying class at my local fly shop, I got the idea from general converstaion there that the consensus was that "shape" of a fly was more important than "color". In other words, if the shape of the fly offers a reasonable representation of bait in the local area, then that fly will be effective in spite of colors chosen in its construction.

 

After reading all the comments in this thread, and now after hearing myself think, I just realized I've been so engaged with my new-found interest in tying that I have not even gone to the water to see if any of my results are effective as fish catchers... Then again I realize that we are in the peak of the hot months now, and the bite in my local bass stream is usually quite inactive until the next cool front comes through. While I await that event, I hope to enjoy a few more evenings reading, researching, learning, and trying patterns discussed here, in hopes of eventually having some winners in my vest next time out.

 

Keep up the good ideas and suggestions.

[tidewaterfly 0]

Mikechell, call it whatever you wish! I like your sense of humor!

The thing about tying is that you can improve. Since you know what you're doing wrong, then fix it & you don't have to come up with names like that! The fly will still probably catch some fish, even ugly ones made from road kill. I'm speaking from experience!

 

Bocamike, I agree with that consensus too with regard to baitfish patterns. However, it's likely the movement or action of the fly will often be the most important aspect. IMO, color or contrast of color can sometimes be important, but usually not as important as shape & action.

 

On another site there was a discussion about why predatory fish take a fly that is tied to imitate a schooling baitfish when fished around large masses of the real thing. The consensus there was that it's the natural baitfish that stands out from the school that often gets eaten. Sometimes there may be a size difference or may be due to it being wounded, it may have a color difference as often an injured baitfish changes color somewhat or there could be other reasons. When our flies don't match the natural exactly, and stand out from the rest in color or more likely movement that in itself could be a reason they get eaten instead of just blending in with the masses. If that's the case, then it might not be a good idea to try & match the real thing too closely, but rather use a color that only vaguely matches, and a profile that is closer to the size of the real thing.

 

It was suggested that color combinations such as chartreuse & white or pink & white, two popular color combo's often work well in situations like this, as they both may standout, yet they don't necessarily match the real thing. It was also suggested that sometimes the real thing exhibit flashes of colors when they're panicked or injured that could show a glow that might be represented by colors such as chartreuse or pink.

 

Whatever the reason, they do work & the fish eat them.

 

I've been fishing for about 50 years, and tying about 46 years. For me, having been primarily a warmwater & tidal water angler during those years, 3 colors, chartreuse, black, & white or sometimes combinations of these have been my most productive, whether with flies or with lures. Not to say others haven't, and I use many colors but these 3 have worked well more times than not. However, as you've indicated, color is just one factor, so when you tie a baitfish pattern, keep in mind there are other factors besides color that make a fly successful.

 

Plus, in all these years I've learned that any fly will catch some fish, no matter how ugly we think it is. The fish we chase will always be the final judge of a flies success.