Attractors? (What and Why?)

[Freddo 0]

Hi All,

 

With all there is to learn about patterns for flies, I'm trying to make sense of the ins and outs of the what's and why's of what are titled" "Attractors" out here in the fly tying realms.

 

Any bites (pardon the pun please)!

 

Thanks in advance!

[YosemiteSam 0]

Attractors, from my understanding, are patterns that are not intended to "match the hatch". They are fished to just "attract" a bite as opposed to imitating any particular insect.

I think they're just supposed to look like any ol' bug that a fish might like.

[FlaFly 0]

What Sam said is about as good a def as I can find. Unfortunately what is or isn't an attractor depends on who is naming it. If you look at Orvis' catalog of "attractors" there are lots of flies there that clearly are simulating a caddis or a mayfly, etc. Not exactly matching a specific mayfly, but still trying to simulate an insect. That is as opposed to just being something flashy or noisy or otherwise "attractive".

[mikechell 0]

I call one of my patterns a "Panfish Attractor" ..

because it seems to draw strikes when nothing else is working. It's my go to fly at the moment.

 

I believe "Attractors" are generic looking flies. They might look like a hopper, or a mayfly, or some other insect, but they are bigger, the wrong color anything that would make it "stand out" from the native prey. A wooly bugger could be called a attractor pattern, because it resembles everything.

On the bottom, it could be a hellgramite, crayfish, large nymph ... swimming it looks like a bait fish, or a swimming nymph .. it's generic "food".

 

I could be wrong. According to some, I AM ... always.

[Freddo 0]

Thanks to all of you for the insight - I have a better understanding now and it makes sense!

[bellevue.chartreuse.trout 0]

I think of attractors as flies that somehow trigger a response. If it's imitative or not - just something that a fish will respond to by checking it out by sucking it into it's mouth.

 

BCT

[crazy4oldcars 0]

They are the fly equivalent to that kid in the neighborhood that, everytime you see him, you want to beat him with a stick.

 

Yeah, like that. LOL

 

As the others said, they are trigger flies that don't really look like anything natural, but still get bitten. Think fire tiger spinners and stick baits.

 

Kirk

[Freddo 0]

Hi and thankd for the replies!

 

@ BCT: Our goldfish must think the aquarium gravel are "attractor" flies. That fish is always popping gravel in his mouth and spitting it out.

 

@ Kirk: I totally understand the trigger thing.

 

You all are great and thanks for the help. Now I'm clear on this term.

[SilverCreek 0]

Attractor, imitator, and impressionistic are 3 styles of flies.

 

Attractors don't look like any specific food nor do they give the impression of a specific food item. The Royal Wullf and Royal Trude are the prototypes of attractor dry flies.

 

 

 

 

The Arizona Prince would be an attractor nymph

 

 

 

 

Impressionistic are the flies that give the impression of life, mainly through movement. I think of the soft hackle flies as prototypical impresionistic wet flies.

 

 

The royal Coachman wet would be the attractor wet fly.

 

[bellevue.chartreuse.trout 0]

Well, a fish does use it's mouth to check things out eh? I don't think a goldfish is so much attracted to using it's mouth to check out the gravel at the bottom of the tank as much as perhaps it's just looking for scraps of leftover food? So I don't 'think' that they are being 'triggered' when they are checking out the gravel.......... maybe...

 

BCT

[utyer 0]

Just like toddlers pick things up, and put them in their mouths, fish do the same. Since they don't have hands, the only way to investigate is to grab it with the mouth.

 

Attractor patterns play to the curious nature of a fish. If something isn't an immediate threat, a fish will often want to investigate something to see if they can eat it. All the attractor patterns do is mimic something a fish "might" be able to eat. It has the same form and profile and coloration as some item a fish could eat. Those attractor patterns that have been successful, find their way into our fly boxes.

[Kirk Dietrich 0]

Silver Creek,

 

What would a Wooly Buggar be considered?

 

Kirk

[Freddo 0]

@BCT: I was joking about the goldfish thinking teh gravel was attracting but believe, like you, that it's getting food off of it of near it.

 

I suppose now this is all clear to me - thanks again all!

[Adam Saarinen 0]

If it has a special colour, a special shape or a special movement that trigers the fish, then i consider it an attractor paturn! The royal trude is a hugely famous attractor paturn! Wemon also get dressed up in attractor paturns!

[SilverCreek 0]

Silver Creek,

 

What would a Wooly Buggar be considered?

 

Kirk

 

I would put it in the impressionistic category since it can be taken for a baitfish, a leech, a crawdad, etc. It uses motion but it also puts out sonic waves so that sonic signature can be thought of as attraction or another "impressionic" characteristic of imitating a characteristic of a living bait.