Jump to content
Fly Tying
Obi

Bob Wayatt's DHE ?

Recommended Posts

Dears,

 

I am just comming back from a nice fishing trip. We fished with nymphs for most of the time, but then there was this occasion when some trout started feed on insects from the surface. From the rise-form, you could tell the fish were feeding on emergers.........

 

I picked up one of the new emerger-patterns that I had in my box just to give it a try: Bob Wayatt's Deer Hair Emerger (DHE). It's a really nice emerger-pattern, an easy-tye, and looks very "catchy".

 

The thing was: No matter what and how much floatant I used (I had three different choices!), the fly simply drowned after one or two casts. I tied it according to the Video on youtube (DHE 2.0) and used elk hair for the wing. The floatant was applied to the wing- and thorax-section, but I never got the fly floating well enough to last for more than two casts.

 

I don't get what happened .......... could somebody clue me in, plz?

 

 

Cheers,

 

Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Obi, A couple of things spring to mind. The recipe calls for deer hair not elk. Elk is a more solid hair and will not be as buoyant. also what hook did you use. Many grub hooks are just too heavy for this pattern.

What dubbing did you use for the thorax? That can make a difference.

 

Cheers,

C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the same problem with a similar pattern. It's maddening as hell to have a two-cast fly.

 

I'm looking closely at my choice of hook, and I've even gone so far as to test my synthetic dubbing to see

which ones actually float and which ones sink. Some that were labeled 'floating' don't.

 

Crackaig's great tip on using deer hair will be a great starting point, never would have thought of that, kudos to you!

 

It's truly a challenge to build a fly that faithfully just floats, cast after cast.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Crackaig says the dubbing makes a big difference. In the pattern it calls for hare. That isn't inherently buoyant and if you dub it on heavy it will soon drag a fly down.

I prefer a good sheep wool, I use Leicester wool, again not buoyant if soaked but traps a good bit of air if loosely dubbed and often just needs a squeeze to have it floating again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It think the fly you tied is below.

 

There is a fundamental misunderstanding on how hollow hair adds flotation.

 

The classic error is that whatever is material that is ABOVE the water line CANNOT float the the fly! So if you are expecting the deer/elk hair to "float" the fly at the level of the base of the hair, it cannot. All that hair that is ABOVE the waterline is actaually adding MASS that is pushing the fly DOWN. ONLY when the deer/elk hair is SUBMERGED can the air in the air add floatation!

 

 

dhe_20.jpg

 

 

ONLY if the specific gravity of the fly is LESS than the specific gravity water (1.0) will the fly float. Surface tension can add extra floatation and that is what is needed. So make it a parachute emerger in the manner of Klinhammer to provide that support of surface tension, or add hackle in the manner of a Quigely Cripple without the hackle tail, or tie the backle around the base of the hai and then bring the hair forward and tie it down behind teh head as in a hacklestacker pattern,or add some foam at the thorax instead of dubbing.

 

 

http://www.manictackleproject.com/userfiles/image/Rene's%20Pleasnat%20Tail%20Klink.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

cripuse.jpg

 

 

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pattern is intended to float flush with the base of the hair as an emerger floats IN THE FILM with the body below and the hair above. . Any method that calls for trapping air in dubbing or some other haphazzard method that DOES NOT ALWAYS PUT THE FLOATATION LEVEL AT THE BASE OF THE DEER HAIR CANNOT give the fly the position in the film that is most effective. That is why Quigley and Hans VanKlinken designed thier flies with hackle in that location!

 

There is no need to reinvent the wheel if you want the fly to float at a set level. Parachute hackle is the solution.

 

 

klink3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silver.... I guess that means that Quigley is NOT down under, despite what the movie had us believe ☺ (or at least his fly isn't).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silver.... I guess that means that Quigley is NOT down under, despite what the movie had us believe ☺ (or at least his fly isn't).

 

I loved that movie. Maybe we should call the Wyatt the "Down Under"

 

http://www.flytyingforum.com/index.php?showtopic=74545&page=2&do=findComment&comment=559760

 

I strongly recommend Gary Borger’s, Fishing the Film. It is the single best resource for how to catch those trout feeding just under, in, or on the surface.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fishing-the-Film-/200574124980

I was a proof reader for the manuscript and didn't have the photos and illustrations that are in the final copy. I believe this book is the single best book on the subject. It will be a book you will not only read but study. It is that good.

It should be in every serious fly fisher's library. Don't just put it on the shelf, but read and study it, and use the techniques that Gary describes. It will make you a better fly fisher.

See the reviews from those who purchased the book.

http://www.amazon.com/Fishing-Film-Fly-Book-Series/product-reviews/0962839272/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?showViewpoints=1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silvercreek, that picture of the klink is very interesting, the fly appears to have cheeks such as those we tie on buzzers, makes a better hatching chronomid from below than I appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dears,

 

Thank you very much for your replies so far - some good points brought up!

 

@Silver: That's exactly the pattern I tied. I followed the tying recipe very strictly, except for the wing part. The dubbing is hare's ear, as indicated. And I used a TMC 2499 hook for the tye. It says "dry fly & nymph" on the box, but it also indicates that the hook is "2x heavy".....

 

It's probably correct that the elk hair is not as boyant as deer hair. That may have been the cause why the fly did not float good enough.

 

I was also thinking about a hackle-stacker- or paraloop-wing to cure the issue. In fact, almost all of the dry flies in my box are tyed paraloop-style, because I firmely believe that a paraloop-hackle has several adventages over a conventional hackle.

 

As far as the DHE, my intention was to give an alternative tying-method a try. I like Bob's point about "trout ammo" (i.e. Flies that are easy to tye and catch under most circumstances). Did aparently not work out for me so dar....

 

What puzzles me a bit are the different properties of differen hair-types. One tends to flare stronger than the other, the next one swims better than the next one, etc. mind-boggling stuff, that is....

 

Cheers,

 

Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more it flairs the more hollow, or really if it flairs it's hollow. This means more buoyant.

A winter red deer skin I find has the most hollow hair. Roe deer tends to be much more fur like and softer, great for muddler heads and lures but not for buoyancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charlie Craven has a great article about Deer vs Elk vs Moose vs Calf hair. Charlie makes the point that the hair NOT hollow in the same manner as a straw is hollow. The hair has interior compartments that are hollow like a cork so the inside is cellular with floatation compartments. The wall thickness and cellularity of the hair determines how much it can be compressed when tied and that determines how much the hair will flair.

 

Al Troth specified elk hair for his pattern, and he specifed hari that did not flair because the EHC is a DOWNWING pattern and a low wing profile is what he wanted. here are two EHC's.

 

This one is in a shadow box and is tied by Al Troth

 

EHCTiedbyAlTroth_zpsd7c422e6.png

 

 

This one is the kind that is commonly tied. The difference is obvious. Wrong type of hair.

 

04-0150_Elk_Hair_Caddis-olive.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silver, THANK YOU!

 

For years I have been saying that only the materials immersed in the water in the water can be buoyant . In fact this years new tying demo (I come up with a new one each year) is called "Dry flies don't float...Weight doesn't sink a nymph".

 

For a material to be buoyant it must displace more than its own weight of the fluid in which it is immersed. The surface is a barrier between two fluids, air and water. For a material which remains above the surface to assist in providing buoyancy, it must be lighter than the fluid in which it is immersed, ie. lighter than air.

 

Your photo of a Klinkhamer shows the other factor that we rely on more than anything to keep a fly on the surface, the meniscus. That Klinkhamer isn't buoyant in that position. If you removed the hackle it may still float but much lower, only becoming buoyant when enough of the wing post is immersed to make it buoyant. It is sitting on the surface because the hackle fibres are spreading the weight of the fly over the meniscus. This is how all traditional hackled dry flies, and many others, remain on the surface.The hook is usually enough to ensure that dry flies are not buoyant.

 

If a tier keeps this in mind when tying dry flies then silly designs, like using CdC as a wing post on parachutes, will be seen for what they are... Pointless.

 

Cheers,

C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note on bouyancy and immersion. There are products on the market today that make materials repel water. They become completely waterproof to the point that makes it impossible to penetrate the meniscus.

I know this doesn't mean the material can suspend a fly above the water, but it can keep a fly ON the water, not IN it

 

I've been using a product for a while (from a TV commercial, no less) that seems to be doing a great job of making anything i use it on completely water proof.

I'll post some pictures and maybe some videos when I get the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one thought a bit out of the box here. It is not necessarily a bad thing to have an emerger that hangs under the water surface. There are several insect species that emerge from their nymphal shucks on the bottom or just under the surface and swim to the surface so having a "winged" pre-emergent pattern might be good, Don't chuck your DHE just yet, it might be the ticket someday. Grease up your flyline and leader to help keep the fly floating in the film or just below and give it a few more false casts to dry it out a bit more in between drifts. If it sinks a little...oh well! Fish it any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...