Let's talk streamers

[ted4887]

I often find myself reading fly fishing articles on a regular basis. Especially the ones that involve something I'm passionate about. One of those things is becoming increasingly popular: streamer fishing. With the popularity on the rise, so too has the number of streamer patterns we all see get posted on forums, Facebook, blogs, etc etc.

I came across an interesting article the other day on Midcurrent. It was an interview with Kelly Galloup. I'm one of these guys that when people who know more than me have something to say, I listen up. Kelly is one of those guys. The most interesting part of the article, to me, was the part where he talked about streamer design.

Midcurrent: What do you think about the explosion of new streamer patterns today?

Kelly Galloup: In the business today, there are a lot of people tying streamers, but they’re just not testing them enough. I don’t just sit down and build something at random. I don’t tie a fly and put it on Facebook. I tie a fly and fish it for a year and refine it.

My streamers are designed to swim in a specific style. To move like something natural and living in the water column, a fly should accelerate in the rear end and stall in the front. This means materials in the head that slow the flow of water over the fly, and materials in the tail that speed it up. Those are the basic physics of successful streamer design.

Interesting, right?

How many of you streamer fanatics out there are guilty of designing a fly that you loved, and immediately putting photos up of it without so much as getting it wet? I know I am. Most of the people who read this ridiculous post of mine probably are too. And I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Don't get me wrong either. Most streamers people tie will catch fish. But can they be improved? How many of us have really put in the time to refine our own fly designs? Have you designed a fly that will trigger the big fish to bite? Or will the old, smart fish refuse it and let the younger and dumber fish take the bait?

Just something to think about while we wait for spring.

 

[Rip Tide]

I worked 8 years on one of my flies before I knew that I had it right.

There's a guy that used to have a regular column in Fly Tyer magazine. Maybe he still does, he's a well known tyer.
He'd publish a new fly every issue and most were untested. That drove me nutz.
His emphasis seemed to be on inventing a fly that would look good in a photo. Whether it could catch a fish or not didn't seem to matter.

 

[gt05254]

Many of the casting streamers I see posted, particularly on facebook, look sort of good with their long wings (extending a hook length and more beyond the bend of the hook), but in practice, would probably foul the tail around the bend on every cast. There is definitely a proportion that works; I suspect, like others above, that there are many streamer designers, but few streamer anglers.
Gary

 

[mridenour]

I have never posted a picture of any of my flies (except for a few that were in a fishes mouth but they weren't the subject of the photo). I'd gladly give my flies to someone else to use but I just hate to take pictures of them.

I don't tie a lot of patterns. Sometimes I try some weird one-offs to try down in the secret lake for bass but I mostly tie the same old flies over and over. There are a few new ones I want to learn this year because I enjoy fishing them but they will probably never get their picture taken either.

But where would the world be without weirdo's like me?

 

[bigjim5589]

I have the utmost respect for Kelly Galloup, and agree in spirit with what he's said, but this isn't nuclear physics we're talking about. IMO, most tiers with more than average experience can come up with a streamer that catches fish. With the materials that are available now, there's little that has not already been done in the way of fly design's. Many so called "new" patterns are rehashes of older ones with newer materials. Some may be improvements over older patterns, but I think when a tier such as Galloup ties a fly, he already has a good idea if it will catch fish or not. I know I do. Take Galloups Slump Buster for example, it's really nothing more than a bunny leech, with a few more materials added. The basic shape & use of rabbit is the same. Let's face it, how many ways can rabbit strips be lashed to a hook?

I certainly agree with proving a pattern when a tier has intentions of marketing it, and as has been said it annoys me a bit when I see so called "new" flies that are redone old patterns, and the tier is applying their name to it like they discovered something. However, that is part of the nature of commercial tying, as everyone expects these guys to be constantly coming up with something new.

I'll even go a step further here, as I used to sell flies of my own design, some of which are very similar to some of today's "new" patterns. You know, been there done that! I actually enjoy seeing such patterns being advertised & displayed in the popular catalogs because I can look at them & say, yeah, that will work! I know because I did something very similar 25 years ago! IMO, it's all good. Just like everything else in life tying comes full circle!

 

[brookfieldangler]

I have the utmost respect for Kelly Galloup, and agree in spirit with what he's said, but this isn't nuclear physics we're talking about. IMO, most tiers with more than average experience can come up with a streamer that catches fish. With the materials that are available now, there's little that has not already been done in the way of fly design's. Many so called "new" patterns are rehashes of older ones with newer materials. Some may be improvements over older patterns, but I think when a tier such as Galloup ties a fly, he already has a good idea if it will catch fish or not. I know I do. Take Galloups Slump Buster for example, it's really nothing more than a bunny leech, with a few more materials added. The basic shape & use of rabbit is the same. Let's face it, how many ways can rabbit strips be lashed to a hook?

I certainly agree with proving a pattern when a tier has intentions of marketing it, and as has been said it annoys me a bit when I see so called "new" flies that are redone old patterns, and the tier is applying their name to it like they discovered something. However, that is part of the nature of commercial tying, as everyone expects these guys to be constantly coming up with something new.

I'll even go a step further here, as I used to sell flies of my own design, some of which are very similar to some of today's "new" patterns. You know, been there done that! I actually enjoy seeing such patterns being advertised & displayed in the popular catalogs because I can look at them & say, yeah, that will work! I know because I did something very similar 25 years ago! IMO, it's all good. Just like everything else in life tying comes full circle!

It's as if you took the words directly from my head.

 

[Rip Tide]

Actually I've been giving streamer design a lot of thought recently so the conversation with Kelly Galloup in Midcurrent a couple of weeks ago was timely.

Here in southern NewEngland "everybody knows" that a good streamer is tied sparse. Often with barely more than a hint of body shape.
They cast easier, they sink easier and fish can't notice that the fly is a fraud if all that they see is a hint of life.

This is all common knowledge because of the influence of guys like Jack Gartside, Ray Bondorew and Kenny Abram and the fact that we tie and use tons of the Clouser Deep Minnow which Lefty describes as being "the width of a barn burner match".

Contrast that to the streamers of Mr Galloup which seem to have as much materials tied on the hook as will fit.
It goes against the whole concept of what we "know" here to be true.

Then a couple of weeks ago, somebody pointed out that just down the turnpike in Jersey you'll find lots of streamers covered with epoxy or silicone.
The influence of Bob Popovic and others of the Jersey shore "school"
All that's somewhat of a "foreign" concept as well (although less so).

These streamers all work, but there's regional differences that often seem to contradict each other.
Who's right? (well we are of course )

 

[ia_trouter]

New at this and spend much time on the net looking for new patterns. It definitely occurred to me many of them are random artistic creations. I have tried to stick with patterns I believe are tested, and often modify them slightly after I copy their base pattern. Not tying a large quantity of any particular streamer until I test it on my water seems prudent. But when I do, I'd rather have Hangtime Minnows in five different colors, rather than assume Bowen's color selection in his video is exactly what I need five copies of.

I really enjoy vids where the fly is actually shown in the water, and an explanation of why it is tied the way it is. Some of Galloups streamer actions are well demonstrated on the net. In the end, I really enjoy tying streamers, even knowing many of them will end up worthless.

And it definitely makes a BIG difference if you are retailing or tying for your personal use. I think retail was his sole point?

 

[trout trekker]

Hey Ted,

What’s the old saying? "Just because it’s new to you, doesn’t mean it’s new to anybody else. "
That might be a good title for a thread..

To answer your question. No. Every fly I tie, is just a compilation of the work of others. Every streamer that I have in bulk, is a pattern that I've been fishing with for a while. To many one night stand patterns out there to get gooey over any single new - untested pattern. They've got to earn their way into my boxes. One-offs don't get tied in bulk and I don't share one-offs with folks. So by my own definition, I've never invented or originated a single pattern. Even though there were many patterns in print that were being pounded out by fly tying firms who purported the contrary.

I’m not much of a poster of fly patterns, mostly for greedy reasons. I fish a lot in waters that will never make it to the fish rags or the tube and in a state with 38 million residents, I‘d like to keep it that way. So since I believe no pattern should go without at least a basic application narrative, that leaves me out.

As far as social media posters tossing up the latest thing that came from their vise.
1) Outside of a couple of bulletin boards, I spend almost no time with social media. So I’m happily ignorant of the moment to moment accomplishments from the “ Look Everybody ” generation.
2) as long as the poster is honest about it and states that it is a pattern or style they are playing around with etc, etc. then I don’t see the harm in a little show and tell.

Even here, you know the guys that post stuff constantly, that are just variations on variations and the only real change is that they've added the new & improved Peter Max inspired bead. Again, if they're just tying and posting for the fun of it, no problem.
Now if they try to serve up some Bologna about the pattern to the world with a tag that says this is the new, downtown, round the block, go get ‘em special. It usually doesn’t take long before the smell-a-vision from their Bologna makes its way to their visitors noses.

Todays tip: Those who’ve spent a good deal of time tying at fly shows, conclaves, clubs, or a few years working in a fly shop with a strong fly tying clientele, are aware that the phrase “ It’ll catch fish " has started more wars than treaties and tariffs ever have.


Thanks guys, TT

 

[Ard]

This is a good topic,

What little I could say could in no way compare to what a fellow with Mr. Galloup's experience puts forth. However, in defense of fly tiers everywhere I believe that we tie several types of streamer flies. We tie those that experience has demonstrated will catch fish, and we tie our flights of fancy. We may (because of the availability of an audience via the Internet) display a fly simply because it seems a thing of beauty at times. Whether or not a fellow will choose to actually tie a personal creation to the line and fish with it is a matter of personal choice.

I remember an article about 16 or 17 years ago in the Outdoor section of the Williamsport Sun Gazette newspaper. The story told was of a possible new state record brook trout that had been caught and summarily dressed & eaten by an unknown PA. angler. He had caught the behemoth in Clinton Counties Fishing Creek. This would be the same creek where Joe Humphries caught his famous 16 + pound brown trout on one of his streamers while night fishing.

The greatest moment of the story came when it was revealed; what the trout had been caught with. The angler had noticed fish eating something "white" so he had cut & pulled material from the tops of his white gym socks and wound it around a bait hook. The fish had been taken to a sporting shop in Mill Hall PA. where it had been measured and weighed. The shop owner contacted the Pennsylvania Fish Commission about the huge trout and in turn they contacted the angler because if they could examine the fish it would be the new state record given the measurements taken at the sport shop.

Unfortunately the fish had been taken to the anglers father in law who had cooked & eaten it by this time.

After reading the article I decided that darn near anything I turned off my vise was worth a few casts

That was a true story, the fish was nearly 8 pounds.

Ard

 

[brookfieldangler]

Good stuff, Ard.

I personally am turned off by this judgmental opinion of Mr. Galloup. If people want to tie a fly, post it on Facebook, and sell it...then who cares. Unless it's a total piece of visual diarrhea that would cause a fish to drop dead of a little fish heart attack, I can pretty much guarantee it would catch a fish.

I think that people over think this whole fishing thing and try to apply way to many exactness that "must be" in order for something to work.

To sum that up in a few words.....get a grip

 

[ted4887]

Brookfield,

I think the point I was attempting to make with this post has been lost somewhere in translation. Tends to happen when I make late night posts.

I don't think Galloup, or myself were trying to insinuate that people shouldn't tie streamers and put them on social media or bulletin boards or whatever. I think the idea that I was most interested in discussing was who takes the time to actually test their flies, and improve them past the original concept.

I wasn't trying to make a reference to anything commercial related, as I have absolutely zero interest in the business side of fly tying. But if you can make a few bucks off of your flies, than more power to you.

 

[brookfieldangler]

Honestly it wasn't anything you said...

It was the

"In the business today, there are a lot of people tying streamers, but they’re just not testing them enough. I don’t just sit down and build something at random. I don’t tie a fly and put it on Facebook. I tie a fly and fish it for a year and refine it"

part that bothered me.

It just wreaks of pretentiousness that turns so many people off to fly fishing. While I'm sure I'm not saying anything that people don't already know, people think fly fishermen are a bunch of snobs. Shocking, right? Unfortunately, statements like this from a guy who is kind of worshiped don't really help dispel that thought. I mean seriously...your supposed to fish a damn fly for an entire year before you post a picture on Facebook? Nonsense. I tie a fly that catches 3 musky the very next day and you can bet your ass that I'm gonna post a picture of it on Facebook and sell them to everyone who asked. Will I change it? You bet but the original still caught fish.

And for the record, I'm not a fly fishing snob, I just think I'm better because I catch fish on the fly.

 

[ted4887]

And for the record, I'm not a fly fishing snob, I just think I'm better because I catch fish on the fly.

I laughed, and secretly nodded my head in agreement.




And I know what you mean regarding that sentence.

But having met Kelly before, I don't think he meant to come off sounding pretentious.. He's not that kind of guy at all. He's the kind of guy that sits around with "the guys" and has a beer or two. In fact, he's a lot more humble than some people that I know. But, I can see what where your coming from. I just read it as his way of making a point about designing flies and the thought process that goes into it.

 

[calftail]

Nothing new ?

I came up with this style in 1975 and always considered it original. I tied this example in basic white but the possibilities are endless as far as configuring the fly. Maybe you can make out in the pics that the wing is tamed by mono loops...it is non-fouling even with the softest of materials you would use for wing construction. The more soft the material used the more the tail wiggles...good thing. Attention to how you make the loops will also give you the minnow shape that I think is so important for imitation, I make sure the mono is tied at the side of the shank and leaves room for the material expand in an open loop.

I have always used nylon materials because the fly when cast will literally plop below the surface without the need for a pull to put it under making the fly instantly look like a bait , not so with other materials I've used, which seem to float when delivered. Nylon is also very translucent underwater giving the fly a sense of life.

Early on I did add features like a splotch of red for gills, and parr marks were a plus, a hackle collar will pull a follower to strike in the cat and mouse game. I have recently played with eyes. It's an on going experiment but the fly flat out works for me.

....and you won't find a fly that cast like this one, you can put it out there.

 

[flycaster1977]

My opinion is pretty simple. I like kelly galloup and anyone else willing to take a chance on a new pattern. Mr galloup is in the business of catching fish. Literally. He sells flies, guides, and appears on television. When he fishes somewhere, 9 times outta ten he is showing the fish there something they havnt seen before. Lets face it, uneducated fish dont abound like they did at one time. Most have seen your selection. Mr galloup, in order to put clients on fish, or to just catch a higher percentage of fish, is literally showing them a different meal. Even a small modification to an already existing fly. Id say that every pro guide is doing the same kinda thing. I know that it spawns the so- called one night stand, but it also keeps folks in business. I also believe this is a cyclic behavior. As fish begin to get used to flashy they will gradually slip back to taking the "old" patterns.

Anyway, just my .02 and not trying to start anything.

 

[Ard]

"In the business today, there are a lot of people tying streamers, but they’re just not testing them enough. I don’t just sit down and build something at random. I don’t tie a fly and put it on Facebook. I tie a fly and fish it for a year and refine it"

I have to agree with the fact that after posting earlier I thought about that same line from the interview.

I said to my wife that "I would have answered the question much differently regardless of my being a famous name in the fishing world or not, of which I am the later. I would have said that I believe that to see so many people tying their own fanciful creations and displaying them was a wonderful thing. The very fact that so many people would even try to create a fly that must be fished actively as opposed to being drifted beneath a bobber is quite refreshing to see."

I would also have to acknowledge that (if I were a famous fly tier) without the Internet or Face Book and other forms of media many tens of thousands of people would never have heard of the flies he ties nor would they be trying to imitate them or create their own little something.

It would be nice if people who become famous for tying or fishing - casting, acknowledged that they understand that millions of people work in what could be called regular jobs. Those millions don't have every day to delve deeper into the world or business of the fly fishing industry. For all those truck drivers, office workers, factory workers and etc. being able to tie a fly to suit their own fancy and to post it to their face book page or a forum where a handful of people may kindly comment is their only recognition in this sport or craft. I think that if the internet allows any of us common hobbyist fly tiers to have our 15 minutes of fame, that is a wonderful thing.

I guess that's how I would have answered that question

 

[Rip Tide]

"In the business today, there are a lot of people tying streamers, but they’re just not testing them enough. I don’t just sit down and build something at random. I don’t tie a fly and put it on Facebook. I tie a fly and fish it for a year and refine it"

I happen to agree with Mr Galloup's statement 100%.
When you put a new fly out for the world to see, nobody expects a miracle, but a "new" fly needs to serve it's purpose better than what's already out there... at the very least in some small application. Otherwise what's the point ?

Gary LaFontaine's "Rollover Scud" is a perfect example. It doesn't look at all special, but because of the way the fly is weighted it sinks hook point up but when it's retrieved it flips to right side up. Hopefully triggering a strike.
This fly isn't for every application, but it's innovative and well thought out to fit a specific purpose.

Even flies that look great straight out of the vice often need some tweaking before they reach their full potential
Behold what an original Muddler Minnow looked like

 

[planettrout]

I think that one has to keep in mind that Kelly designed most of those big, gaudy patterns to toss in the Madison behind his Slide Inn. That river is loaded with sculpins of varying sizes and colors. In other locations I believe they just trigger the territorial instincts of very large Trout and probably, other species.

For streamers, in the Sierras, I tend to go with stuff that has stood the test of time...like this clipped coachman that was used by Frank Arcularius on his family ranch on the upper Owens River...



He taught Ray Bergman how to fish this pattern, in those waters and did the same for me in the early 80's:

Arcularius On The River - History


I study the baitfish that are prevalent in the rivers and lakes I fish up there and imitate what is present..Tom Loe of Sierra Drifters, designed his Spruce-A-Bou patterns specifically for the Lower Owens:



...and boy do they work...

I also use a lot of older Marabou,Matuka,Hornberg, Goblin and Perch Fry patterns on the Owens and East Walker Rivers. Kelly's sculpin streamers work well too, in that water...'cause there be those guys in there...


PT/TB

 

[bear 007]

I find it really interesting the variations in patterns from one part of the country to the other, what works in this region is quite different than what works out west, part of being a good fisherman is knowing what will or will not work in his particular area. Patterns are always evolving and changing, whether it be new materials or the availability of old materials, its bound to happen.

Do I test every Pattern before I post it, no, but I'm not selling them, I'm just having fun with them.