FLYMPH FORUM

Forum members (Ray Tucker, Bob Dietz, Chris Stewart, etc) have noticed that some of Pete Hidy's flies were photographed with the tippet still in the eye, tied with the Turle knot. Dad called it the Turtle Knot, and illustrated it in his Sports Illustrated Book of Wet Fly Fishing (1961). Bob pointed out that the Turle knot held better with gut, and was less secure with nylon tippet. But Chris reports that his Dad, same generation as mine, only used the Turle knot, and only used nylon leaders. In the text below scanned from the Sports Illustrate book, Pete acknowledges the risk, suggesting tucking the tip back through the loop a second time as insurance. This is not shown in the illustration, unfortunately.



As most of you know, Pete liked Up-Eye hooks. The reason was that with Turtle Knot, the fly would tend to drop its tail and point its eye toward the surface. Pete thought this body language of a fly about to escape from the water excited the fish. This knot is also relatively easy to tie, being nothing more than a common Slip Knot.

Interesting and helpful. I believe I will give this a try next time out.

I tried this knot a couple of times at the vise. Pretty easy. Think I'll give it a try. Only fishing here right now is for Snow Sharks.

Rene Harrop and Mike Lawson showed me this knot in January 1974. They indeed brought the end through the loop a second time and referred to it as a double turle knot. I have used this knot almost exclusively for all flies since then and (this is going to sound like a fisherman) can not remember this knot ever failing me in the last 40 years.

Rod

I use both the Improved Clinch Knot and the Turle Knot. I first started using the Turle when I began steelhead fishing. Consequently, often using up eye hooks. I would tie on a turle knot then add a riffle hitch dependent on the water. Never had any problem with them. When I got into flymph fishing and using up eye hooks I just naturally used the turle knot. I still use it today but only on up eye hooks. I use the improved clinch for all others. I have never used a riffle hitch on a trout fly though, don't know why. Might have to try it out. Anyone add this to the turle knot for trout flies?

Be careful with the Turle (Turtle) knot when using either monofilament or fluorocarbon.....it is highly prone to slipping.
This knot was developed by a Major Turle, a contemporary of Halford and an early dry fly pioneer, to attach flies to gut points, we would call them tippets today. Gut is much less prone to slipping than modern materials and it only takes a turn or two to form a secure knot on a hook eye whereas mono or fluoro need more turns.

The most secure knot for a through-the-eye-and-around-the-head connection with contemporary tippets is the Harvey Knot. Lefty Kreh says it tests 100% and I've used it, (when I'm not too lazy to tie it!) for many years. I don't believe I have ever had one fail, something I can't claim for any other knot. http://www.netknots.com/fishing_knots/h ... y-fly-knot

The up-eye hook was developed as an aid to tying early dry flies. It was simply easier to drop the loops of the finishing knot of silk over the up-eye than a down eye. The style was so prevalent that for decades dry flies were tied on up-eyes and wets were put on down-eyes and it became axiomatic for the angler or tier to choose his flies or hooks based on the position of the eye.

Carl,

I sometimes fish a Riffling Hitch when night fishing for trout. It can be deadly, and gives a different look/presentation options.

Best,

Tim

Greenwell wrote:The up-eye hook was developed as an aid to tying early dry flies. It was simply easier to drop the loops of the finishing knot of silk over the up-eye than a down eye. The style was so prevalent that for decades dry flies were tied on up-eyes and wets were put on down-eyes and it became axiomatic for the angler or tier to choose his flies or hooks based on the position of the eye.

John and others, I have been thinking about this comment all weekend and around the edges of what I've been doing in the house, I find myself grabbing reference books from the 1880's through current authors. I have a couple of questions. There is an overlap apparently with the transition from eyeless hooks to eyed hooks. Is there a clear moment when eyed hooks became prominent?

More interesting to me is the notion that up eyed hooks were designated for dries and down eyed hooks for wets. There is some inconsistency here as well in the reference books (or at least the representative flies illustrated), but the best reference that I found to illustrate this period in my collection is Bob Church's Guide to Trout Flies (Wiltshire, 1987). As he presents a broad spectrum of UK flies, these depict the historic patterns in the way you've described - up eyed for dries, down eyed for wets. Of course as he presents more contemporary flies, they are almost exclusively down eyed, but it's still hard to decipher a clear period when this idea was prevalent, which ever knot you choose. Thanks for expanding my understanding of the history of hook design. I've been more of a progressive all my tying life insisting that the hooks that are right for my flies in my water are contemporary. But the background of the irons is really interesting, especially in trying to piece together the fly designs from decade to decade and water to water.

w

Short answer: there was no clear delineation but it's use was excellarated by the advancement of dry fly techniques.
I'm away from my resources this week. I do know that Wade (1840's) pictured flies on eyed hooks. The issue was more about tippet, gut, horsehair, than lack of understanding of the principles involved.
Many felt that a wet fly to gut swam better whereas a dry fly would "crack off" due to repeated false casting if tied to a blind hook.

Howdy All;

In my copy of "The Masters on the Nymph" 1979 1st ed.
in the lower Left corner of pg. 133 (the Dave Whitlock
chapter), he (Dave), shows the Turle Knot with the extra
loop and shows it to be satisfactory for Up eye and Down
eye but, not so good for straight eye.
Perhaps someone with a scanner and a copy could post the page?

hank