Yorkshire Spider (John Shaner's Collection)

[crazy4oldcars]

Maybe a matter of color preference? It matches the hackle remarkably well.
For some reason, probably drummed into me over at FAOL, I had it in my mind that it was taboo to trim the hackle. That the untrimmed ends were more "natural", and therefore to be preferred.
I can see it being a measure of tier's skill, but, looking at it logically, I have a hard time imagining the fish having an opinion. Thoughts for the more experienced fisher-folk?

Kirk

[Mataura mayfly]

Okay, I am going to stick my head out.... totally willing to have it cut off.

Are we sure the dubbing is wool. or rather sheep wool? If it were pigs "wool" (a popular dressing material and dyed in many shades- often used in the era, but more usually in Salmon & Sea Trout dressings), then this pattern could be mistaken for a February Red- or at least a variation?
Now if it were not wool, but fur, in particular the fur from the ear of a Fox, then we may be looking at a March Brown variant?

On the clipped/cut to length hackle- very acceptable in the day. Indeed I have diagram reference to it in a book (somewhere) as to just how and when to do so.
If one was to use a clipped hackle versus a smaller hackle more suited to the hook size, the clipped version would give a stiffer more robust hackle compared to the other. Advantages would be less of a tendency to collapse and cloak the body of the fly thus giving a better (?) representation of true legs and wing, a stronger more robust fibre less likely to be shredded by small trout teeth and a fly perhaps better suited to more turbulent waters?

[Greenwell]

When I put on my Spider Program, the most asked question is about hackle length. A good fly tier strives for consistency in their finished product so over the years any number of formulas have been put forward to help achieve that goal. There's only one problem and that's related to the hook. It was perhaps a bit easier when there were fewer hook models available but today with literately hundreds of fly hook models and sizes available it's pretty hard to say that a hackle should be "twice the length of the hook gap" or some such measure. Unless the hook model and size is clearly stated that formula really means very little.

When I show people these original flies they almost always comment on the longer hackle and ask why the early tiers preferred that length. Actually, the answer is easily found in the older books and anyone having access to either the originals or reprints will be able to find it easily. Hackles were meant to represent wings and not legs, or other appendages, and wings are longer than legs. The premise that wings are represented by one material and legs by another goes back before Halford, but it was he, (Halford) in his writings, who made that the standard by which we are still burdened today. In the classic works on Spiders the patterns will often read something like "winged with the feather from a partridge back". This doesn't mean that the feather was rolled and tied on in the classic winging style but rather turned as a hackle.

From studying old flies I now tend to make the hackles longer than I had in the past. The flies are very effective, at least as much so as shorter hackled flies, and besides I really like the looks of them!

Eric, I think the wool body on this fly was an attempt to give a buggier, more translucent look to the dressing. I've long used teased out and dubbed crewel wool on my wets and have found it makes a great looking, as well as durable fly.

[Mataura mayfly]

Has nobody else noticed the "addition" in front of the hackle of this fly?
There is a turn of Peacock herl immediately in front of the the hackle. This (to me) raises another question.
Somewhere I have seen a written list of Pritt dressings in which the Brown Watchet (Little Brown Dun) is listed above the Orange Partridge dressing.
Brown Watchet calls for a #1 hook, wings hackled with a well dappled feather from a Partridge's back, body- orange silk, head- peacock herl.
The Orange Partridge dressing calls for a #1 hook, wings hackled as above and body of orange silk.

So apart from the dubbing addition of the photographed fly, the two dressings are basically the same fly, but for the Peacock herl head of the Brown Watchet.....

[swellcat]

If a new tyer posted this fly and asked for candid critique, what would you say?
---

[redietz]

Has nobody else noticed the "addition" in front of the hackle of this fly?

No, I hadn't actually noticed. It looks too much like a shadow, although after staring at the photo for several minute, I've convinced myself that you're right.

I'd like to know more about the tyer. I can't help but noticing the middle name of "Walbran". Was he related somehow to F.M. Walbran? Was he from the Wharfedale or some other part of Yorkshire?

If a new tyer posted this fly and asked for candid critique, what would you say?

Noting that it was tied blind eye and probably "in hand", I would say "well done!"

[Greenwell]

"If a new tyer posted this fly and asked for candid critique, what would you say?"

What a great question! And not all that easy to answer.............but in my opinion this is a beautifully dressed fly and if a beginner showed it to me I'd say he had the makings of an expert.

Viewed critically, we must understand the actual size of the fly, about modern size 18, and it would take a very accomplished tier to dress it this neatly on such a small hook. Then, again taking into account the size, remember that it's dressed with silk which is much thicker than many modern threads. Look closely at the incredible neatness of the wraps; there's not a superfluous or wasted turn. There is also a tiny wrap of peacock hearl at the head, a common design element in many early Spiders and damn hard to do even on an eyed hook. Everything taken added up, construction-wise this is the work of a master fly dresser.

I think I know what you're saying though. At first glance the fly looks just a bit lazy with it's trimmed and somewhat wild hackle, something we might expect from a novice tier. But again we need to look at it in the context of the time it was tied. As I posted earlier, trimming hackle was common for various reasons. There is also purpose to disheveled hackle. In the water it would have been much more mobile and life-like and probably more effective than a neater hackle. These are pragmatic flies, tied to fish with rather than to impress one's buddies and that's why I find them so compelling.

Over the years my measure of what constitutes "good" fly tying has changed dramatically. First and foremost, I'm an angler and therefore I look at flies with an angler's eye. How is a particular fly going to fish? Is it attractive to the trout? Is it durable? Easily repeatable and simple to tie? Are the materials common and accessible? It's easy to be impressed with hyper-neat flies, not a wrap out of place and everything measured and tidy, (an artist friend calls such flies "wooden") tied for aesthetics and not for the river. But what interests me now is more often something much less perfect. I want to try to understand the mental and mechanical processes that go into a successful "fishing" fly, how the tier's experience on the water brought him to a certain conclusion of style and construction. To me, that is much more interesting than just pretty combinations of color and texture. But of course this is just my opinion, others' may disagree and certainly have just as much right to their take on what constitutes "good" fly tying.

We'll be posting some more interesting old patterns soon and I hope you'll enjoy looking at them, and I also hope they'll foment some more discussion!

[Greenwell]

"I'd like to know more about the tyer. I can't help but noticing the middle name of "Walbran". Was he related somehow to F.M. Walbran? Was he from the Wharfedale or some other part of Yorkshire?"

I'll be posting a bit more on Mr. Cooper as we go along. There will be a brief biography of him included in Rob Smith's new book "The North Country Fly: Yorkshire's Soft Hackle Tradition", Published by Coch-Y-Bonddu Books and due out in February. I'll ask Rob if I can post it here.

HWC was a fixture in the Yorkshire dales and a noted collector of angling books and manuscripts, as well an an expert fly dresser. Despite his middle name he wasn't related to Francis "Max" Walbran.

I have an original copy of his obituary and will see if I can put it into a postable form.

[William Anderson]

John, these posts come to the heart of what I like so much about fishing and tying complimented by the history. There are not many historic flies that I find all that interesting on their own, other than the most practical fishing flies that we all seem to enjoy here. The spiders, flymphs and the Skues and Sawyer nymphs always fascinate me. Your comments on "good flies" resonates as well, as I continue to make adjustments to my own flies. I wish I could say that my preferences have been informed more by my time on the water, but that's only partly accurate. Lacking the days on the water of some of you I have to rely on your experience as a starting place and test the results for myself. Fortunately with this group I feel like I've been given the ball on the 5 yard line and offered help even then. It's much appreciated.

My thoughts are typical, what does it represent?, how was it presented and when? How does it apply to my time on the water this next season and my time at the bench this winter? (these are not questions, just rhetorical musings)

I'm looking forward to seeing the flies and hearing the history, as well as the technical aspects of these flies from the Cooper wallet. Thanks for sharing these.

[Mataura mayfly]

No, I hadn't actually noticed. It looks too much like a shadow, although after staring at the photo for several minute, I've convinced myself that you're right.

I must admit to missing it first viewing.
The way Ray has loaded the photo, it is possible to "click" on the photograph and open it in another window, you can then expand it to full screen, or hold down the control button on the keyboard and press the + button to enlarge or zoom. Then you can really appreciate the tidy form of the tie and wonder at the execution of it being tied "in hand"!

This also gives you a better view of the hackle feather stem (or what looks to be) coming out at around 7 o'clock if looking from the front. Which leads me to......

John, do you think the hackle feather was tied in by the tip or the butt?
If that is the stem left in place I am seeing, it is still a pretty fine feather- but you do say modern #18, so it would have to be, but do you think the trimming of the hackle was done before wrapping or after the fly was completed?