Mosquito

Discussion in 'Patterns' started by Rory McMahon, Feb 21, 2006.

  1. Rory McMahon Active Member

    Posts: 1,615
    lynnwood
    Ratings: +2 / 0
    Can anyone give me a good mosquito recipe. I googled it and couldn't find any actual fly recipes. Just recipes about keeping mosquitos away.

    Thanx
    T990
  2. mr trout Trevor Hutton

    Posts: 545
    Yakima, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    One simple tie is to rub off all the fibers from a piece of peocock herl with an eraser, then use that as a body with a couple wrapps of grizzly hackle and a small wing of poly yarn or CDC. Simple, but it works.
  3. steve s Member

    Posts: 442
    Issaquah, Washington
    Ratings: +4 / 0
    tail: Grizzly hackle fibers
    body: Moose hair, one dark one light, or two hackle quills, white and black
    wing: down wing of grizzly hackle tips
    hackle: grizzly

    It's tied like a standard dry fly but with the wing tied down over the body like a caddis.

    Hope this helps,

    Steve S
  4. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,136
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,225 / 0
    I have a couple of favorite little lakes in the foothills and have discovered over the years that each has a different dry pattern that works best. On one, it's a regular Adams. I've had an Adams chewed so hard by literally dozens of fish in an afternoon that it's barely recognizable a fly, much less an Adams.

    On the other lake just a few miles away an Adams will barely draw yawns from the resident cutts and brookies. But tie on a mosquito in size 14 or 16 and the fish go nuts. The biggest fish I've ever taken from it fell to a mosquito.

    Looking at the two patterns side by side, they don't appear to be that different, mainly the herl body on the mosquito and the additional brown hackle on the Adams. But their differing success on such otherwise similar waters points out a huge difference between the way fish and fishermen perceive flies.

    I read somewhere that a West Yellowstone fly shop owner once quipped that a half dozen or so patterns are all you really need to catch fish. Then he gestured to the hundreds of other patterns in his huge shop and said, "The rest are here to catch fishermen."

    K
  5. chadk Be the guide...

    Posts: 5,057
    Snohomish, WA.
    Ratings: +41 / 0
    Speaking of chewed up flies...

    Has anyone else experience this where you start out with a fly (I distinctly remember doing this with both a Royal Wolff and a small black woolly bugger) and at first it is hard to get a hit. Then things start warming up (as in getting hits) and then eventually you can hardly keep them off. Eventually the fly is so chewed up that you can't really tell what the original pattern was, but you won't change it because it is working so well.

    Do you think this is because:
    a) the 'perfectly' tied pattern isn't as tasty looking to a fish as it is to the fisherman
    b) it is just a matter of timing - the fish were not as active, and then the bite turned on - pattern in this case isn't a big factor as long as it is 'close'
    c) a ragged and torn up fly complete with dangling thread is just more vulnerable looking and intices more strikes
    d) all of the above
    e) none of the above
  6. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,136
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,225 / 0
    f) Fish are widely reported to have a sense of smell that's several hundred times more sensitive than ours. As such they rely on their sense of smell to determine whether possible food smells, well, 'fishy' and thus should be avoided as a potential danger instead of calories.

    A 'veteran' fly that's caught a fish has picked up some of that fish's smell which seems to reassure subsequent fish that it's OK to eat and not dangerous. Whenever possible, I'll start out with a veteran fly instead of a virgin one as I believe they're more effective at putting me into fish.

    K
  7. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,136
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,225 / 0
    Here's the first one I Googled up: http://www.flyfishingconnection.com/patterns/flies/145/Mosquito/

    I think when you used the word 'recipe' you confused Google. Try using 'fly pattern' in addition to the fly name instead.

    K
  8. chadk Be the guide...

    Posts: 5,057
    Snohomish, WA.
    Ratings: +41 / 0
    How could I forget the fish slime\blood theory?? Not sure how well that would work with dry fly fishing though...

    I'll add that to the list. But in general, I'm leaning toward "all the above".

    Next time I'm in that situation, I'll test it out and see what happens. I'll have a second rod rigged up with a brand new fly. Once the fish start going crazy for the first fly and it is pretty well hammered but still catching them well, I'll switch to the 'virgin' fly of the same original pattern. (no touching the fly with my fish slimed fingers)

    If the fish keep nailing the new fly at the same rate as the tattered and slimed fly - we can chalk it up to 'dinner time' as apposed to what the fly looked like or smelled like. If the fish start shying away from it right away, I can purposely rough it up and see if that triggers strikes. If that still does not work, I'll pop that original 'smelly' fly back in - if they immediately take it, then we can assume the 'fish slime' theory is the winner.

    Come to think of it kent - I know just the time and place to try this and you are invited to help in this rigorous study. After all - it's for the kids... Or whatever ;)
  9. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,136
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,225 / 0
    Sign me up!

    K
  10. cabezon Sculpin Enterprises

    Posts: 1,713
    Olympia, WA
    Ratings: +237 / 0
    Hmmmmm. I have my doubts about both the likelihood of the "sense of smell theory" and the "attractiveness of fish slime" theories. First, especially in streams, as fish rise from their holding spots to strike at a fly, they are very unlikely to be streamline carrying any odor from your fly; besides, how far to you think that this chemical signal will disperse in the short distance of a drift. Could it be useful in short-distance decisions, leading to refusals?? Maybe, but I'm more convinced that the decision at that point is visual, not chemical.

    Second, cyprinids (minnows, carp, goldfish) among other fishes have special cells under their skin that release a chemical alarm substance when disturbed. Research with intertidal sculpins has also demonstrated that skin extracts can change fish behavior. Multiple experiments have demonstrated that members of the same fish species and sometimes even unrelated species that may also be vulnerable can detect this alarm substance and take evasive action - tighter schooling, heading for cover, etc. Interestingly, there is evidence that larger predators (fish and predatory beetles) are attracted to the area where there is alarm substance. One hypothesis is that this is the burgler alarm effect; the release of alarm substance from a wounded minnow will attract in a bigger predator to drive off/eat whatever it was that attacked the cyprinid in the first place.

    I think that chewed flied often sit flusher in the surface film, creating a more attractive visual profile. Especially with modern hackles, dry flies often perch well off the water. If I'm a trout thinking that this bug may be food, I'll probably ignore it because its probably about to fly off before I can get to it. A bug sitting in the film is either in trouble or still early enough in the emerging process to be there when I rise from my holding position.

    Just my attempts to think like a fish,

    Steve
  11. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,136
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,225 / 0
    On the contrary, there is plenty of evidence to support the notion that fish do indeed smell. After all, that's why shark repellent works.

    But that aside, try this simple test: before tying on a fly, rub a liberal amount of suntan lotion on your hands and then all over your face and arms. Next, without washing your hands, pick out and tie on a fly. The minute amount of paba-whatever-it-is in suntan lotion you've introduced to the fly acts as reverse fish magnet and will act as a deterrant to any potential takers.

    The reverse effect is also why many gear fishers will spray a little WD-40 on their hardware before fishing for steelhead or salmon. Or why a little shrimp oil acts like bait and thus is banned on many FF only streams.

    My point here is not that a veteran fly attracts a fish, but that it seems to mask the human or foreign scent that can so easily find its way onto the fly. Not being aware of this and being careful with the scents we introduce to a fly is IMHO one of the main reasons some folks catch fewer fish than others.

    To that point, there's plenty in the literature to support the notion that women frequently outfish men. Why? Because women perspire less than men and their perspiration contains lesser quantities of several chemicals that are also proven fish repellents.

    That's why we wily veterans always advise newbies to urinate on their hands immediately before tying on their fly as a sure-fire way to eliminate unwanted scents.

    As primarily a lake fisherman, I've found that while veteran dry flies seem to work better than virgins, I notice the effect much more on nymphs or streamers where the fy is presented at the fish's level and they have a more leisurely opportunity to inspect it before comitting to ingesting.

    K
  12. Tony Tony

    Posts: 501
    Lynnwood Wa
    Ratings: +54 / 0
    I pretty much agree with the scent theory but I don't think it has much to do with fishing drys. I was fishing a small lake once having just a record day on drys using a royal coachman and the fly I was using pretty much was destroyed the floss had been torn from many fish teeth and was hanging off so I put on a new one and started getting refusals so I tied the old one back on and the fish went back to just slamming it, I'm pretty sure that the more messed up fly looked much more like an emerger with stuff hanging off and sort of veiling around when on the water which was just buggier looking than the new one was. I also think that some times a new fly will work better than an old one when you are fishing them deep, I've had fish stop hitting a bugger and when I put on a new one start up again, I think it has something to do with the way the materials will hold air better when first used but thats just a theory, I believe the more impressionistic a fly becomes from being torn up the wider range of things it will imitate.
  13. Tony Tony

    Posts: 501
    Lynnwood Wa
    Ratings: +54 / 0
    I pretty much agree with the scent theory but I don't think it has much to do with fishing drys. I was fishing a small lake once having just a record day on drys using a royal coachman and the fly I was using pretty much was destroyed the floss had been torn from many fish teeth and was hanging off so I put on a new one and started getting refusals so I tied the old one back on and the fish went back to just slamming it, I'm pretty sure that the more messed up fly looked much more like an emerger with stuff hanging off and sort of veiling around when on the water which was just buggier looking than the new one was. I also think that some times a new fly will work better than an old one when you are fishing them deep, I've had fish stop hitting a bugger and when I put on a new one start up again, I think it has something to do with the way the materials will hold air better when first used but thats just a theory, I believe the more impressionistic a fly becomes from being torn up the wider range of things it will imitate.
    tony