You start with deductive reasoning, when that fails – you’re getting close to a solution

Logic and fishing is an uncomfortable pairing in the same sentence, but it gives you someplace to start.

I need a small olive clam whose shell is about the size of the nail on your index finger, light enough to cast with a #5 line, heavy enough to sink to the bottom quickly, resembles a clam in profile (loosely) – and has some small motion if lifted and moved.

Clams aren’t known for hopping away from your Linguini, so motion may not be a realistic factor. I’d like to have something move should I lift the fly out of the mud in front of a siphoning Carp, possibly drawing attention to the morsel.

The fly needs to be small (no larger than a #10) and drab, and the clam shell shouldn’t hinder hooking if possible.

The first that satisfies ALL of my requirements

Those are the requirements – and I’ve been mulling over solutions all week. I’m aiming to return to the feeding Carp I found on the Little Stinking, with a half dozen prototypes. Solving riddles is always a slow evolutionary process, and I don’t expect to be rewarded – at best I’m thinking I might eliminate some of the variables.

I’m an impressionist fly tier, convinced that knotted legs and precise imitation catch fishermen and not fish, and that credo imbues all the flies I invent. *

I’m leaning towards Prototype #19 (pictured above) – which uses the Bernat Boa fringe to give me an Olive cone shape that hides a 4mm gunmetal bead. The bead sinks the fly and prevents the yarn from altering it’s cone shape – keeping it flared and simulating the desired profile.

Both John Paul Lipton and John Montana put great store in the San Juan Worm, and Roughfisher’s “Clam Before the Storm” uses a similar “San Juan” style of fleshy foot – so I added that to give it a bit of movement.

With a three day weekend on the horizon this’ll give me a chance to start discarding what doesn’t work – and get me closer to what might.

* Invent = I’ve never tied it, I’ve never seen anyone tie it, it hasn’t appeared in any book, periodical, or magazine – but that doesn’t mean some fellow 100 years ago didn’t tie it first.

6 thoughts on “You start with deductive reasoning, when that fails – you’re getting close to a solution

  1. Trout Underground

    It’s never pretty when a good fly tying mind goes wholly over the edge.

    If the bastards won’t eat a Hare’s Ear, well then we’ll simply lower their water quality until they do…

  2. Jean-Paul Lipton

    Credit for the clam before the storm pattern goes to Craig Matthew’s original bonefish pattern, and to Matt Klara at sexyloops.com for their adaptation of the fly.

    I’ve only fished it once but I’ll need to give it a fair shot before making the call on it. Good luck with that pattern KB, you’ll need it. Of course if it works, I’ll be stealing it from ya.

  3. Steve

    Keep us posted on the results O.K.?
    I don’t know squat about carp but,
    your pictured proto-type looks like it would be deadly for a particular estuarial sea-trout spot I’ve been trying to crack for a while.

  4. john montana

    I’ll take a dozen…seriously. You are onto something here. The clam before the storm was a bust, mainly because the clams are never open whena carp finds them. I like what you’ve got here…the waters I fish are littered with broken clam shells, and coincidentally loaded with fat carp.

  5. KBarton10

    Water tests give it a “thumbs up” – sinks about 6-8″ per second and keeps it’s shape when dormant on the bottom. It looks good so far – we’ll see how the fish percieve it.

Comments are closed.