The String Thing

Ever had a friend hand you a fly and say, “When all else fails I tie this on, it normally catches them!” What’s that about, you ask? Why weren’t we using this fly in the first place?

Well the String Fly is that fly but it’s the one I tie on at the start of the day. It’s a fly I will fish on the Oreti, the Mataura, everywhere—I’ve even had terrific fishing for winter rainbows on the Tongariro! I fish it confidently and there are not too many reasons why fish would refuse its slim and simple shape. Constructed of only a few basic materials, it’s easy to tie and I only tie it in a single size. This is not a fly you will see sold in shops.

I recall a cool March day on the Mataura with Peter. I hadn’t used the String Fly recently as we had been blessed with some consistent dry fly action over the last month. Of course my friend’s arrival heralded some cooler weather and the fish were slow to rise. A nymph was more likely to get attention. Not surprisingly it worked on several trout we had in front of us, and then it continued to work really well when we fished blind in the riffles, and as a dropper when fishing to those lying deeper in the runs. Pete eventually asked to see the fly and was pleasantly surprised to see such a simple tie. “My kind of fly-tying,” he said.

More recently fished with a beadhead Hare’s Ear, the String Fly caught more than its share on the Mataura during the autumn hatches. Fished dead drift and with a nice slow draw to imitate emerging mayflies, the fly fishes well on the swing as a ‘flymph’ or wee wet as well. I really like the String Fly for its versatility and simplicity. I like it even more for the simple concepts it brings to fly tying and the reminder that fly design is simpler than we think.

The String Fly looks like everything and nothing at all. Just like the popular and very effective Hare’s Ear but with a simpler and perhaps deadlier design. Slim, segmented, brown—fished at the right depth with movement it has all the ingredients to be a first choice fly.

Twenty years ago when I met Dave Eccleston, he showed me the fly. His fishing partner was Jim Ring, who featured in Tony Orman’s Trout on a Nymph. Between them they had thousands of days on the rivers around Nelson and tens of thousands of trout landed. Jim and Dave were already well into the theories of supernormal release triggers in flies and had simplified their boxes down and down until they were doing 80% or more of their fishing with only two flies. The String Fly was one of those two.

Dave fished his flies in tandem nearly all of the time. Often with two different sizes and weights on, he would fish upstream without an indicator, maintaining contact with his flies at all times or looking for any tell-tale movements of the fish he could see. He always told me that when I fished with an indicator I missed too many strikes, and if my flies were falling and lifting in the water column then they were only behaving like something living. Maintaining contact would give me an earlier indication of a take and stripping the fly in would not spook the trout.

He told me that they had started with the Pheasant Tail but had found a fishing net with thread so close to the colour of the pheasant they were using, that they started tying with it. It proved much more durable. They eventually ignored the tail and the copper thorax for an underbody of lead and a sparse hen hackle for more life. A supernormal fly he always told me.

Supernormal release theory and caricature in fly design were based on Tinbergen’s work with sticklebacks. The idea has been written about extensively and I first saw it in Orman’s book. The idea was to incorporate and exaggerate features in the fly distinct to the prey item, and in some way the fly would then be taken in preference to the natural. Jim Ring’s idea was to create a super pattern for selective trout. However, when the fish didn’t give a damn Jim and Dave were almost exclusively using the String Fly and I believe it was because the fish had no reason to refuse this simple imitation.

No reason to refuse has been a catch cry for me ever since Bob Wyatt coined it. When a fish moves to what might be food in its sphere of drift, why would it refuse to take your fly if it looks and behaves approximately like an expected prey form? A slim brown shape, which appears alive, must be food? A trout cannot ignore too many prey forms in the drift without trying, otherwise it would go hungry! It may be that the String Fly has certain super release characteristics but I believe its success has more to do with its simple shape, and the idea that it is presented at the right depth to elicit a response, with no negative triggers to suggest an imposter.

Sawyer’s Pheasant Tail is a terrific fly. Made to sink and imitate the mayfly it has caught many fish around the world. However, a criticism of the PT is that catching several fish will soon destroy the delicate fibres. The String Fly takes the key colouration and behavior of the PT, combines it with the shape of the Sawyer Bug, adds movement and, hey presto, a first choice nymph.

I only tie this fly in size 14, weighted and unweighted, but Jim and Dave fished them from sizes 8 to 16. The reason I only tie it in size 14 is that I will use other flies with it to attract a fish’s attention (like a bead head) and to provide weight to fish at the correct depth. In The Artful Science of Trout Fishing, John Hayes states that the size prey form to start gaining a trout’s attention is about 12 mm. A size 14 is perfect.

The key ingredient is string. I use embroidery thread #400 and a bright, fine copper wire as a rib. I like all my flies to sink as per the PT so usually tie-in an underbody of lead. No tail: it doesn’t add movement and would barely be considered in a prey image. A hen hackle tied backwards completes the fly.

Key characteristics for me are the colour of the ‘string’ when wet, the contrasting copper wire, the shape, and any movement from the hackle. More recently, however, I have been tying the fly with visual hotspots with great success and omitting the hackle completely. It starts looking more like a caddis imitation then, but I’ve never seen a fluorescent red caddis either! Adding sparkle and beads does not seem to add to its success, and then it would be something else anyway, wouldn’t it?

I normally fish the fly in tandem and often don’t fish with an indicator. (I finally understand Dave!) I cast upstream and look to draw my line tight, retrieving in pace with the current. If my flies are tight I can easily feel takes and by adjusting the weight of the point fly I can even feel my flies touching stones too. The idea behind having my String Fly lightly weighted is that it stays in the zone and I can maintain contact. (It also allows me to fish it subsurface as a single fly.)

When the fly swings and or rises up in the water it fishes even better. Fished across or downstream it is like a spider (wet fly) pattern. Look for any movement in your fly-line tip if you lose contact, and vary your speed of swing by mending and retrieving.

As you can see, the fly is so simple and so plain, it’s not one that will make it to the shop counter. But it is a fly you should have in your box. Perfectly coloured to match a range of mayflies (very well matched to Deleatidium in NZ). Simple and effective. It’s my kind of first choice fly.

By the way, the other fly Jim and Dave fished was a String Fly tied with peacock herl!

HOOK: Tiemco 3769, #14

THREAD: Black or brown

BODY: #400 DMC string or embroidery thread, with lead underbody (optional)

RIB: Fine, bright copper wire

THROAT: Hen hackle, sloping backwards, colour of choice

HOTSPOT: Optional hotspots of chartreuse or red thread can be added instead of hackle at the head—lacquer the head so it stays bright