Saving money on flies was one reason I started fly-tying, but by the time I had enough materials and tools to make it happen, that rationale became obsolete.
A big auction of historical fishing equipment in Boston by Lang’s last month made me laugh when I read that a box of “seven historic flies,” including one tied by Theodore Gordon and another by angling author George LaBranche, fetched $7,975. Yes, that’s more than $1,100 per fly, or about as much as you’d pay for a sizable tarpon fly these days. (I kid).
I decided to check out the online tackle store on Lang’s website and found some interesting old lures (not to mention some serious prices) amid the “vintage” tackle. I knew there was a market for intricately (or famously) tied flies, but I didn’t realize lures were such a collector’s treasure.
I was taken aback by the artisanal paint jobs, hand-carved wood, glass eyes, wooden boxes, and some wild mechanical features among the lures of the past. It made me a little nostalgic as 90 percent of the lures in my box are plastic with a little metal thrown in to boot.
[Field & Stream's recent "50 Greatest Lures of All Time" also had me waxing nostalgic about some baits. ]
On the Lang’s site, I found the rather intimidating Sinful Sal (pictured at right, $75), a weedless, plastic frog (only $175!), the Punky Spoon, which is described as a fly-rod lure, and the robotic-looking Worden Bucktail.
A couple of pre-1900 spoons also caught my eye.
Those old lures had me thinking that fishing was a hell of a lot easier 50, 60, 70 years ago and beyond. Every place was less crowded, the fish hadn’t seen the same flies, lures and baits for generations, and clunky, overly dressed lures were productive. Of course, rods were heavy, reels were clunky, and, well, we don’t even have to talk about fishing line.
It was nice to see the Jitterbug, one of my favorite non-fly lures for its quirky function and goofy elegance, hasn’t changed much. You can’t improve a design like that.
Well, the metal lip is now plastic.
Posted by gjhaze 
