Volume 2, Part 1 Part 8 (1/2)
_Spinning, &c_.--Mid-water fis.h.i.+ng, as has been said, broadly consists in the use of a small fish, or something that simulates it, and its devices are aimed almost entirely at those fish which prey on their fellows. Spinning, live-baiting and trolling[1] are these devices.
In the first a small dead fish or an imitation of it made in metal, india-rubber, or other substance, is caused to revolve rapidly as it is pulled through the water, so that it gives the idea of something in difficulties and trying to escape. In the second a small fish is put on the angler's hook alive and conveys the same idea by its own efforts. In the third a small dead fish is caused to dart up and down in the water without revolving; it conveys the same idea as the spinning fish, though the manipulation is different.
[Footnote 1: Trolling is very commonly confused in angling writing and talk with _trailing_, which simply means drawing a spinning-bait along behind a boat in motion.]
_Bottom-Fis.h.i.+ng_.--Bottom-fis.h.i.+ng is the branch of angling which is the most general. There is practically no fresh-water fish that will not take some one or more of the baits on the angler's list if they are properly presented to it when it is hungry. Usually the baited hook is on or near the bottom of the water, but the rule suggested by the name ”bottom-fis.h.i.+ng” is not invariable and often the bait is best used in mid-water; similarly, in ”mid-water fis.h.i.+ng” the bait must sometimes be used as close to the bottom as possible. Bottom-fis.h.i.+ng is roughly divisible into two kinds, float-fis.h.i.+ng, in which a bite is detected by the aid of a float fastened to the line above the hook and so balanced that its tip is visible above the water, and hand-fis.h.i.+ng, in which no float is used and the angler trusts to his hand to feel the bite of a fish. In most cases either method can be adopted and it is a matter of taste, but broadly speaking the float-tackle is more suited to water which is not very deep and is either still or not rapid. In great depths or strong streams a float is difficult to manage.
_The Fish_.
It is practically impossible to cla.s.sify the fish an angler catches according to the methods which he employs, as most fish can be taken by at least two of these methods, while many of those most highly esteemed can be caught by all three. Sporting fresh-water fish are therefore treated according to their families and merits from the angler's point of view, and it is briefly indicated which method or methods best succeed in pursuit of them.
_Salmon_.--First in importance come the migratory _Salmonidae_, and at the head of them the salmon (_Salmo salar_), which has a two-fold reputation as a sporting and as a commercial a.s.set. The salmon fisheries of a country are a very valuable possession, but it is only comparatively recently that this has been realized and that salmon rivers have received the legal protection which is necessary to their well-being. Even now it cannot be a.s.serted that in England the salmon question, as it is called, is settled. Partly owing to our ignorance of the life-history of the fish, partly owing to the difficulty of reconciling the opposed interests of commerce and sport, the problem as to how a river should be treated remains only partially solved, though it cannot be denied that there has been a great advance in the right direction. The life-history of the salmon, so far as it concerns the matter in hand, may be very briefly summed up. It is bred in the rivers and fed in the sea. The parent fish ascend in late autumn as high as they can get, the ova are deposited on gravel shallows, hatching out in the course of a few weeks into parr. The infant salmon remains in fresh water at least one year, generally two years, without growing more than a few inches, and then about May a.s.sumes what is called the smolt-dress, that is to say, it loses the dark parr-bands and red spots of infancy and becomes silvery all over. After this it descends without delay to the sea, where it feeds to such good purpose that in a year it has reached a weight of 2 lb to 4 lb or more, and it may then reascend as a grilse. Small grilse indeed may only have been in the sea a few months, ascending in the autumn of the year of their first descent. If the fish survives the perils of its first ascent and sp.a.w.ning season and as a kelt or sp.a.w.ned fish gets down to the sea again, it comes up a second time as a salmon of weight varying from 8 lb upwards. Whether salmon come up rivers, and, if so, sp.a.w.n, every year, why some fish are much heavier than others of the same age, what their mode of life is in the sea, why some run up in spring and summer when the breeding season is not till about November or December, whether they were originally sea-fish or river-fish--these and other similar questions await a conclusive answer. One princ.i.p.al fact, however, stands out amid the uncertainty, and that is that without a free pa.s.sage up and down unpolluted rivers and without protection on the sp.a.w.ning beds salmon have a very poor chance of perpetuating their species. Economic prudence dictates therefore that every year a considerable proportion of running salmon should be allowed to escape the dangers that confront them in the shape of nets, obstructions, pollutions, rods and poachers. And it is in the adjustment of the interests which are bound up in these dangers (the last excepted; officially poachers have no interests, though in practice their plea of ”custom and right” has too often to be taken into consideration) that the salmon question consists. To secure a fair proportion of fish for the market, a fair proportion for the rods and a fair proportion for the redds, without unduly damaging manufacturing interests, this is the object of those who have the question at heart, and with many organizations and scientific observers at work it should not be long before the object is attained. Already the system of ”marking” kelts with a small silver label has resulted in a considerable array of valuable statistics which have made it possible to estimate the salmon's ordinary rate of growth from year to year. It is very largely due to the efforts of anglers that the matter has gone so far. Whether salmon feed in fresh water is another question of peculiar interest to anglers, for it would seem that if they do not then the whole practice of taking them must be an anomaly. Champions have arisen on both sides of the argument, some, scientists, a.s.serting that salmon (parr and kelts excluded, for both feed greedily as opportunity occurs) do not feed, others, mostly anglers, maintaining strongly that they do, and bringing as evidence their undoubted and customary capture by rod and line, not only with the fly, but also with such obvious food-stuffs as dead baits, worms and prawns. On the other side it is argued that food is never found inside a salmon after it has been long enough in a river to have digested its last meal taken in salt water. The very few instances of food found in salmon which have been brought forward to support the contrary opinion are in the scientific view to be regarded with great caution; certainly in one case of recent years, which at first appeared to be well authenticated, it was afterwards found that a small trout had been pushed down a salmon's throat after capture by way of a joke. A consideration of the question, however, which may perhaps make some appeal to both sides, is put forward by Dr.J.
Kingston Barton in the first of the two volumes on _Fis.h.i.+ng_ (_Country Life_ Series). He maintains that salmon do not habitually feed in fresh water, but he does not reject the possibility of their occasionally taking food. His view is that after exertion, such as that entailed by running from pool to pool during a spate, the fish may feel a very transient hunger and be impelled thereby to snap at anything in its vicinity which looks edible. The fact that the angler's best opportunity is undoubtedly when salmon have newly arrived into a pool, supports this contention. The longer they are compelled to remain in the same spot by lack of water the worse becomes the prospect of catching them, and ”unfishable” is one of the expressive words which fishermen use to indicate the condition of a river during the long periods of drought which too often distinguish the sport.
[v.02 p.0026]
_Salmon Tackle and Methods_.--It is when the drought breaks up and the long-awaited rain has come that the angler has his chance and makes ready his tackle, against the period of a few days (on some short streams only a few hours) during which the water will be right; _right_ is a very exact term on some rivers, meaning not only that the colour of the water is suitable to the fly, but that its height shall be within an inch or two of a given mark, prescribed by experience.
As to the tackle which is made ready, there is, as in most angling matters, divergence of opinion. Salmon fly-rods are now made princ.i.p.ally of two materials, greenheart and split-cane; the former is less expensive, the latter is more durable; it is entirely a matter of taste which a man uses, but the split-cane rod is now rather more in favour, and for salmon-fis.h.i.+ng it is in England usually built with a core of steel running from b.u.t.t to tip and known as a ”steel centre.”
How long the rod shall be is also a matter on which anglers differ, but from 16 ft. to 17 ft. 6 in. represents the limits within which most rods are preferred. The tendency is to reduce rather than to increase the length of the rod, which may be accounted for by the adoption of a heavy line. Early in the 19th century anglers used light-topped rods of 20 ft. and even more, and with them a light line composed partly of horse-hair; they thought 60 ft. with such material a good cast. Modern experience, however, has shown that a shorter rod with a heavier top will throw a heavy dressed silk line much farther with less exertion. Ninety feet is now considered a good fis.h.i.+ng cast, while many men can throw a great deal more. In the United States, where rods have long been used much lighter than in England, the limits suggested would be considered too high. From 12 ft. 6 in. to 15 ft. 6 in. is about the range of the American angler's choice, though long rods are not unknown with him. The infinite variety of reels, lines, gut collars[1] and other forms of tackle which is now presented to the angler's consideration and for his bewilderment is too wide a subject to be touched upon here. Something, however, falls to be said about flies. One of the perennially fruitful topics of inquiry is what the fish takes a salmon-fly to be. Beyond a fairly general admission that it is regarded as something endowed with life, perhaps resembling a remembered article of marine diet, perhaps inviting gastronomic experiment, perhaps irritating merely and rousing an impulse to destroy, the discussion has not reached any definite conclusion. But more or less connected with it is the controversy as to variety of colour and pattern. Some authorities hold that a great variety of patterns with very minute differences in colour and shades of colour is essential to complete success; others contend that salmon do not differentiate between nice shades of colour, that they only draw distinctions between flies broadly as being light, medium or dark in general appearance, and that the size of a fly rather than its colour is the important point for the angler's consideration. Others again go some way with the supporters of the colour-scheme and admit the efficacy of flies whose general character is red, or yellow, or black, and so on. The opinion of the majority, however, is probably based on past experience, and a man's favourite flies for different rivers and condition of water are those with which he or someone else has previously succeeded. It remains a fact that in most fly-books great variety of patterns will be discoverable, while certain old standard favourites such as the Jock Scott, Durham Ranger, Silver Doctor, and Thunder and Lightning will be prominent. Coming out of the region of controversy it is a safe generalization to say that the general rule is: big flies for spring fis.h.i.+ng when rivers are probably high, small flies for summer and low water, and flies medium or small in autumn according to the conditions. Spring fis.h.i.+ng is considered the cream of the sport. Though salmon are not as a rule so numerous or so heavy as during the autumn run, and though kelts are often a nuisance in the early months, yet the clean-run fish of February, March or April amply repays patience and disappointment by its fighting powers and its beauty. Summer fis.h.i.+ng on most rivers in the British Islands is uncertain, but in Norway summer is the season, which possibly explains to some extent the popularity of that country with British anglers, for the pleasure of a sport is largely increased by good weather.
Two methods of using the fly are in vogue, casting and harling. The first is by far the more artistic, and it may be practised either from a boat, from the bank or from the bed of the river itself; in the last case the angler wades, wearing waterproof trousers or wading-stockings and stout nail-studded brogues. In either case the fis.h.i.+ng is similar.
The fly is cast across and down stream, and has to be brought over the ”lie” of the fish, swimming naturally with its head to the stream, its feathers working with tempting movement and its whole appearance suggesting some live thing dropping gradually down and across stream.
Most anglers add to the motion of the fly by ”working” it with short pulls from the rod-top. When a fish takes, the rise is sometimes seen, sometimes not; in any case the angler should not respond with the rod until he _feels_ the pull. Then he should _tighten_, not strike. The fatal word ”strike,” with its too literal interpretation, has caused many a breakage. Having hooked his fish, the angler must be guided by circ.u.mstances as to what he does; the salmon will usually decide that for him. But it is a sound rule to give a well-hooked fish no unnecessary advantage and to hold on as hard as the tackle will allow.
Good tackle will stand an immense strain, and with this ”a minute a pound” is a fair estimate of the time in which a fish should be landed. A foul-hooked salmon (no uncommon thing, for a fish not infrequently misses the fly and gets hooked somewhere in the body) takes much longer to land. The other method of using the fly, harling, which is practised on a few big rivers, consists in trailing the fly behind a boat rowed backward and forwards across the stream and dropping gradually downwards. Fly-fis.h.i.+ng for salmon is also practised on some lakes, into which the fish run. On lakes the boat drifts slowly along a ”beat,” while the angler casts diagonally over the spots where salmon are wont to lie. Salmon may also be caught by ”mid-water fis.h.i.+ng,” with a natural bait either spun or trolled and with artificial spinning-baits of different kinds, and by ”bottom-fis.h.i.+ng” with prawns, shrimps and worms. Spinning is usually practised when the water is too high or too coloured for the fly; trolling is seldom employed, but is useful for exploring pools which cannot be fished by spinning or with the fly; the prawn is a valuable lure in low water and when fish are unwilling to rise; while the worm is killing at all states of the river, but except as a last resource is not much in favour. There are a few waters where salmon have the reputation of not taking a fly at all; in them spinning or prawning are the usual modes of fis.h.i.+ng. But most anglers, wherever possible, prefer to use the fly. The rod for the alternative methods is generally shorter and stiffer than the fly-rod, though made of like material. Twelve to fourteen feet represents about the range of choice. Outside the British Islands the salmon-fisher finds the headquarters of his sport in Europe in Scandinavia and Iceland, and in the New World in some of the waters of Canada and Newfoundland.
[Footnote 1: The precise date when silkworm gut (now so important a feature of the angler's equipment) was introduced is obscure. Pepys, in his _Diary_ (1667), mentions ”a gut string varnished over” which ”is beyond any hair for strength and smallness” as a new angling secret which he likes ”mightily.” In the third edition (1700) of Chetham's _Vade-Mec.u.m_, already cited, appears an advertis.e.m.e.nt of the ”East India weed, which is the only thing for trout, carp and bottom-fis.h.i.+ng.” Again, in the third edition of n.o.bbes's _Art of Trolling_ (1805), in the supplementary matter, appears a letter signed by J. Eaton and G. Gimber, tackle-makers of Crooked Lane (July 20, 1801), in which it is stated that gut ”is produced from the silkworm and not an Indian weed, _as has. .h.i.therto been conjectured_....” The word ”gut” is employed before this date, but it seems obvious that silkworm gut was for a long time used under the impression that it was a weed, and that its introduction was a thing of the 17th century. It is probable, however, that vegetable fibre was used too; we believe that in some parts of India it is used by natives to this day. Pepys'
”minikin” was probably cat-gut.]
_Land-locked Salmon_.--The land-locked salmon (_Salmo salar sebago_) of Canada and the lakes of Maine is, as its name implies, now regarded by scientists as merely a land-locked form of the salmon. It does not often attain a greater size than 20 ft, but it is a fine fighter and is highly esteemed by American anglers. In most waters it does not take a fly so well as a spinning-bait, live-bait or worm. The methods of angling for it do not differ materially from those employed for other _Salmonidae_.
_Pacific Salmon_.--Closely allied to _Salmo salar_ both in appearance and habits is the genus _Oncorhynchus_, commonly known as Pacific salmon. It contains six species, is peculiar to the North Pacific Ocean, and is of some importance to the angler, though of not nearly so much as the Atlantic salmon. The quinnat is the largest member of the genus, closely resembles _salar_ in appearance and surpa.s.ses him in size. The others, sockeye, humpback, cohoe, dog-salmon and masu, are smaller and of less interest to the angler, though some of them have great commercial value. The last-named is only found in the waters of j.a.pan, but the rest occur in greater or less quant.i.ties in the rivers of Kamchatka, Alaska, British Columbia and Oregon. The problems presented to science by solar are offered by _Oncorhynchus_ also, but there are variations in his life-history, such as the fact that few if any fish of the genus are supposed to survive their first sp.a.w.ning season. When once in the rivers none of these salmon is of very much use to the angler; as, though it is stated that they will occasionally take a fly or spoon in fresh water, they are not nearly so responsive as their Atlantic cousin and in many streams are undoubtedly not worth trying for. At the mouths of some rivers, however, where the water is distinctly tidal, and in certain bays of the sea itself they give very fine sport, the method of fis.h.i.+ng for them being usually to trail a heavy spoonbait behind a boat. By this means remarkable bags of fish have been made by anglers. The sport is of quite recent development.
[v.02 p.0027]
_Sea-Trout_.--Next to the salmon comes the sea-trout, the other migratory salmonid of Europe. This is a fish with many local names and a good deal of local variation. Modern science, however, recognises two ”races” only, _Salmo trutta_, the sea-trout proper, and _Salmo cambricus_ or _eriox_, the bull-trout, or sewin of Wales, which is most prominent in such rivers as the Coquet and Tweed. The life-history of sea-trout is much the same as that of salmon, and the fish on their first return from the sea in the grilse-stage are called by many names, finnock, herling and whitling being perhaps the best known. Of the two races _Salmo trutta_ alone is of much use to the fly-fisher. The bull-trout, for some obscure reason, is not at all responsive to his efforts, except in its kelt stage. Then it will take greedily enough, but that is small consolation. The bull-trout is a strong fish and grows to a great size and it is a pity that it is not of greater sporting value, if only to make up for its bad reputation as an article of food. Some amends, however, are made by its cousin the sea-trout, which is one of the gamest and daintiest fish on the angler's list. It is found in most salmon rivers and also in not a few streams which are too small to harbour the bigger fish, while there are many lakes in Scotland and Ireland (where the fish is usually known as white trout) where the fis.h.i.+ng is superb when the trout have run up into them. Fly-fis.h.i.+ng for sea-trout is not a thing apart.
A three-pounder that will impale itself on a big salmon-fly, might equally well have taken a tiny trout-fly. Many anglers, when fis.h.i.+ng a sea-trout river where they run large, 5 lb or more, and where there is also a chance of a salmon, effect a compromise by using a light 13 ft. or 14 ft. double-handed rod, and tackle not so slender as to make hooking a salmon a certain disaster. But undoubtedly to get the full pleasure out of sea-trout-fis.h.i.+ng a single-handed rod of 10 ft. to 12 ft. with reasonably fine gut and small flies should be used, and the way of using it is much the same as in wet-fly fis.h.i.+ng for brown trout, which will be treated later. When the double-handed rod and small salmon-flies are used, the fis.h.i.+ng is practically the same as salmon-fis.h.i.+ng except that it is on a somewhat smaller scale. Flies for sea-trout are numberless and local patterns abound, as may be expected with a fish which has so catholic a taste. But, as with salmon-fishers so with sea-trout-fishers, experience forms belief and success governs selection. Among the small salmon-flies and loch-flies which will fill his book, the angler will do well to have a store of very small trout-flies at hand, while experience has shown that even the dry fly will kill sea-trout on occasion, a thing that is worth remembering where rivers are low and fish shy. July, August and September are in general the best months for sea-trout, and as they are dry months the angler often has to put up with indifferent sport.
The fish will, however, rise in tidal water and in a few localities even in the sea itself, or in salt-water lochs into which streams run.
Sea-trout have an irritating knack of ”coming short,” that is to say, they will pluck at the fly without really taking it. There are occasions, on the other hand, in loch-fis.h.i.+ng where plenty of time must be given to the fish without tightening on it, especially if it happens to be a big one. Like salmon, sea-trout are to be caught with spinning-baits and also with the worm. The main controversy that is concerned with sea-trout is whether or no the fish captured in early spring are clean fish or well-mended kelts. On the whole, as sea-trout seldom run before May, the majority of opinion inclines to their being kelts.
_Non-migratory Salmonidae_.--Of the non-migratory members of the _Salmonidae_ the most important in Great Britain is the brown trout (_Salmo fario_). Its American cousin the rainbow trout (_S. irideus_) is now fairly well established in the country too, while other transatlantic species both of trout and char (which are some of them partially migratory, that is to say, migratory when occasion offers), such as the steelhead (_S. rivularis_), fontinalis (_S. fonlinalis_) and the cut-throat trout (_S. clarkii_), are at least not unknown.
All these fish, together with their allied forms in America, can be captured with the fly, and, speaking broadly, the wet-fly method will do well for them all. Therefore it is only necessary to deal with the methods applicable to one species, the brown trout.
_Trout_.--Of the game-fishes the brown trout is the most popular, for it is spread over the whole of Great Britain and most of Europe, wherever there are waters suited to it. It is a fine sporting fish and is excellent for the table, while in some streams and lakes it grows to a very considerable size, examples of 16 lb from southern rivers and 20 lb from Irish and Scottish lakes being not unknown. One of the signs of its popularity is that its habits and history have produced some very animated controversies. Some of the earliest discussions were provoked by the liability of the fish to change its appearance in different surroundings and conditions, and so at one time many a district claimed its local trout as a separate species. Now, however, science admits but one species, though, to such well-defined varieties as the Loch Leven trout, the estuarine trout and the gillaroo, it concedes the right to separate names and ”races.” In effect all, from the great _ferox_ of the big lakes of Scotland and Ireland to the little fingerling of the Devons.h.i.+re brook, are one and the same--_Salmo fario_.
_Wet-Fly Fis.h.i.+ng for Trout_.--Fly-fis.h.i.+ng for trout is divided into three kinds: fis.h.i.+ng with the artificial fly sunk or ”wet,” fis.h.i.+ng with it floating or ”dry” and fis.h.i.+ng with the natural insect. Of the two first methods the wet fly is the older and may be taken first.
Time was when all good anglers cast their flies downstream and thought no harm. But in 1857 W.C. Stewart published his _Practical Angler_, in which he taught that it paid better to fish up-stream, for by so doing the angler was not only less likely to be seen by the trout but was more likely to hook his fish. The doctrine was much discussed and criticized, but it gradually won adherents, until now up-stream fis.h.i.+ng is the orthodox method where it is possible. Stewart was also one of the first to advocate a lighter rod in place of the heavy 12 ft. and 13 ft. weapons that were used in the North in his time.
There are still many men who use the long rod for wet-fly fis.h.i.+ng in streams, but there are now more who find 10 ft. quite enough for their purpose. For lake-fis.h.i.+ng from a boat, however, the longer rod is still in many cases preferred. In fis.h.i.+ng rivers the main art is to place the right flies in the right places and to let them come naturally down with the stream. The right flies may be ascertained to some extent from books and from local wisdom, but the right places can only be learnt by experience. It does not, however, take long to acquire ”an eye for water” and that is half the battle, for the haunts of trout in rapid rivers are very much alike. In lake-fis.h.i.+ng chance has a greater share in bringing about success, but here too the right fly and the right place are important; the actual management of rod, line and flies, of course, is easier, for there is no stream to be reckoned with. Though there is little left to be said about wet-fly fis.h.i.+ng where the fly is an imitation more or less exact of a natural insect, there is another branch of the art which has been stimulated by modern developments. This is the use of salmon-flies for big trout much in the same way as for salmon. In such rivers as the Thames, where the trout are cannibals and run very large, ordinary trout-flies are of little use, and the fly-fisher's only chance is to use a big fly and ”work” it, casting across and down stream. The big fly has also been found serviceable with the great fish of New Zealand and with the inhabitants of such a piece of water as Blagdon Lake near Bristol, where the trout run very large. For this kind of fis.h.i.+ng much stronger tackle and a heavier rod are required than for catching fish that seldom exceed the pound.
[v.02 p.0028]
_Dry Fly_.--Fis.h.i.+ng with the floating fly is a device of southern origin, and the idea no doubt arose from the facts that on the placid south country streams the natural fly floats on the surface and that the trout are accustomed to feed on it there. The controversy ”dry _versus_ wet” was long and spirited, but the new idea won the day and now not only on the chalk-streams, but on such stretches of even Highland rivers as are suitable, the dry-fly man may be seen testing his theories. These theories are simple and consist in placing before the fish an exact imitation of the insect on which it is feeding, in such a way that it shall float down exactly as if it were an insect of the same kind. To this end special tackle and special methods have been found necessary. Not only the fly but also the line has to float on the wafer; the line is very heavy and therefore the rod (split-cane or greenheart) must be stiff and powerful; special precautions have to be taken that the fly shall float unhindered and shall not ”drag”; special casts have to be made to counteract awkward winds; and, lastly, the matching of the fly with the insect on the water is a matter of much nicety, for the water-flies are of many shades and colours. Many brains have busied themselves with the solution of these problems with such success that dry-fly fis.h.i.+ng is now a finished art.