The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1892-07-27
TROUT sUPERsTIrIoNs.
An Angler Discourses on the Taboos
of the Sacred Fish.
From the Saturday Review.

An Angler Discourses on the Taboos
of the sacred Fish.
From the Saturday Review.
Angling on the Itchen, the Test, and all
other fashionable trout streams is governed
by rigid law that fly is the only permissi-
bic lure. No sportsman questions the ira
dition, which indeed, is so thoroughly estab-
lished that the very poacher in the dead OF
night would blush at the thought OF using
anything grosser than an alder.
Nearly all etiquet ~, howsoever difficult 1t
may be TO perceive what originally gave
rise to them. are rational at bottom; but
this one seems an exception. There is no
obvious reason why worm or gsntles or the
Alexandra fly, or even minnow, should be
tabooed. AT least there is none that we can
see. Perhaps, IL one were ventursome
enough to ask a Hampshire fisherman in
what respect m1nnow is offensive, we
should be told that 1t falls into the water
with shocking splash. The splash is I'M
deniable; but surely it Is an inadequate ex-
PLANTATION OF the taboo. A minnow 10 not
the only thing that splashes We have seen
the hghtest dry fly splash abominably, to
the Obvious terror of the trout and the
Hampshire fisherman himself splashes, for
he invariably wades, and in-that act dis
turbs the water IN half an hour more than
all the minnows in the tackle shops could
possibly do in day.
1t is equally impossible to think that the
Objectionable characteristic Of the miunow
is that it is too killing. The minnow is not
killing at all. He who could do any good
with minnow In the pellucid waters Of a
chalk stream would be an artist OF incom-
parable skill. The trout usually flee an
anglers minnow in a perturbation COM
pared with which the author Of "SRlome's"
displeasure with the lord chamberlain 10
equanimity. Can it be, then. that in taboo
ing the minnow our fishermen are making a
virtue OF necessity, and not couuteuancing
1t merely because 1t is useless9 We might
moline to this conjecture il it were not that
the best-managed dry fly is usually useless,
too. Why are our modern fishermen 50
fastidious as to the means by which they
achieve failurel
Illumination on the gentle makes the SUBJ
ject darker than ever. Indeed, gentles,
which may be defined as maRgots, wasp
grubs, caddis, or any other white creeping
things, are treated according to a code Of
angling morals which is quite inexplic ably
arbitrary. You must not use a gentle
when 1t is "stone bait" but you do a
highly meritorious action when, ten min
utes afterward, he has taken to himself the
wings Of the greendrake, and you seize him
to adorn tail. You must nos use q mag
got from the butchers, but you are at lib
erty to pus bit of white leather on fly
hook, and that. oddly enough, is sometimes
lure more deadly than the gentle, of
which it Is intended to be an imitation.
You must not use an Alexandra, but no.
body will hinder you from working with a
2-inch Jock Scott if you are fool enough to
prefer that means Of failure
There is, however, a reason for this par
ticular taboo. 1t is founded upon c wisdom
akin to that Of Theophile GAutier's cat,
which, hearing parrot speak, remarked,
rehectively: This is not bird This is a
gentleman. Listen to his conversation"
In the estimate OF the conscientious fisher
man the Alexandra fly is not a fly. 1t is a
mlnnow. Its dressing of feathers looks like
wings; but there are three hooks UNDER
meath, and when the thing Is In the water il
has the appearance OF a green minnow.
Thus far the philosophy of the taboo is
unimpeachable; but we can 60 no further.
The Alexandra's resemblance to a minnow
is no closer than that Of brown hackle to
spider, which Is so little close that we
have the audacity to doubt whether the
trout feels himself to be rising al a spider
when we feel that 1t is a spider we are offer
ing him. What cause, indeed, have we to
believe that fish take our lures in the spirit
in which they are Rivenl Is IL not pretty
we'll ascertained that there is no fly. no
shrimp, no prawn, which has any likeness
to the blue devils, the thunder-and-lfght-
nings, and other engines on which salmon
willingly impale themselVes2 What can q
trout be thinking Of when it snaps at pare
tails Let us hope that anglers will not
allow this so-called nineteenth century to
pass away with the premises Of their science
unrevised. 1t is high time they were con-
| sidering the possibility that fish take some
lures merely for the fun Of the thing, or by
way of resenting an insult, and not because
the lures seem something good to eat.
Having gone so far In heresy, we may as
we'll say word for the worm. Any one
caught in the act of fishing in Hampshire
with worm would be promptly expelled
by his club. AS he would have broken the
rules, that would serve the rascal right:
but really the taboo of the worm is, like
Grimes acts in the eyes OF the liberal party
when 1t is the other party which has passed
them, means OF turning innocence into
wrong.
The worm, in itself, is inoffensive. Very
often, especially on a bright summer day, it
would be less OF failure than a fly usually
is; but that should not be accouted to its
discrsdit. The streams on which it Ia for
hidden are 80 well stocked that no harm
would be done, although all the fishermen
on them tried worm now and then, and sue
decided as often and as abundantly as their
skill permitted. Successful worm fishing
in clear stream is no mean art. 1t might
be rated higher than success with the dry
fly; for while il is true that the trout as a
rule, prefer a worm co an insect, It Is also
true that to cast a worm SO as TO attract the
fish is much more difficult than to "plaoe"
dry fly neatly.