Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1892-09-23
TROUT AND FLIES
SUGGESTIONS THAT ANGLERS IN.
VARlABLY FOLLOW.

vARlABLY FOLLOW.
An Angler Discourses the Taboos Of
the Sacred Fish-There Seems to Be No
Reason Why Other Bait Than FLEE May
Not Be Used in Hooking Trout.
Angling on the ltchen, the Test and all
other fashionable trout streamsis governed
by rigid law that the fly is the only per-
mlsslble lure No sportsman questions the
tradition. which indeed is SO thoroughly
established that the very poacher in the
dead Of night would blush at the thought
81 using anything grosser than an alder.
Nearly all stiquettes, howsoeyer difficult
II maybe to perceive what originally gave
rise to Them, are rational at bottom: but
this ole seems all exception There is no
obvious reason why worm or gentles or the
Alexandra fly 81 even minnow should be
tabpoed- AT :eas: there Is uoue that we
can see.
Perhaps ii one were yentcresome enough
70 ask Hampshire fisherman ID what
respect niinnow is offensive. we should
he told that it falls into the water with
shocking splash The splash is undeniable;
but surely it is All inadequate explanation
OF the taboo A minnow is not The only
thing that splashes. We have seen the
sightest dry fly splash abomnably, to- he
obvious terror Of the trout, and the Hamp-
shire fisherman himself splashes. for he in
varably wades, and In that act aisturbs
the water in half an hour u.ore than ali
The minnows in the tackle shops could pos
sibly DC in day
Its equally impossible to think that The
objectionable characteristic Of the minnow
Is That it is too killing The minnow is not
killing at all. He who could &c any good
with a nnhow iii tie pelluci1 waters Of
ehalA stream would b. an artist of incom.
parable skill The trout usually fee an
anglers minnow IL perturbation com
pared with which the author of 'Sa.ome's"
displeasure With tie lord chamberiaip IL
equanimity. Can It '., then, that IA So
booing the minnov our fishermen are
making virtue Of necessity, and not
countenancing it merely because it is use
less? We might incline to this conjecture.
if it were not that the best managed dry
fly is usually useless too. Why are our
modern fishermen so fastidious as to the
means by which they achieve failure?
Illumination on the gentle makes the
subject darker Than ever. Indeed gentles,
which mag b.. defined as maggots, wasp
grubs caddis or any other white creeping
things, are treated according to code of
angling morals which is quite inexplicably
arbitrary You must not use a gentle
when it is 'stone bait" but you do
highly meritorious action when, ten min
utes afterwarG, he has taken to himself
the wings Of the greendrake and you seize
him to adorn a tail, You must not use
maggot from the butchers; but you are at
liberty to put a bit of white leather on a
fly hook, and that oddly enough is some
times 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
2-inch Jock Scott if you are fool enough
to prefer that means Of failure.
There is, however reason for this par
ticular taboo. 1t is founded upon wis
dom akin to that Of Theophile Gautier's
cat, which, hearing a parrot speak, re-
marked refectively: '"This is not bird.
This is gentleman. Listen to his CONVEX
sationv' In the estimate of the conscien-
tious fisherman, the Alexandra fly is not
fly. 1t is minnow. It's dressing of feath-
ers looks like wings; but there are three
hooks underneath, and when the thing IL
in the water it has the appearance Of a
green minnow.
Thus far the philosophy of the taboo is
unimpeachable; but we can go no further.
The Alexandra's resem blance to a minnow
is no closer than that of a brown hackle to
a spider, which is SO little close that we
have the audacity to doubt whether the
trout feels himself to be rising at spider
when we feel that it is spider we are Of
fering him. What cause indeed have we
to believe that fish take our lures in the
spirit in which they are given? Is it not
pretty well ascertained that there is no fly,
no shrimp, no prawn which has any like
ness to the blue devils the thunder-and-
ightnings and other engines on which
salmon willingly impale themselvess What
can trout be thinking Of when it snaps at
parr tail? Let US hope that anglers will
not allow this SO called Nineteenth century
to pass away with the premises of their
science unrevised. It is high time they
were considering 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
but really the taboo of the worm is, like
crimes acts in the eyes of the Liberal par
ty when it is the other party which has
passed them, means of turning innocence
into wrong.
The worm in itself is inofensive. Very
often, especially on bright summer day,
it would be less of failure than fly usu-
ally is, but that should not be accounted
to it's discredit The streams on which it
is forbidden are so well stocked that no
harm would be done, although ali the fish
ermen on them tried worm now and then,
and succeeded as often and as abundantly
as their skill permitted. Successful worm
fishing in a clear stream is no mean art.
It might be rated higher than success with
the dry fly, for while it is true that the
trout as rule prefer worm to an in
sect, it is also true that to cast a worm so
as to attract the fish is much more difficult
than to ''place" dry fly neatly.-London
Saturday Review.