Practical dry-fly fishing

Contents

Introduction vii

PAGE

CHAPTEB

CHAPTER I English Dry-Fly Methods Modified by American Ideas and Conditions

" ir ^ THAT is a dry-fly?"

Y Y '^^^^ question, asked by a prominent sportsman at the annual Field Day of the Camp- Fire Club of America, at Mr. Ernest Thompson Seton's beautiful estate at Cos Cob, Conn., in the latter part of June, 1910, rather startled me for a moment, as the man who asked it had been a thorough out-door man all his life; had visited nearly all the haunts of big game in this country and in Canada; had shot at different times mountain sheep, mountain goat, moose, bear, antelope, elk, caribou^ various kinds of [31 deer, and other varieties of wild animals, and had, as a rule, carried at least one fishing-rod with him on most of his trips, if not on all. I knew that he had been successful in luring many kinds of game-fish, as I had seen some of his records; and had also examined, mounted in his oflSce, fine specimens of large bass, silver trout, ouananiche, muscalonge, and other inhabitants of the streams and lakes.

A day or two before this question was asked an article written by the author had appeared, the general purpose of which had been to place the question seriously before American anglers, as to why they had not taken more interest in this most fascinating branch of angling, used so extensively for many years on the English chalk streams, and recognized almost universally by British anglers as the most sportsman- [41

English Dry-Fly Literature

like, most artistic, and most scientific of all methods of taking trout. In the article referred to there had been an important error — an error of omission. While believing that a comparatively small number of American anglers were familiar with dry-fly methods, yet I had assumed that all would know what was meant when the dry-fly or floating fly was mentioned. The first important contribution to dry-fly literature was made in England in 1851; and from that time until now in that country it has been one of the most fully discussed methods of fishing. Some of the British dry-fly books published within the past thirty years may be ranked properly among the greatest works of angling literature. Many American enthusiasts and collectors possess at least a few of the most important of these works; and yet even a slight investigation would show that their circulation in this country is by no means general. To ask the average English sportsman the question propounded at the beginning of this chapter — '* What is a dry-fly?" — would be almost equivalent to asking an American to define base-ball.

While it is true that the past year or two the floating fly has been discussed more generally than ever before by American anglers, yet some of our old-timers — those who have been fly-fishing enthusiasts for years — have assumed that Americans have been familiar with dry-fly methods since the publication, many years ago, of Mr. Halford's earlier works; but a little thought and observation, in the author's judgment, will prove this assumption to be entirely erroneous, and made possible only by that psychological condition [6]

A Psychological Fallacy

which often exists in the minds of experts in many branches of learning that makes them think that merely because they are thoroughly familiar with a certain subject all others must share their knowledge in at least some degree. The fallacy of the line of reasoning that the works of the great English expert must have produced in this country a wide-spread familiarity with the angling methods advocated by him may be discovered easily by one who endeavors to procure in any of our leading cities a copy of Mr. HaKord's most important book from the beginner's stand-point — and I think from the stand-point of the expert as well — "Dry-Fly Fishing in Theory and Practice," published in 1889. For many months, some years ago, the author made a search for this work among New York dealers both in new and in second-hand books, and failed to find a single copy. Later, after another equally thorough search for the same author's "Dry-Fly Entomology," the writer was compelled to send to England for it.

From his early boyhood the author has been an angling enthusiast; as a believer in heredity there exists in his mind no doubt that some of his love of angling was transmitted by his parents and grandparents, to go no further back. This love of his favorite sport does not blossom like a flower in the happy days of the fishing season, to wither away with the approach of winter. Many winter evenings are spent in his library, where he may select for his evening entertainment one or more of several hundred of the most interesting angling books written since the days of Walton. He may go even [8]

Angling Books, Old and New

farther back than that, for once in a while he feels like reading from a rare old volume published in 1633 a few verses of the "Piscatorie Eclogs" by Phineas Fletcher, or from the English translation made in 1722 of "Oppian's HaKeutics." Of Enghsh works on the dry-fly he has endeavored to make a complete collection, and, unlike books in many libraries, these do not exist merely for ornament. They have been studied and their contents often discussed with angling friends. After having read many of the works of both old and modern angling writers one is forced to come to the conclusion that angling literature since the days of Walton has been one long series of repetitions. Here and there a book shines out conspicuous for the originality of its ideas. Were this the proper place for such a discussion it would be a delight to mention these shining Hghts, and endeavor to show wherein they excelled in new ideas of value to the angling world.

While Mr. Pulman explained dry-fly methods in 1851, yet when Mr. Halford began to write, after an exhaustive study made on the trout streams themselves, he had practically a virgin field before him. Therefore his early books were entirely original in conception, they described clearly and fully this important method of angling, and were contributions to angling literature of great and lasting value. That all writers coming after him must necessarily go over a certain part of the ground covered by him, however much they might differ with him in minor details, follows as a matter of course; for the entire theory of dry-fly fishing is founded on a comparatively few basic [10 1

American Dry-Fly Methods

principles upon which all experts agree. So the general rules governing the use of the dry-fly that will be described in this work resemble closely those advocated by Mr. Halford and other English authors; but in all cases the methods are those used by the writer himself, which have been learned, first, by his early crude experiments, made before he had read any authoritative works on the subject; by study of the books by English writers; by experiences on the streams in the company of expert dry-fly anglers; and last, by many long discussions with several skilful users of the floating lure. The various differences between the methods that will be advocated for our American streams, and those described by English authorities for use on their chalk streams, will be pronounced in some details, and such things as the advo- [11]

cacy of "fishing the stream" instead of "stalking the fish" and "fishing the rise" only, may seem heretical to what is known as the dry-fly "purist" of England. In this book we shall cast our fly wherever our judgment tells us that there should be a trout. Mr. George A. B. Dewar, in his most excellent work, "The Book of the Dry- Fly," says: "The best short description of the difference between wet and dry-fly fishing is that which describes the first as 'fishing the stream' and the second as 'fishing the rise.'" We cannot agree with this; there is no good reason for not "fishing the stream " with the floating fly. Then again we shall endeavor to show that while in England the dry-fly is considered the proper method to use only on smooth, placid water, yet it is equally eflficacious on our swifter and more turbulent streams.

Rods, English and American

In the tackle, especially the rods, used, there will also be some differences in ideas. It would be hard for an American angler to read carefully the descriptions of English rods contained in even the latest catalogues of some of the largest British tacklemakers without imagining that he had gone back several generations.* Some of their "light" rods are of a weight seldom if ever seen in this country. Instead of the very beautifully made German silver suction ferules, with which all American anglers are familiar, they advertise various styles of *' lockfast" joints which would be an eyesore to any American fisherman. They also have rods with steel centres, and some of them are wound with steel or bronze wire on the outside. A well-

* Many of the best anglers of England are now using our light American rods.

[13 1 known dry-fly "purist" and angling writer, in a book published as late as 1908, advocates the use of a rod eleven feet long, weighing eleven ounces — one that ''can easily be wielded single-handed." What strength must he possess who can wield such a weapon easily!

Some views, entirely contrary to those held by English authorities, will be expressed by the author, which he would be glad to designate "the American methods," if we had a number of dry-fly anglers sufficiently large to merit the somewhat ambitious title, "the American school."

Incidentally, some of these differences of opinion may meet with the severe criticisms of a few of the old-timers among American anglers, who read Halford in 1889, and who have regarded his book as almost sacred ever since. [14]

Experts Not Infallible

In dry-fly discussions it is sometimes customary for them to quote the ideas to which Mr. Halford gave utterance twenty-three years ago, and that is the end of the argument; the case has been decided by the court of last appeal. We admire Mr. Halford, but we would not thrust upon him an infalHbility which we feel very sure he would have no desire to claim, especially if he were to give advice in regard to fishing American streams; while it is at least possible that in the years that have elapsed since 1889 he may have changed or modified some of the views he then expressed. As late as February 25, 1912, Mr. Halford said, in a letter to the author of this book: ''I note what you say about the absence of rises on your streams. I have had similar experiences in England, and have, like you, found it profitable to float a fly [15]

over a likely spot, especially if a good fish is seen in good position and likely to feed."

Chapter II I

Fishing the Rise'' and ''Fishing I the Stream/' and a Word ( About the English ''Purist" |

THE theory of dry-fly fishing is founded on the use of an artificial fly that is an exact imitation* of a natural insect, in size, shape, and color, and so made that it will not easily sink; it is cast up-stream and al-

* Several times in this book I shall speak of flies tied in exact imitation of natural insects. It will be readily understood, especially if one looks at some of our common insects through a microscope, and sees with what wonderful delicacy they are formed, how impossible it would be to fashion with feathers, silks, and other materials at the command of the fly-maker, exact reproductions, from a technical and scientific stand-point, of live insects. The author means by "exact imitations" artificial flies that have been made to match in size, shape, color, and other details the original insect with all possible fidelity.

lowed to float down on the surface of the water with no other motion than that imparted by the current.

However much anglers may disagree about many theories, yet on these points all writers, all experts, and all users of the floating fly are apparently in accord. They all accept the exact imitation theory — a bone of contention among wet fly anglers for many years. There is no divergence of opinion in regard to fishing up-stream — another topic of discussion among the wet fly men that probably will never be settled to the satisfaction of all. And the proposition that the dry-fly must float down with the current, with no other motion whatever, is universally agreed to. So in many ways the dry-fly fishermen form a happy and harmonious family, and the knotty problems that are forever coming up

Ways of the Dry-FJy Purist

to cause disagreements among the users of the sunken fly are reduced to a minimum.

And still harmony does not always reign supreme among members of the English floating fly fraternity. The dry-fly "purist," as he is known, casts his fly usually only when he sees a trout rising; he "stalks" the fish; if he sees a rise, he goes within casting distance of the spot, carefully places his fly so that it falls exactly where the trout had risen, or just above it, that the fly may float down over the fish. If he does not get a rise, it is not unusual for him to try a fly of a different pattern; if he finally gives up in his attempt to catch this particular trout, he looks for another rising fish, but does not make another cast until he again sees a rise. If no rises occur within his vision during the day, he does not wet his line. Some of this cult carry field-glasses with which they scan the surface of the stream.

These methods undoubtedly mark a very high type of sportsmanship in angling; perhaps I should be somewhat tempted to say the highest type of sportsmanship if I did not have reason to believe that our method of taking a fish that has not already indicated its exact location to the fisherman requires at least as much skill on the part of the angler as the purist's method of fishing the rise only, where the exact whereabouts of the fish is known. It seems to me that when an angler sees a rising fish, within casting distance, the battle is at least half won.

An American, with a mind capable of seeing humorous features in almost all things, and also at times not beyond the temptation of indulging in

Gloom by the Riverside

ridicule, may easily see an opening for poking fun at the disappointed purist, as he returns at evening without once having cast a fly during the day. In fact, he does not escape ridicule in England; he has been the victim of much sarcasm, even from some members of the British angling fraternity. Mr. G. E. M. Skues, a bright and at times sarcastic English writer, says, in his ''Minor Tactics of the Chalk Stream": "I know of no sight more gloomy than that of a golfer painfully tramping from shot to shot. But perhaps the next gloomiest sight is the angler, who, with perhaps but a single day at his disposal, lounges hour by hour by the side of the main river, waiting with such patience as he can muster for the rise which comes not." The strict purist, in turn, has retorted to those who are incUned to make of him a ridiculous figure, by calling all who do not adopt his methods "poachers." It would not be fair, however, to the British angler — men of the Halford type — to convey an impression that ill-natured criticism is common among the British sportsmen. I have read much of their literature, bearing on all sides of the question, and have found a general inclination to be tolerant of each other's opinions, and most courteous in their arguments. Their ideas of sportsmanship are high, a condition that I believe is very general among dry-fly anglers everywhere. The fascination of the game seems to be the attraction of this method of fishing, and not the "heavy creel" at the end of the day.

The purist's method of angling, sportsmanlike and praiseworthy though it may be, is not, I think, the style of

When Patience Has Its Limits

dry-fly fishing that would generally appeal to American anglers, even though conditions on our streams made it at all times possible. It is diflBcult to imagine an American fly-fisherman so patient that he would spend a day on the stream without casting a fly. In the first place, he enjoys the practice of casting, whether the fish rise or not. Then again, abundant experience has taught our American anglers that on some of our near-by streams they may often pass an entire day without seeing a trout rise at a natural insect. So the dry-fly angler of this country begins casting when he reaches the stream, more or less "for general results," as the Englishman might call it; but the work of an American expert is not always a bunghng performance, and frequently there is very little "hit-or-miss" about it. He generally

[23 1 shows a keen knowledge of the habits of the trout, and where they should be l^'^ing in wait for their food. His methods may differ from those of the English purist in that instead of easting at the rise, he casts at those places where experience has taught him that the trout hide, live, and seek their food. There is nothing more skilful to be seen on a stream than the casting of a dry-fly expert. It is seldom except when watching them that I have seen flies 'light like thistle-down"; or that I have been deceived for a moment into thinking that an artificial fly was a natural insect as it fluttered through the air to the surface of the water.

But no American fisherman familiar with English angling literature can help feeling admiration for the English dry-fly enthusiast's deep study of

Angling Entomologists

his favorite sport. The Enghsh expert is an entomologist and knows upon what insects the trout feed, and as a rule finds out what insect they are taking on that particular day and hour that he is on the stream; and from his fly box he selects a fly tied in exact imitation in form, size, and color of the living insect. How small a part has a knowledge of entomology played, as a general rule, in American trout fishing ! The dry-fly angler endeavors to present the fly to the fish in the most natural manner possible. He knows that weak, flying insects cannot swim against a current with the speed of a torpedo boat, and that they do not move about under the surface by starts and jerks. He reasons that if a winged insect is on the surface of a running stream it can have but one action; that is the motion imparted by the current. In other words, the fly simply floats on the surface of the water; and so his artificial lures came to be known as dry-flies or floating flies.

And from this comes the whole theory of dry-fly fishing, as described briefly at the beginning of this chapter: The exact imitation, and the fly that floats down-stream with a natural motion. If any movement is given to the fly, other than that imparted by the current, the dry-fly angler's theory is that the trout will look upon it as an entirely unnatural proceeding, something that it has discovered that live flies will not do, and that therefore the lure will have no attraction whatever for the fish.

I CHAPTER in

I Largely Statistical, Describing { Rods, Lines, Leaders, Flies, \ and Other Tackle

)1 S to the equipment necessary for /-% this method of fishing, the author will assume that the reader is thoroughly familiar with the proper clothing to wear, the several styles of wading trousers or wading stockings, landing-net, reel, creel, and various things of minor importance, and in discussing this part of the subject will confine himself principally to rods, lines, leaders, and flies.

The rod is generally and properly regarded as the most important part of a fisherman's outfit. There is nothing that can equal a good rod of split-bamboo. For dry-fly fishing the rod should have plenty of what is commonly known as ''backbone"; that is, it should not be weak or "whippy." It may be nine, nine and one-half, or ten feet long, though, perhaps, the tenfoot rod is the favorite.* It is impossible to describe a rod adequately by merely giving weight for length, for the very simple reason that one nine-foot rod of six ounces may have much less power, backbone, and resiliency, than another of the same length weighing four and one-half ounces. What are known as four-ounce or five-ounce tournament rods, weighing four and three-quarter ounces and five and one-half or five and three-quarter ounces, respectively (an allowance of

*The favorite of all rods used by the author is nine feet long and weighs, with metal reel seat, four and three-quarter ounces.

Weights of Rods and Lines

three-quarters of an ounce is always made for a metal reel seat in fly-casting tournaments), are in my opinion ideal rods for the purpose. Not, however, that tournament rods are at all necessary. The author has several rods that were not built for tournament casting, but which are ideal for dry-fly fishing — one in particular, nine and one-half feet long, weighing five and one-half ounces, full of backbone, snap, and ginger, and easily capable of handling an English water-proofed D tapered hne, a line much heavier than lines usually used in fishing. There are several reasons why a strong, powerful rod should be chosen for dry-fly work. A heavier line is used than is customary in ordinary fly-fishing, for reasons that will be explained; the rod is called upon to do much more work, for in using the dry-fly, after each cast [29]

there must be several casts in the air, or ''false casts," for the purpose of drying the fly, and lengthening the line before the insect again touches the water. Therefore the rod should be powerful, though not necessarily heavy; in fact, unless one likes to have a tired wrist at the end of the day, an unnecessarily heavy rod is anything but desirable. Incidentally it may be stated that it is a good plan always to select a reel of the exact weight to balance the rod perfectly, so that the rod does not feel top-heavy.

Expert anglers will advise without qualification an English water-proofed silk Hne for dry-fly fishing. It may, perhaps, hurt an American's pride to feel compelled to admit that while nothing can equal the best Americanmade split-bamboo rods, there has not as yet been produced a fly-line in [301

Lines Dressed in a Vacuum

this country that can compare with the best EngHsh product. These Hues are expensive, but well worth the money they cost. Some anglers who would like to possess an English line feel that they cannot afford it; yet they can afford to go on expensive fishing trips. My advice would be to get the line, and to pay for it, if necessary, by reducing the duration of a fishing trip by one day. The line, having thus been paid for, will furnish pleasure for many other trips to come.

The English fly-lines are water-proofed in a vacuum, so that the "dressing" may permeate every fibre of the silk. Then they are rubbed down, and afterward dressed again. Just how many times this operation is repeated depends upon the make and quality of the line. The completed product is a Une of great beauty, smoothness, and flexibility, and the angler who has not used one has a fresh pleasure before him in fly-casting. As to the size of the line, the same thing that was said of "weight for length" in rods may be said of lines, changing the expression to "weight for size." In a line it is the weight that counts; and lines of different makes designated by the letters D, E, or F, vary both in size and in weight. It is probable, however, that the beginner in dry-fly fishing will be perfectly safe if he buys an E line, though I often use with much pleasure the heavier D line. Some may look upon a trout line of this size as suitable only for tournament work, and be inclined to criticise its use on the streams. They may be right. But if the reader will bear with me for a moment I think that the proposition will seem more reasonable to him: In

The Line Must Fit the Rod

the first place, the author does not be- Heve in "far-off" casting, excepting when absolutely necessary. The D line tapers gradually for from fifteen to eighteen feet from its largest diameter to a very fine diameter at the end; to this is attached a nine-foot leader, so that before one begins to use the thickest length of the line he already has from twenty-four to twenty-seven feet of finer line and leader out. Then on his long casts he begins to avail himself of the driving power of the heaviest part of the line. Perhaps, however, it will be more sensible for the beginner to buy an E line, but by all means it should be tapered. And remember that the line must be neither too heavy nor too light for the rod. It should, in other words, '*fit" the rod exactly.

Next in importance comes the leader. There are various opinions as to whether this necessary article should be tapered or not, and also as to the exact length that should be used. The beginner may study all these things out on the streams, and be guided both by his own experience and that of expert anglers whom he may meet. It is safe to say that a large majority of dry-fly anglers both in England and America use a tapered leader nine feet long, and dry-fly leaders are commonly listed in this way in nearly all catalogues. It is true that a long, light leader is difficult to manage against a strong head-wind, and in these weather conditions a leader of six feet might be better. The conventional dry-fly leader is tapered, and is rather coarse at the line end, tapering down from fine drawn gut to the finest undrawn at the end to which the fly is tied. Personally I prefer the fine undrawn gut

English and American Flies

ends or points to the drawn gut for general fishing.

It is generally a pleasure to an American writer to do all American products full justice, and not to advocate the purchase abroad of things that are made in this country of equal quality. I have unhesitatingly advised my readers to buy English lines, but I am in much doubt as to what to say about the purchase of flies. Of course, England is the home — the birthplace, so to speak — of the floating fly, and its use in this country has been so limited that American fly-tiers have not had suflScient encouragement to make efforts to put upon the market a product that can compete in quality with the English floating insect, or to attempt to tie flies in imitation of insects found upon American streams. So personally, I think that our most expert dry-fly fishermen generally use flies of English make. There has been much more interest in the dry-fly in this country recently than ever before, and some of our dealers have imported English dry-flies of the best quality, and have put them on the market at reasonable prices. They should be encouraged in this good work. As to the flies themselves, it has already been made plain that they are "tied dry"; that is, so that they will float. It is therefore necessary that the bodies of dry-flies shall be made of materials that will float readily, and that will not become water-soaked easily. There are certain objections to the use of silk, as most of it changes color when wet, and the "dubbing" commonly used for the bodies of wet flies, becomes quickly water-soaked and the fly consequently loses its buoyancy; so that now Mr.

Fly-Dressing Materials

Halford recommends quill, horse-hair, and Rofia grass for dressing the bodies of floating flies. This, however, is a subject that properly belongs to the flydressers' art and need not be enlarged upon in a book of instruction in the use of the fly.

Chapter IV

Showing that Americans May Use the Dry-Fly, Though There is No American Fly-Fisher's Entomology

WHILE perhaps American anglers as a rule have suffered no particular inconvenience from being compelled to use English patterns, yet who would not feel much more pride if Americans were able to procure flies of the highest class tied in imitation of the insects found upon our own streams? But there is one obstacle that seems to make this impossible at present. In 1836, seventy-six years ago, Mr. Alfred Ronalds gave to the English angling world a very complete entomology, containing the names

Nature Imitated Accurately

of forty-six flies commonly found upon the English streams, which formed a large part of the insect food of their trout. Very careful drawings of these insects were made, and in the book the plates were hand-colored to resemble the natural fly in every particular. Side by side with the natural insects were plates of the imitation flies, also hand-colored. In 1886, Mr. Halford published one of his celebrated works, ''Floating Flies and How to Dress Them," and in this book were shown ninety artificial patterns, all dressed from the natural insects, and in the de luxe edition hand-colored. In 1897, Mr. Halford gave to anglers another work, his "Dry -Fly Entomology," containing one hundred patterns. The great accuracy aimed at by Mr. Halford in all his entomological studies may be understood when we learn that he in no case was satisfied that he had the correct type of any insect until he had secured at least two hundred specimens of that insect, all taken from the water and none from the air. In America it is doubtless true that many anglers have examined carefully various insects they have seen on our trout streams, but no one apparently has carried his investigations so far as to make them of practical value to a large number of his fellow anglers.