Its habits of feeding, spawning, etc., are very similar to those of the small-mouth. It prefers stiller water, and is more at home in weedy situations, and will thrive in quiet, mossy ponds with muddy bottom where the small-mouth would eventually become extinct; on the other hand, the large-mouth can exist wherever it is possible for the small-mouth to do so. It is better able to withstand the vicissitudes of climate and temperature, and has a wonderful adaptability that enables it to become reconciled to its environment. The feeding habits of the two black-basses are much the same, though they differ as to their haunts. The large-mouth favors weedy rather than rocky places, and though its food is also much the same, the large-mouth is perhaps more partial to frogs and minnows, in the absence of crawfish, which, like the other species, it prefers.

In the Northern states it hibernates, and reaches a maximum weight of six or eight pounds, while in the Gulf states, where it is active the year round, it is taken weighing twenty pounds or more. In Florida I have taken it on the fly up to fourteen pounds, and up to twenty pounds with natural bait. In waters where it coexists with the small-mouth bass there is no difference in their excellence as food-fish. I have often eaten the large-mouth bass from the Clearwater lakes of Utah and Washington, that, with the single exception of the whitefish of Lake Superior, were the best of all fresh-water fishes. And I can truly say the same of those from some of the large rivers of Florida, notably the St. Lucie, St. Sebastian, and New rivers.

It prefers to spawn on gravel or sand, but if such situations are lacking, it makes its nest on a clay or mud bottom, or on the roots of water-plants; or in ponds of very deep water without shallow shores, it will spawn on the top of masses of weeds, in order to get near enough to sunlight. In other respects its breeding habits are similar to its cousin the small-mouth, the time of incubation and the guarding of the eggs and young being about the same.

As to the much-mooted subject of the gameness of the large-mouth bass I have no hesitation in saying, from an experience of nearly forty years, covering all sections of the country, that where the two species coexist there is no difference in their game qualities. The large-mouth is fully the equal of the small-mouth where they are exposed to the same conditions. Many anglers profess to think otherwise, but their deductions are drawn from a comparison of the two species when subject to totally different environment; for it is altogether a matter of environment and not of physical structure or idiosyncrasy that influences their game qualities. A small-mouth bass in a clear, rocky stream, highly aerated as it must be, is, as a matter of course, more active than a large-mouth bass in a quiet, weedy pond.

With others the opinion is merely a matter of prejudice or hearsay, a prejudice that is, indeed, difficult to account for. It does not make the small-mouth bass a gamer fish by disparaging the large-mouth. As I have said elsewhere, if the large-mouth bass is just as game as the small-mouth, the angler is just that much better off. As prejudice and ignorance go hand in hand, we are not surprised when we hear persons—I do not style them anglers—call the small-mouth the "true" black-bass, implying that the large-mouth is not a black-bass, but is, as they often say, the Oswego bass, which is, of course, absurd. I am glad to add, however, that the prejudice against the large-mouth bass is dying out among observant anglers, who know that a trout in a clear stream is more vigorous than one in a weedy, mucky pond.

From my own experience I am prepared to say that the large-mouth bass is more to be relied on in rising to the fly than the small-mouth, which fact should be taken into consideration when the gameness of the two species is compared. The remarks concerning fly-fishing for the small-mouth bass are also applicable to the large-mouth, as both are fished for in the same way, and with the same tackle, except that the rod may be a little heavier. For the large bass of the Gulf states the rod should be fully eight ounces in weight, and the flies a trifle larger, on hooks Nos. 2 to 6; otherwise the tackle should be the same.

Minnow-casting for the large-mouth need not differ from that described for the small-mouth bass. The tackle likewise may be the same, though for the heavy bass of Florida the rod may be eight, or even nine ounces, if preferred. Hooks may also be employed of a larger size, say Nos. 1 to 1-0, or even 2-0, as larger minnows are used for bait.

Some anglers of the Middle West have adopted a very short rod of six feet or less for casting the live frog or pork-rind overhead, in the same way as casting a fly. This is a very primitive style of bait-casting, being the same as practised by bucolic boys and Southern negroes using a sapling pole without a reel. The frog is reeled up to within a few inches of the tip and propelled like a wad of clay from a slender stick as we were wont to do as boys. The frog is projected with great accuracy, but not without a smack and splash on the water. With such a rod most of the pleasure of playing a bass to a finish is lost. Presumably the end justifies the means, but this method does not appeal to the artistic angler. If bait must be used, a small minnow, lightly cast from a suitable rod, is more in accordance with the eternal fitness of things and the practice and traditions of the gentle art. In very weedy ponds and lakes, however, where there is not open water enough to play a bass, and where it must be landed as soon as possible, this rod and style of casting answer a good purpose.

[OSWEGO (LARGE-MOUTH) BASS]

Still-fishing is the same for either species of black-bass, but as it is usually done from an anchored boat on Northern lakes, where the large-mouth bass is of greater size and weight than the small-mouth bass, somewhat heavier tackle may be used than recommended for the small-mouth.