In a recent number of the London Fishing Gazette is one of the best articles on the English grayling that I have ever seen. It is written by Mr. E. F. Goodwin, who is undoubtedly fully conversant with his theme and well acquainted with the habits of that fish. Among other things he says:—

"When in season I maintain that the grayling will give excellent sport on suitable tackle, is splendid eating, and is as handsome a fish as any angler need wish to gaze upon. What more can one want? How Charles Cotton could have written in such terms of condemnation of the sporting qualities of this fish as to call him 'one of the deadest-hearted fishes in the world, and the bigger he is the more easily taken,' passes my understanding, although we must remember that this remark was passed to 'Viator' on his catching a grayling in the early part of March, when the fish would be out of condition in all probability. I confess to a feeling of disappointment at the summary way in which Walton dismisses the grayling, showing that he did not think very highly of him either from an edible or sporting point of view.

"Grayling will rise readily to the artificial fly, and although they will come again time after time if missed (or perhaps I should say if they miss the fly, which is more usual), they require the neatest and finest tackle and the most delicate handling to secure them; and as Francis Francis truly says, 'when you have hooked a grayling, your next job is to land him.' ... There is a lot of difference between the way a well-conditioned trout and grayling fight after being hooked, and this may account for some of the condemnation heaped upon the latter as to its non-sportive character; for although not so lively as the trout with its mad rushes for liberty, yet the kind of resistance is more dangerous to the hold you have on him, for the grayling tries the hold of the hook in every possible way, and from every possible point of that hold. To my mind a grayling is much more difficult to land than a trout, and the more I fish for grayling the more convinced I am of his gameness and sporting qualities. Certainly there are a great many more grayling lost after being hooked than trout, and this is accounted for principally not so much from the reputed tenderness of the mouth as from the fact of the fish not being so firmly hooked as the trout usually is.

"The ideas of grayling not heading up-stream and of being deleterious to the trout have been perpetuated by author after author, just copying one another without really ascertaining the facts.... As regards the advisability of introducing grayling into a trout stream, that depends entirely upon the nature of the river. As far as my experience and observation go, grayling only become detrimental to the trout in that, being active and voracious feeders, they consume the food that otherwise would have belonged to and been partaken of by the trout. It is certain that these fish live together in general amity. The grayling is but seldom a fish eater, and therefore any accusation as to its being destructive to the fry of trout is untenable. That it, in the trout-spawning season, may help itself to what it can find of the superfluous ova which float down the stream no one can object to, but as to its burrowing in the redds and disturbing the hatching ova. I very much doubt it. Both the late Dr. Brunton and Dr. Hamilton were very strong in their assertion that this was a matter of impossibility with the grayling, and yet we are assured by Dr. James A. Henshall that the fry of grayling are as much addicted to cannibalism as the pike-perch fry."

[THE MORE SPORTSMANLY WAY OF CATCHING]

[MASCALONGE]

After giving a brief space to natural bait-fishing, he goes on to say: "But after all there is only one way in which this fish should be caught, and that is with the fly. This ground has been gone over so many times that it only remains for me to say that, the grayling being a bold and daring riser, never be discouraged if you fail to hook him, even if he rise at your fly time after time. He lies very low in the river when watching for his prey, and therefore is not so easily disturbed; and if you remain quite still when he has risen and missed the fly and gone down to his lair, he will surely rise again. His rise, too, is different to a trout. A trout, from lying close to the surface when feeding, takes without effort the flies floating over him, and also is easily scared. A grayling, from lying deep in the water, quite close to the bottom, comes up with great rapidity, and seldom takes the fly until it has passed him; and should he miss it, which often happens, disappears so quickly that he may well be compared to a shadow—hence the name of 'umber,' from umbra, a shadow. Should you hook him, up goes his great dorsal fin and down goes his head in his determination to get to his hiding-place, and it depends on his size and gameness, as well as the skill of the angler, whether he succeeds or not. I have often heard anglers complain that grayling are more difficult to hook than trout. Experienced anglers are all aware that grayling are not so easily hooked on the rise as trout, but he offers the best compensation in his power by consenting to rise over and over again until if you do not hook him the fault is yours, not his. When he rises at a passing fly he must ascend at lightning speed in order to cover the distance in time to catch it; having done so, he turns instantly head down and descends at the same speed. This is really the 'somersault' so well known to grayling fishers. With a long line it is next to impossible to strike a grayling on the instant, and a taut line in this fishing is of even greater importance than in trout-fishing."

I have given the above liberal quotations because the article agrees so well with my own practice in grayling fishing, and accords with the habits of the American graylings as I have observed them.

FOOTNOTE:

[1]