INTRODUCTORY 41 



in endeavouring to reconcile the statements of the different witnesses. 



Perhaps the views of anglers should be received with caution, but 

 1 may submit this opinion concerning Tweed " bull trout " given me by 

 jn angler residing on Tweedside, who is himself a close student of fish 

 and their habits and from whose pen any work on the Salmonidce would 

 be of great value. " I am afraid 1 am not an authority on the subject," 

 he modestly wrote me, " but 1 hold that sea-trout, salmon-trout, and 

 bull-trout are one and the same fish. They vary very much in size 

 only — from \ lb. to, say, 25 lbs." So, too, Mr. John James Hardy, of 

 Alnwick, wrote me when I inquired if he could furnish me with a 

 characteristic photograph of an AIn or a Coquet " bull trout " : — " The 

 trouble is that my opinion is that the Coquet so-called bull trout is only 

 an overgrown sea-trout; that there is no difference between the bull 

 trout and the sea-trout, and that Salnio eriox exists only in imagination." 

 It is difficult to get over the fact, however, that as far back as the time 

 of Izaak Walton, the "bull tnmt" was a noticeable fish. "There is 

 also," said his Piscator, " in Northumberland a trout called a bull trout, 

 of a much greater length and bigness than any in the southern parts " ; 

 and Walton's detailed description of the " Fordidgc " trout differs in 

 no essentials from a modern description of the " bull trout," of which 

 it may generally be said, if one be caught, that " that trout hit not for 

 hunger but wantonness." 



This subject is of course one which is frequently dealt with in 

 current angling literature, and in the pages of " The Fishing Gazette " 

 and " The Field " one finds constant references to the " bull trout." 

 I have often curiously examined accounts of the fish to .see if there is 

 any recognisable distinction botwocn them and sea-trout, but it is not 

 easy to find anything in their habits that distinguishes " bull trout " 

 from big sea-trout, and not much more in their appearance than a more 

 pronounced convexity of tail. 



It seems to me, therefore, admitting the characteristic of the " round 



