THOUGHTS ON BIG FISH 169 



pounds. I remember the clock striking ten as I 

 lifted it out in my landing-net. 



This was a fish of reasonable shape and solidity, 

 but I remember another big Blagdon trout which 

 was less satisfactory. This was also caught on a 

 dry fly. It had been found rising steadily just 

 inside a clump of weeds which was within easy 

 casting distance of the bank. It was feeding in 

 the very deliberate manner which is suggestive of a 

 heavy trout, and when after some tmie I persuaded 

 it to take a fly — a hackle-fly not unlike the brown 

 silverhorns that were about in plenty — I expected 

 something extra special in the way of a battle. 

 The result was surprising. The hooked fish hardly 

 resisted at all, gave a feeble waggle or two, and then 

 allowed itself to be towed ashore. The reason for 

 this was plain then — it was very badly deformed. 

 Though it had the length and framework of a big 

 one, it also had a double spinal curvature, and, as 

 might be expected, was anything but athletic, and 

 poorly nourished to boot. The surprising thing 

 was tliat the fish, a rainbow, had been able, despite 

 physical disabilities which must have attended it 

 from the fry stage, to live and grow to a weight of 

 nearly three pounds. 



Rainbows are rather apt to be disappointing on 

 the scales because of their short life and their 





i'' 





