TROUT FLY-FISHING IN AMERICA 



render him unfit to try out both methods in any compara- 

 tive test for determining the merits of both. 



The comparative merits of the two methods of fly- 

 fishing can only be fairly, squarely and impartially tried 

 out by two anglers, one representing the wet-fly and the 

 other the dry-fly, and each should be an expert exponent 

 of his respective style of fly-fishing. 



Results obtained from such a tryout would be of some 

 value in determining which method was the more compre- 

 hensive as well as skillful, without prejudice to either. 



It must always be borne in mind that the test between 

 the dry-fly dry and the dry-fly wet is not the question, but 

 that the test is between the two methods of fishing with 

 a fly, the wet and the dry. 



Mr. Gill's tryout proved nothing as to the relative 

 merits of the two styles of fly-fishing any more than a try- 

 out would prove anything had a wet-fly been substituted 

 for a dry one by Mr. Gill, and certainly he would not have 

 thought such a tryout was at all fair to his method of fish- 

 ing the fly, nor would any fair-minded angler think so. 



In trying out the two methods of fly-fishing both ex- 

 ponents of the two styles should be obliged to fish, not only 

 waters suitable to the dry-fly, but those suitable to the wet- 

 fly as well. Both methods should be tested on all the dif- 

 ferent fishable waters, for only in this way can the real 

 merits be at all determined with fairness to each and a 

 proper comparison be made. 



It is refreshing at times to observe the frankness and 

 fairness with which an English dry-fly angler says cer- 



70 



