TROUT FLY-FISHING IN AMERICA 



try, one can understand why the dry-fly anglers there may 

 be absolutely correct when speaking about certain 

 methods used by wet-fly men. 



On the other hand, one cannot understand how the 

 American dry-fly anglers can make the statements they do 

 unless they simply voice their English cousins' views, hav- 

 ing no real knowledge of their own. 



For instance, Mr. Dewar, who is an exceptionally fair 

 writer in what he has to say about the wet-fly angler, makes 

 several statements that do not apply to wet-fly fishing in 

 this country at all, and to which every good sportsman and 

 angler who uses the wet-fly method very properly and em- 

 phatically objects. 



I refer to such statements as these : 



"As a rule he" (the wet-fly angler) "fishes down or across 

 stream, and does not strike till he feels his fish." 



"It is the aim of the wet-fly angler, as we have seen, to make 

 his flies sink below the surface. ..." 



"It might not be too much to say that it is no more satisfaction 

 to him" (the wet-fly angler) "to hook and land a particular feeding 

 fish than to hook in a rough bit of water a fish of whose existence, 

 till the tug on the line came, he knew nothing." 



I do not believe the anglers of this country, the fair- 

 minded-sportsmen, be they wet or dry-fly exponents of the 

 two different methods, will ever tolerate such statements 

 as these made by dry-fly writers, especially when such a 

 noted and experienced angler as Henry P. Wells, who 

 was an expert wet-fly angler, states as follows, speaking 

 about striking trout. 



72 



