34 Tr outing-Flies. 



In summing up the arguments, or rather such 

 arguments as Mr Pennell adduces, on both sides, 

 he gives what he calls his own " true rationale " of 

 the matter in these words : 



" 1. Trout certainly take the artificial for the 

 natural fly. 



" 2. But as the artificial fly is necessarily pre- 

 sented in an abnormal condition namely, wet 

 instead of dry, sunk instead of floating, and as the 

 resemblance which wet feathers and silk under 

 water bear to dry insect-down, fluff, and wings on 

 the water, is imperfect, (3) it is necessary, for the 

 purpose of hiding the counterfeit, and partly also 

 to hide the hook, to give the fly an unnatural, life- 

 like movement in the water, adding to it also an 

 unnatural quantity of legs (hackles) which open 

 and shut, and move with the movements of the 



fly. 



" 4. These movements and alterations, however, 

 make it quite impossible for trout to discriminate 

 minutely between the various unnatural imitations 

 of natural flies, whether in form or tint, (5) and 

 render it doubly important that the imitation 

 insect should be as characteristic and ' fly-like ' as 

 possible in shape, lest the fish should fail to per- 

 ceive the resemblance altogether. 



" 6. General shape, general colour, and size, are 

 all that can be distinguished by the fish. These 



