154 ON MINNOW AND PARR-TAIL FISHING. 



with by the use of such tackle as I have recommended. 

 There are also two evils resulting from the adoption of 

 it, apparently unregarded; one is, that it interferes with 

 the protrusion of a hook from the very part of the 

 minnow, namely, the head, whereby trout generally 

 seize it ; and the other, that it disguises in some mea- 

 sure the conformation of that section of the lure, more 

 especially the eyes, which I esteem to be of a very 

 attractive nature. To pike, at any rate, they are so, a 

 proof of which I very recently met with. 



Happening, one afternoon, to troll from the bank for 

 these fish, in a favourite resort of theirs, on Teviot, I 

 employed for my bait the lower half of a parr or small 

 trout, using gimp tackle and swivels. The cast itself is 

 not above twenty or thirty yards in length, and to fish 

 it carefully over did not occupy me ten minutes. This 

 I did on the occasion alluded to, without, to my know- 

 ledge, stirring a single fin. Not content, however, with 

 one trial, although a searching one, I continued to ply 

 on in the same spot for nearly half an hour, with no 

 better success. At length, as a farewell resource, I 

 resolved to re-fish the cast with the upper half of the 

 parr. Accordingly, appending it to my tackle, I re- 

 commenced throwing, and although in playing it below 

 the surface of the water, it spun but indifferently, to 

 my surprise, in a very short time, I captured with it no 

 fewer than five pike, two of which weighed about six 

 pounds each. These were scattered along with others, 

 which managed, owing to the nature of the landing 

 place to make their escape, over the whole cast in ques- 

 tion, and in my opinion had preferred the bait latterly 

 employed, solely on account of the eyes and head. 

 This incident, however, I mention, not as any argument 

 against the use of the parr-tail, whether for pike or 



