Rods and Rod Material. 153 



source of danger to him. Twice in my angling experi- 

 ence have I been obliged to cut a hook, fastened there 

 on the back cast, from the face of a companion who 

 considered the use of a feather-weight rod a point of 

 honor. It is astonishing how tough at least some of 

 the muscles of the face are. In both cases I stripped 

 the fly from the hook and endeavored to bring out the 

 point and draw the rest of the hook through, but, after 

 applying all the force I dared, was obliged to resort to 

 the knife, for fear of breaking off the hook in the flesh. 



It seems to me, therefore, that the sphere of the feath- 

 er-weight rod is confined to rapid sheltered streams ; and 

 this not only for the reasons already stated, but because 

 its lifting power for the back cast is less than a more 

 potent rod. A rapid current may be made in part to 

 neutralize this difficulty, since if, when it is time for the 

 back cast, the line be allowed to run down stream to its 

 full extent and then checked until the force of the cur- 

 rent has thrown the flies to the surface, the whole lifting 

 power of the rod is available for the back cast. Of course, 

 on water having little or no current this cannot be done. 



As to the action preferred in a fly-rod, even greater dis- 

 cordance of opinion is found. One likes a rod stiff as a 

 poker for the lower third, and withy for the remainder 

 of its length. Another will look at nothing not stiff in 

 butt and tip, and sloppy in the middle joint. A third 

 must have plenty of action in the butt, and not much 

 elsewhere ; a fourth uniform action from the handle to 

 the tip, but quite stiff withal ; a fifth the same general 

 spring, but great flexibility; and so on to the end of the 

 chapter. Therefore the writer, when he describes what a 

 fly-rod should be, gives but his own personal preference, 

 from which many a better angler will dissent. 



