February 4, 1893] 
THE FISHING GAZETTE 
79 
now evident that there has been a recent re¬ 
arrangement and classification of the anglers 
fishing this choice stretch of water, and that the 
Sportsman’s Guide is all wrong. Twenty rods 
had it formerly at £2 2s. per rod. Now six have 
it at £4 4s. per rod (with the total rights of the 
former twenty), plus fourteen anglers confined to 
sea trout at £1 Is. per rod. 
It was not the actual estuary of the Ytban I 
referred to in mentioning the proposal to form a 
tidal lake there, but the burn which lies between 
the estuary and the village of Newburgh, sepa¬ 
rated from the estuary by the links, but fed from 
it. A couple of dam dykes is all that is needed 
to experiment with. G. M. M. 
THE PRESERVATION OF INLAND 
FISHERIES. 
SiK,—We desire to draw the attention of 
anglers and land owners in rural and sporting 
districts to the danger now threatening many of 
our rivulets and trout streams from the admis¬ 
sion into them of imperfectly-purified town and 
village sewage, owing to a mistaken, but just 
now prevalent, belief that chemical processes for 
the purification of sewage may cost the rate¬ 
payers less than resorting, in these times of 
agricultural depression, to the only natural and 
hitherto recognised method of purification, by 
means of land. 
All Government inquiries during the last 
thirty years have demonstrated the fact that land 
alone can purify sewage, and that any clarifica¬ 
tion obtainable from deposition or precipitation, 
with or without any known chemical agent, is 
only sufficient in case the effluent from such pro¬ 
cess can be discharged into a tidal river, or some 
other large and rapid current. Thus, such 
chemical process should only legitimately be 
resorted to in crowded manufacturing districts, 
where land is not to be bought at any reasonable 
price. 
Agricultural depression and bad management 
of many sewage farms in this country have rudely 
shaken the faith of Dr. Edward Franklin, F.R S., 
and other early supporters who recommended 
irrigation, upon the double basis of efficiency as 
well as economy. Modern patentees, who, 
naturally, first think of their pockets, recognise 
an available source of profit in the subsidies 
which rural authorities, alarmed by farming 
losse.s, may be induced to pay for any process 
which professes to obviate or diminish their farm¬ 
ing responsibilities. If such patentees confine 
themselves to the legitimate openings above 
referred to, well and good, but of late they have 
tried to intrude into inland towns, in sparsely 
inhabited districts, which could obtain abundance 
of good land at agricultural price, and where the 
effluent must be discharged into some clear fish¬ 
ing stream. 
In such cases they make the plausible excuse 
that their imperfect effluent shall be passed over 
a few acres of land before discharged into the 
stream, but with such a limited area, and the 
probable neglect of due precautions, after the 
novelty has worn off, in most cases a nuisance will 
result, and the pollution of our upland streams 
must follow. 
All the experiments of such patentees, whether 
in the laboratory or with the sewage of a town, 
are' made upon more or less defined volumes, 
treated by carefully educated and interested 
employes working within four walls (which exclude 
all but ticket-holders on show days). Whereas 
our sewage farms, traversed or bounded by public 
roads or footpaths, are open to observation by 
day and night, and neither managers nor labourers 
have much pecuniary interest in success or 
failure. 
We trust that anglers, fishery boards, land 
owners, and others who value sport and the 
amenities of country life, will unite in opposition 
to any future attempt to intrude chemical treat¬ 
ment upon the notice of sanitary authorities 
within reach of suitable land. Otherwise salmon, 
trout, and bottom fishing, except in remote dis¬ 
tricts, will be shortly numbered among the sports 
of the past, without any necessity whatever.— 
Yours faithfull}^ 
Alfred S. Jones, Lt.-Col,, late 9th 
Lancers. 
Eakdley Bailey Denton, M.A., Oxon. 
Culverside, Carshalton. 
I^IN. versus 2in. MESHES. 
Dear Sir, —Will you allow me space to correct 
an erroneous impression that appears to prevail as 
to the difference between a l^in. and a 2in. mesh. 
I observe that one of the principal speakers at 
the meeting of the Angler’s Association at the 
Foresters’ Hall, remarked that the alteration in 
the size of the mesh was equal to a decrease of 
25 per cent.; such I believe is the general opinion; 
and I must say it does so appear at first sight. 
But, as a matter of fact, the reduction instead of 
being 25 per cent., is almost 45, or, to speak more 
exactly, 43| per cent. 
A net made with a 2in. mesh has openings or 
meshes of 4 square inches each, whilst one netted 
with a l|in. mesh has openings of only 2j square 
inches ; or, as I said in my previous letter 
(.Tan. 21), “a fraction more than half the size.” 
The diagrams will show at a glance the relative 
sizes of the two meshes. In Fig. I the larger 
square is the size of the 2in. mesh, the smaller 
one that of the l^in. The small dotted square 
represents the amount by which the smaller mesh 
exceeds the half of the larger one. 
In Fig. 2 the meshes a.re represented as drawn 
out to a convenient shape for the escape of a fish. 
Without an opportunity, at this moment, of 
held by the larger. Surely this great difference 
was not appreciated by the Board of the Thames 
Conservancy when framing the bye-laws.—I am. 
Sir, yours obediently, 
A Son of F.ather Thames. 
AMBER WAX. 
Dear Sir, —In reply to your correspondent, 
A.D.C., I beg to state the articles are known as 
“Amber Wax,” and can be obtained at any oil 
shop.—Respectfully yours, W. H. E. 
Castlenau, S.W. 
MAPS FOR ANGLERS, &c. 
Dear Sir, —Would you kindly say in your next 
issue, if it is possible to procure maps showing 
specially the source and course of the rivers of 
the various districts ? 
Also dD you know whether it is possible to 
borrow from any library, or other source, Mr. 
Halford’s “ Dry Fly-Fishing ” and “ Floating 
Flies,” &c., by paying a subscription —Respect¬ 
fully yours. Lux. 
[Our correspondent will find the reduced 
ordnance maps, in sections, published by Messrs. 
Gall and Inglis, Edinboro’ and London, most 
useful. We have no doubt Mr. Halford’s book is 
in some of the public libraries, but have no 
information on the point.— Ed.] 
INCIDENT IN ROACH FISHING. 
Dear Sir, —Whilst fishing last Sunday near 
Staines, a rather curious capture of a small roach 
was made by my brother. He struck at an ap¬ 
parent bite, and, to our suprise, on raising the 
fish from the water we both saw that it was 
caught in the line some six inches from the hook. 
The line had formed a complete noose round the 
middle of the fish. We thought probably another 
fish had taken the bait and carried the line round 
the second fish, which the act of striking 
tightened. The fish, about four inches long, was 
of course returned to his native element. Wishing 
you all success, I remain, yours faithfully, 
S. W. 
A DISCLAIMER. 
j Dear Sir, —The Henley reporter in your last 
I issue, draws special attention of pike fishers to 
the taking of small pike by me. This is entirely 
I false, as was the report by “ Marlow Buzz,” a few 
weeks ago, crediting me with a 51b. bream.— 
j Yours truly, R. Collins. 
Aston, nr. Henley-on-Thames. 
MISTAKEN WEIGHT OF FISH. 
! Sir, —I did not intend to reply to the correc- 
1 tion of “ Esox ” in regard to the 251b. jack, as it 
I was merely stated in connection with the circum- 
j stances attending its capture. When I saw it in 
I the late Mr. H. L. Rolfe’s studio, it was there 
! considered as a fish of that weight, and I 
' remember when I was there Mr. Alfred Jardine 
came in with a perch of over 31b., and Mr. Rolfe 
remarked, “ I would rather have the perch than 
the 251b. jack.” I have, however, received a 
letter from my old friend, Mr. Sachs, in reference 
to this correction, and he gives me authority to 
use it: “ The fish weighed 23|lb., and it is labelled 
on the case 241b., allowing half-a-pound for waste. 
Such a slip ought not to have been taken notice of. 
It reads as if his late friend, Mr. H. L. Rolfe, 
forced a small jack down. We took the fish to 
Buckland, left it there for casting, and Mr. 
Eden had it afterwards to put the skin into a 
case. I certainly did not cram the fish. I think 
it was not wise to say where the fish came from, 
.as such publicity gets people to write for orders, 
and that ultimately prevents any further orders 
being given.” The latter has always been my 
policy. I think “ Esox’s ” correction was not 
needed, as it was of very small importance. B. 
NO ERROR. 
Dear Sir, —With reference to my article en¬ 
titled “ Zig Zag Routes,” &c., to which a correspon¬ 
dent called your attention in the issue of Jan. 14, 
of the Fishing Gazette, I beg to state there is no 
error in the figures given. There is a wide mar¬ 
gin between 250 dols. and 2'50 dobs. Perhaps, 
when reading the article, a strong January sun¬ 
beam prevented him from seeing the “ point.”— 
Amours, Ac., _ Rux. 
THE PROPOSED RUIN OF THE THAMES 
AS AN ANGLING RESORT. 
Dear Sir, —Many thanks for printing my long 
letter in the Fishing Gazette of last Saturdaj’. 
Please allow me to correct one word. 1 am made 
to say “ I have myself assisted in saving millions 
of perch ova.” I wrote very hurriedly, and 
]irobably used the word “ millions ” by a slip of 
the pen. My intention was to write “ myriads.” 
I hope, dear sir, you will at once notify in 
the Gazette, the publication by advertisement of 
the revised draft when it appears. — Yours 
obediently, Arthur C. Butler. 
Reading. 
