Mat 6, 1893] 
THE FISHING GAZETTE 
329 
YELLOW FEVER. 
“ Oh that we two were Maying.” 
“ How I have been looking forward to this 
day, and what a ghastly sell it is ! ]Sr<»ar the end 
of May, if you please, and an icy north-easter 
shrieking down the valley, and tons of weeds 
coming down the main river. True, I might put on 
a big fly, and ‘chuck and chance it,’ down stream 
in the lower water, where it runs too slow to be 
fishable, except on a rough day. So they say, at 
least. I don’t complain of the water at any time 
when you can put a line up stream. But 1 came 
for sport—and chuck and chance it in a wind if 
you catch nothing is boredom incarnate, and if 
you catch, is undistinguishable from murder. 
. . . Not a fish moving anywhere. . . . 
Let’s come out of this, and get into the hut and 
talk flies. . . . 
“What’s that? Water rat, you think. Look 
again. Head and tail rise — another. There 
goes another. Man, let’s slip across and get 
under shelter of the spinney, and if we don’t 
have the grandest twenty minutes ever known— 
call me Ananias and Sapphira. Into the punt 
with you. Landina-net, please. Over we go! 
Out with you, quick ! Not a second to lose. 
“ Now we’re out of the wind. Just enough 
behind us to help out the line, and the only 
smooth reach of the river for miles before us. 
“What shall you put up? Whitchurch, my 
boy! Whitchurch, by all that’s holy! If you 
haven’t any, pick my pocket and be off. There 
goes a fish under the opposite bank. There he 
comes again, and again, 2pb. if he’s an ouhce, 
and mad on the feed. Out of reach ? Not a bit 
of it. See that. If he won’t have that he won’t 
have anything. . . . Ah! Habet. 
# # # * * 
“ Do you see any more rises ? I’m afraid it’s 
all over. Hasn’t lasted twenty minutes. How 
ha,ve you done ? Yes; a good brace. What do 
you think of these? All on Whitchurch— 
double cypher—a grand fly ! ’’ 
Wing .— Pale starling. 
Body. —Yellow floss silk. 
Legs. —Palish ginger cock’s hackle. 
WhisJcs. —To match legs. 
Hook. —00 for preference, or 0, very occasion¬ 
ally 1. I don’t believe in treble cyphers. 
I think this is almost the best of the Yellows 
He can be dressed in a variety of shades—lighter 
as the season advances, and you can use wool for 
the body at times with advantage. 
Last year I was down here for the May-fly, 
and, in two disappointing days, I got three brace 
out of my total of six and a-half brace with this 
little chap, the rest falling to the May-fly. The 
trout went on taking the Whitchurch till after 
seven in the evening, and I killed a brace in my 
last quarter of an hour. 
Often in May-fly time a paler shade of yellow 
will do better at midday, when the trout will 
desert the Green Drake to line the banks and kiss 
down the Pale Yellow Duns, almost without 
breaking the surface. Mr. Halford gives a 
capital pattern known as Flight’s Fancy. 
Wings. —Palest starling 
Body. —Very pale yellow floss silk. 
Bib. —Fine flat gold. 
Legs. —Pale buff Cochen cock. 
whisks —To match. 
Hook. —00. 
His other patterns are (1 and 2) the Medium 
and Pale Olive Quills, and (.3) Pale Olive Dun. 
The former are too well known to require descrip¬ 
tion. The third bears repetition. 
Wing. —Pale starling. 
Body. —Pale yellowish floss. 
Bib. —White hair from Polar bear. 
Legs. —White cock’s hackle dyed. 
Whisk. —Medium olive. 
Hook. —0, 00, or 000. 
He also gives a Hare’s Ear Quill—a common 
Olive Quill, with hare’s face legs and Drake’s 
Extractor. 
Wings. —Light starling. 
Body. —Pale yellow olive floss. 
Bib. —Fine gold wire. 
Leg. —White cock’s hackle, dyed in green olive 
and carried to tail. 
Whisk. —Cock’s beard hackled, similarly dyed. 
Hook. —0, 00, and 000. 
But the greatest of these is Whitchurch. 
The late George Currell, of Winchester, had a 
pattern which he called “the Irresistible.” 
Wing. —Medium starling. 
Body .—Cream coloured mohair or silk. 
Bibbing —Fine flat gold or silver. 
Legs. —Buff Cochin cock. 
Whisks .— Same. 
Another pet pattern of his was called Little 
Carter. 
Wing. —Medium starling. 
Body. —Dubbing of sheep’s wool torn up with 
one white and one deep yellow silkworm cocoon 
in proportions of two of wool to one of silk. 
Legs. —Dubbing picked out. 
Whisks .—Sable tail, three fibres. 
Hook. —00 or 0. 
I could give a dozen more of his dressings, but 
refrain in mercy. 
His old-fashioned Primrose Dun is, however, 
too good and too typical to pass over. 
Wings. —Light starling. 
Body. —Primrose floss. 
Tag —Turn of gold. 
Legs. —Light honey dun or pale ginger. 
Whisk. —Three fibres ginger cock. 
Hook.—00. 
Currell made a great study of the Olive Dun, 
and his patterns exhibit a greater variety than 
those of any angling author I know of. 
Ogden’s Hare’s Ear is just the same fly as 
Whitchurch, only that instead of having a floss 
body, the yellow tying silk is displayed, and the 
ginger hackle is replaced by ginger or cinnamon- 
coloured stout hairs from the face of a hare. The 
best-looking pattern I ever saw of this fly was 
tied by Mrs. Eichardson, of Kingston-on-Thames, 
or by her mother, Mrs. Ogden Smith—I forget 
which. They no doubt inherit the patterns from 
Ogden, the original inventor. Ogden gives a 
pattern of Yellow Dun which is not unlike Whit¬ 
church, only the body is not of floss silk. It 
runs :— 
Wing. —Young (f.e., pale) starling. 
Body. —Yellow silk waxed with white wax. 
Legs. —Two turns of a good yellow dun hackle. 
Whisk. —Two strands of honey dun hackle, 
rather long. 
What he means by a yellow dun, as distin¬ 
guished from a honey dun hackle, I don’t know, 
unless it means brassy dun. 
Then he says the dunterel hackle on this body 
is very deadly, both for trout and grayliug. 
This is the famous Dotterel and Yellow of the 
North. When dotterel is not to be had, the 
starling (inside wing) supplies a substitute. 
Ogden gives another Yellow Dun, of a nonde¬ 
script character, which he calls Ogden’s Fancy. 
It is a sort of cross between a Wicknam’s Fancy 
and a Yellow Dun. 
Here is an idea, for the fly-dresser, to try the 
effect of crossina a series of patterns. This would 
be more plausible if there were any tendency on 
the part of standard patterns to die of in and in 
breeding. 
Ogden’s Fancy is dressed thus :— 
Wings. —Broad and upright—light starling. 
Body. —Yellow silk waxed with white wax. 
Tag. — Gold, two turns. 
Legs. —Bright red cock’s hackle with black root 
(and black centre for preference), ribbed from 
head to tail. Blood red or mahogany-coloured 
hackle for a variety. 
Whisks. —Three strands red cock’s hackle. 
Rook. —0 to 5 or 6. 
I have no experience of the fly, but Ogden re¬ 
commends it for dry fly work. 
Foster of Ashbourne’s patterns of the Yellow 
Dun are three in number : 
(1) Wings. —Young starling or fieldfare quill 
feather. 
Body. —Palish yellow mohair, mixed with a 
little pale blue fur, spun on palish yellow silk. 
Legs. —Light dun hackle freckled with yellow. 
(2) June Shade (Golden Dun)— 
Wing. —Young starling. 
Body —Deep yellow tying silk. 
Bib. —Fine gold wire. 
Legs. —Palish dun hackle, freckled with yellow. 
This looks like a pale yellow Greenwell’s Glory. 
(3) Common Yellow Dun— 
Same dressing minus the tinsel. 
Not a great difference from Whitchurch and 
Ogden. 
Theakston, strangely enough, overlooks the 
Yellow Dun entirely. 
Walbran, in addition to south country patterns, 
gives us several north country dressings, e.g , 
Snipe Bloa: 
Wings. —(Hackled). Inside jack snipe’s wing. 
Body. —Straw-coloured silk. 
Hook. —No. 1. 
(2) Dotterel Dun—described above. 
(3) Yellow Dun (winged). 
Wing. —Young starling’s quill feather. 
Bod?/..—Lemon-coloured silk waxed and un¬ 
twisted in wrapping on, so as to show a rib. 
Leys.—Olive stained hackle. 
Hook. —No. 1. 
This is the Yellow-legged Bloa of Jackson. 
Pritt gives us the Snipe Bloa again, and a 
Yellowy-legged Bloa differing from Foster’s com¬ 
mon Yellow Dun only in the injunction to wax 
well the silk to form the body, and in having a 
Cochin hen’s ginger hackle instead of a honey 
dun. But Whitchurch is tied indifferently with 
Cochin ginger hackle or honey dun. 
The Poult Bloa is a floss-bodied pattern tied 
hacklewise with the blue feather from under 
the wing of a young grouse killed in August or 
thereabouts. 
Francis Francis is “ inclined to think this fly 
is but a modification or sort of second crop of 
the Blue Dun.” Just Foster’s theory. Francis 
says it comes on more during the middle of the 
day than at morning or evening. That may be 
true enough of April, but as the feast of St. May¬ 
fly comes round, 1 have observed three distinct 
hatches of this little insect in a day. One before 
the Green Drake began to show, one in the mid- 
day interval, and a third after the flopping was 
over for the day. 
^ Francis Francis says many wise words of the 
Yellow Dun, and sums up all the authorities 
most capably. Thus, “ the body is of all shades 
of yellow from straw colour to a very pronounced 
yellow, and so almost to the colour known as 
gosling green or a sort of pale olive. Here again 
nothing comes near the quill body, if you can get 
it of the right colour. Silk you may use, but if 
you do it must be many shades lighter than the 
fly on the water, for as soon as it is wet the colour 
deepens very much, and it also spoils after once 
or twice using ; though in some of the very 
light shades floss silk gives that watery impal¬ 
pable look which the bodies of some duns have i.i 
a marked degree, nothing else does. The legs 
should be made of a delicate honey dun hen’s 
hackle. ... If the angler cannot get it, he 
may use the hackle of a light buff Cochin China 
hen «hich practically does almost as well. . . . 
It is well to have bodies of different hues. The 
wing should be taken from the wing of a young 
starling, being a lighter colour, and having a 
finer texture than an old one. The tail is short 
and limp, and the angler may use two small 
strands of the buff Cochin hackle.” 
There ! In these few sentences Francis Francis 
has summed up with the most perfect accuracy 
and lucidity all that h>is been rightly said by all 
the authors about the Yellow Dun. It is the last 
word on the subject, and a typical example of 
his marvellous thoroughne.ss. 
Probably there is no fly imitated in Britain the 
various patterns of which differ less among them¬ 
selves than the Yellow Dun. Look at the varie¬ 
ties of the Blue Dun. Look at the wild vagaries 
of the Olive and the March Brown and the Iron 
Blue, ond be thankful for the primitive simplicity' 
of your Yellow Dun. 
All that I have said of the Yellow Dun hitherto 
is, comparatively speaking, modern history, but 
the subject could not be called complete without 
an historical retrospect. 
The first mention of the Yellow Dun is not in 
Walton’s list, but in Cotton’s. It is No. 5, and 
the description runs thus :— 
“There is also a Yellow Dun ; the dubbing of 
camel’s hair, and yellow camlet or wool, mixed, 
and a white grey wing.” 
Camlet is not now attainable. Camels’ hair 
(outside of paint brushes) is not easily accessible, 
but the pattern looks a likely one; and, when all 
is said and done, 1 cannot allege that we have 
made much advance on Cotton’s days. Yet, to 
have arrived at his stage of perfection, think 
what patient study and observation genera¬ 
tions of silent, unrecorded, unremembered, dead 
anglers must have given to the evolution of 
this fly. 
This is much, but for downright genius and 
