Dec. 29, 1906.] 
IO29 
cane. I do not know if you, Sir, handled the 
split-cane 18ft. salmon rod, weighing 320Z. (not 
520Z.) with which Mr. E. J. Mills competed at 
the Crystal Palace tournament of 1904. It 
struck me (I am not a salmon fisher) as the 
most amazing piece of concentrated power I 
ever handled, and if there was a stiffer green- 
heart at the tournament,'I should like to have 
seen it.” 
“Unbiased” asks: 
“Why, if Mr. Hardy believes split-cane to be 
stiffer and more powerful than greenheart, did 
he think that a weaver’s beam of 520Z. of the 
material was necessary to hold up and propel 
a sufficiently long line to give him a chance of 
winning the tournament? 
“The greenheart expert had sufficient confi¬ 
dence in his material to be satisfied that a vastly 
lighter rod would carry the line.” 
J. F. C. Bell wrote as follows: 
“My experience is that split-cane does give 
and bend more than greenheart with an equal 
strain up to a certain point, the difference being 
that in greenheart the factor of safety, as re¬ 
gards the continuation of the curve, ceases 
about the center of the middle joint, with the re¬ 
sult if the strain is increased and the curve con¬ 
tinued beyond the factor of safety, which is situ¬ 
ated in the middle joint, a smash or fracture is 
the natural consequence. On the other hand, 
the same strain will cause the split-cane to as¬ 
sume a more circular curve, or, in other words, 
it gives more and bends more, and the strain 
can be increased until the curve continues to 
the butt, and even then the factor of safety is 
not exceeded, so that up to a certain point split- 
cane gives more than greenheart, but the strain 
that will fracture the middle piece of a green¬ 
heart can be exceeded and easily borne by a 
good split-cane with absolute safety, owing to 
the nature of the material, as however carefully 
greenheart may be selected it is almost im¬ 
possible for the grain to continue true to the 
axis of the rod throughout its entire length, 
while with each succeeding year the resistance 
of the rod and the curve deteriorates, and the 
wood becomes more brittle and untrustworthy.” 
Our anglers, knowing the wonderful stiffness 
of American hand-made split bamboo, which 
needs neither backbone nor reinforcing with 
steel, often marvel at the efforts put forth by 
English manufacturers to stiffen their split 
bamboo rods. This controversy has brought 
out several reasons why English rods need 
stiffening. One of these is found in the com¬ 
ments of Mr. Theodore Gordon, a correspon¬ 
dent of Forest and Stream, who asked, in writ¬ 
ing to Mr. Marston: 
“Why is it that most of the English split- 
cane rods are so limber, have such a soft, floppy 
feeling, in spite of their weight and large dia¬ 
meter? If one of our best makers was to copy 
my old English rod exactly, in the bamboo used 
over here, he could turn out a rod as stiff as 
a poker and almost, if not quite, strong enough 
to kill a tarpon on. 
“I have puzzled my brains over the argu¬ 
ment that greenheart is stiffer than split-cane for 
some time past, and think that this is the solu¬ 
tion of the puzzle. The cane or bamboo used 
in England by the best makers is very strong 
and durable, stronger, perhaps, than the ma¬ 
terial we use, but it is not nearly as stiff and 
springy. Copy a greenheart salmon rod in good 
bamboo and you will have an infinitely stiffer, 
more powerful rod.” 
Something that applies more particularly to 
Americans is found in a communication from 
J. J. Owen,' of Liverpool, a member of a firm 
of rare wood dealers. A great deal of the green¬ 
heart used by British rod-makers is imported 
by this Liverpool firm, which also supplies the 
American market to an important extent. Here 
the complaint is constant that good greenheart 
cannot be obtained, and some rod-makers will 
not make rods of this material if they can 
persuade their customers to take split bamboo 
or lancewood instead. Not many all-wood fly- 
rods are now made in the medium grades, as 
preference is generally gi'ven the better grades 
of sawed bamboo rods instead by those who do 
not wish to invest enough money in a rod to 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
* 
obtain one made of first class hand-split bamboo. 
But the trade in bait rods in this country is 
so large and the demand so diverse in character 
that vast numbers of wood rods are sold by the 
dealers. These number not only cheap rods, 
but medium and even high-priced rods. Still, 
greenheart is by no means a favorite to-day 
with fresh-water live-bait anglers, and although 
it is well liked by scores of salt-water anglers, 
its popularity is waning, and other varieties of 
wood, and even sawed and -split bamboo, are 
strongly advocated by the veterans. The heavy 
dark wood known in the trade as bethabara is 
taking the place of greenheart among the sea 
anglers, and combination ash and lancewood 
rods are much used, while the despised second- 
growth hickory, stained to imitate bethabara, 
often gives surprisingly good results in landing 
big fish. Split bamboo is not, and probably 
never will be, the favorite material for salt¬ 
water rods, but both bait- and fly-casters are 
agreed that no other material at present known 
is equal to good hand-made American split 
bamboo. 
Mr. Owen, who is himself a salmon angler, 
said: 
“My firm has cut up a large quantity of logs 
for the trade, and there is great difficulty in 
finding sufficient wood of the right quality. An 
expert is employed to select, and unfortunately 
only a small proportion turns out suitable for 
rods. Timber merchants must have other out¬ 
lets for the wood which is not suitable for rods. 
“If makers were to supply their customers 
with rods made from suitable timber, the verdict 
would be in favor of greenheart, but soft dis¬ 
colored wood only leads to disappointment.” 
Glanrhos, who had been a salmon angler for 
forty-eight years when he first tried an Ameri¬ 
can split bamboo rod, says it was a perfect 
revelation to him. He adds: 
“I had handled many cane rods, but never 
before met one that I preferred to my old green¬ 
heart. The power, lightness and spring of this 
rod was so totally different from that of any 
cane rod I had previously used, that it was a 
perfect marvel, and though there were over a 
dozen anglers at Bad Boll, and they nearly all 
had cane rods (most of them steel-centered), 
we all agreed that there was not one of them 
that could approach M. Bougie’s American rod. 
I was so struck by this rod that it was not long 
before I was ordering an American cane. 
Though a convert to cane as against greenheart, 
I personally have no opinion of steel-centered 
rods, for the simple reason that the two ma¬ 
terials are not homogeneous, and sooner or 
later the hard steel core breaks one or more of 
the delicate cells of the cane, and then begins 
working, and finally cuts a groove in the cane, 
when the dissolution of the rod is only a matter 
of time and use. I have known so many in¬ 
stances of steel-centered rods going in this way 
that I am convinced my theory as to the 
‘groove-cutting’ is correct, and some of my 
friends who were the owners of these costly rods 
have gone back in disgust to the simpler and 
less expensive greenheart. I have, however, 
come to the conclusion that a thoroughly well- 
made cane rod, without steel center,-is so far 
superior to an ordinary greenheart for light¬ 
ness and power combined that it is well worth 
the extra initial expense.” 
“Unbiased,” in one of his communications, 
referred to one or two persons who, he thought, 
had possibly extended J. J. Hardy’s knowledge 
of the capabilities of split cane, but Mr. Hardy, 
with his usual assurance, replied that “Un¬ 
biased” should know that he (Hardy) had no 
necessity for such education. Mr. Hardy evi¬ 
dently took deeply to heart the beating John 
Enright gave him at the Crystal Palace tourna¬ 
ment several years ago, but he cannot accept 
defeat gracefully, taking instead every occasion 
to point out that he is the real champion sal¬ 
mon fly-caster. Why? Because he would have 
beate.n Enright easily if—and there you are. 
Mr. Hardy should visit Missouri. He still in¬ 
sists that he can beat Enright, and sneers at the 
latter’s great performance on Harlem Mere, in 
Central Park, last October, with the salmon 
fly-rod. 
We do not know how this question is re¬ 
garded in England, but of this we are certain: 
A great many anglers in the United States 
would be glad to witness a salmon fly contest 
between John Enright, the modest Irish record- 
holder, and J. J. Hardy, the Englishman who is 
neither willing to give Enright proper credit 
nor ready to try conclusions with him. 
Salmon, Smelt and Cat. 
Sussex, N. B., Dec. 17. —Editor Forest and 
Stream: In your issue of July 28 last that ex¬ 
perienced angler, acute observer and genial 
writer, W. B. Mershon—whose contributions 
to your columns are only too few and far be¬ 
tween—told us of having seen on the Grand 
Cascapedia a salmon feeding on the flies that 
were very numerous on the water. At the sec¬ 
ond cast over this fish he was fortunate enough 
to capture it; from its stomach and alimentary 
canal he took eight flifes or waterbugs, which 
were placed in alcohol and sent to Dr. Weir 
Mitchell, who was then fishing on the same 
river. Mr. Mershon quotes him as saying, 
“There is no question about a salmon’s diges¬ 
tive apparatus becoming useless after coming 
into fresh water.” 
This, is so contrary to our latest authorities, 
and so entirely opposed to my own experi¬ 
ence during fifty years’ observation as an 
angler on our Quebec, New Brunswick and 
Nova Scotia rivers—some of which salmon 
enter in March and April and remain until 
October and November—that in your issue 
of Aug. 11 I respectfully asked Dr. Mitchell 
for the data on which he founded so positive 
an assertion. 
Dr. Mitchell, so far, has not granted my re¬ 
quest; but in issue 9f Sept. 8, your correspond¬ 
ent “C. D. W. B.” tells of having seen one 
salmon rise, and take a large dragon-fly; of 
another that took a small trout off his hook, 
and of still another that took a small one on 
the wing, as it passed over the pool in which 
the fish was lying. In the issue of Sept. 22 
Dr. R. T. Morris gave us some facts that came 
under his own observation, showing that one 
salmon rose to a small chip and was afterward 
caught on a salmon fly, and that another was 
caught in Denny’s River on a hook baited with 
a worm and weighted with a rusty nail for a 
sinker. 
All this, from observers presumably as com¬ 
petent to form a correct opinion as Dr. 
Mitchell, having failed to draw from him any¬ 
thing in support of his strange ipse dixit, Dr. 
Morris in your issue of Dec. 8, “poked fun” 
at his fellow sportsman by advising him to 
draw a Jock-Scott across the floor in front of 
a cat and observe what she does with it. Had 
Dr. Morris suggested a mouse or a smelt in¬ 
stead of an artificial fly, Dr. Mitchell would 
have an object lesson from which he could 
draw a correct conclusion. 
Would Dr. Morris kindly inform his fellow 
anglers on what rivers he has. seen smelts 
ascend falls, rest side by side with salmon, and 
wiggle their tails before them with never a 
fear? The writer has hitherto believed that 
our smelts have spawned and returned to 
salt water long before our salmon have as¬ 
cended to their spawning grounds. In all his 
long experience, he has never seen a salmon 
and smelt lying side by side; nor in all his 
angling has he ever seen a smelt in any of the 
numerous salmon pools he has fished. With 
all deference to the genial and learned Doc¬ 
tors, he can’t think that our present scant 
knowledge of the life history of the salmon 
will be much increased by reasoning from the 
habits of smelts and cats. They might use the 
argumentum ad ignorantiam and contend that, as 
the tail is a useless appendage to the cat, 
so also is the hook on the lower jaw of the 
male salmon; but this conclusion would be no 
more convincing to a careful observer than is 
Dr. Mitchell’s unsupported assertion that the 
salmon’s digestive apparatus is useless during 
two-thirds of its life, if, as is generally be¬ 
lieved, the fish spawns annually. 
The Old Angler. 
