752 
FOREST AND STREAM 
mmM 
te****’ 
From an oil painting by A. D. Turner. 
Montana Grayling. (Thymallus montanus .) 
The Flower of Fishes—The Grayling 
The Discovery of a New Range of this Most Beautiful of all the Finny Tribes, 
With Associate Studies From the Writings of Various Authorites 
By Charles Bradford. 
"I may, peradventure, give you some instruc¬ 
tions that may be of use even in your own riv¬ 
ers.”—Charles Cotton, The Conipleat Angler, 1676. 
HE grayling has some few points 
of dispute about its origin, its 
T „ classification, its artificial dis- 
P tribution and its natural range, 
Eg} and in clearing these disputed 
questions there should be no 
unpleasant argument indulged 
in between the interested ang¬ 
lers and ichthyologists; this for two good and 
sufficient reasons ; one : scientific knowledge re¬ 
quires experiment, study and time—“Rome wasn’t 
built in a day”—and, two: because the unravel¬ 
ing of mysteries in nature and the explaining of 
nature’s secrets constitute a delightful pastime 
to the sincere mind, and in no way afford ex¬ 
cuses for boisterous quarreling. 
Much of the unpleasant argument that is in¬ 
dulged in in these undecided points in natural 
history emanates from one or both of the par¬ 
ticipants in the dispute making positive state¬ 
ments without actual knowledge to substantiate 
their declarations, instead of their using the 
terms “I think,” “I surmise,” “I believe,” “I 
imagine,” “I conclude,” etc., in instances where 
actual knowledge is lacking. 
An angler says he caught a brook trout (Sal- 
valinus fontinalis) east of the Rocky Mountains, 
and that this species is indigenous to the streams 
east of the Rocky Mountains—this in direct con¬ 
tradiction to the decisions of the authoritive 
ichthyologists. Another angler replies that his 
brother fisherman is in error—-that he did not 
catch a true brook trout (Salvalinus fontinalis) ; 
that the specimen taken was of the Dolly Var- 
den trout species. Then angler number three 
casts his argumentative fly—he declares angler 
number one is in the right, that his fish was « 
true brook tiout, a specimen of artificial intro¬ 
duction (planting) by the United States Fish 
Commission in the streams east of the Rockies. 
What species the scientists would prove the 
specimen to belong to is not known, but, one of 
the three aiguers is in the right so far as the 
classification is concerned, and while one or two 
of the disputers must be in the wrong in this 
particular, all are wrong in their way of argu¬ 
ment. Each should use the terms “I think,” etc., 
until the scientific proof is in hand. 
No honest theory, piscatorial or otherwise, ex¬ 
pressed by an honest man should be openly de¬ 
nied. If the theorist is sincere he will say he 
“thinks” this and that, until the authoritive mind 
actually settles the question, and if the theorist’s 
opponent is equally honest and serious he will 
“think” in expressing his opposing views and not 
make positive denials before the scientific result 
is announced. 
Why should anybody, expert or neophite, take 
offense at a new theory? Rather he should be 
pleased at the discovery, and encourage pleasant 
and studious discourse—gentle and uplifting dis¬ 
course such as Father Izaak and his pupil en¬ 
gaged in as they “stretched their legs up Totten¬ 
ham Hill * * * toward Ware * * * that 
fine fresh May morning.” 
The amusing result of the maladministrative 
dispute between the two boisterous, unenlight¬ 
ened, profess-to-know-it-all arguers is: in the 
end both usually find themselves in the wrong. 
“Look before you leap.” “Be sure you’re right, 
then go ahead.” “There are two sides to a 
story.” Don’t explode half primed. The arguer 
should say he thinks, or imagines, or believes or 
hopes, etc., when he doesn’t really know, and his 
opponent shouldn’t forget to use one of these 
terms in denying the expressed views unless he 
knows what he is talking about. 
“One of the charms of angling,” says T. E. 
Pritt, “is that it presents an endless field for ar¬ 
gument, speculation and experiment.” True, as 
Mr. Pritt says, the field of argument—at least 
quiet, honest argument—is one of the charms of 
the gentle ait, and Mr. Pritt might have just 
as wisely included fishes as well as fishing in this 
charming argumentative field. 
In concurrence with the foregoing deductions 
I will here introduce for pleasant discussion two 
new lively subjects concerning the grayling — 
one being imparted in the theory of a brother 
angler who declares that the grayling, the most 
beautiful finny species in the world, “the flower 
of fishes,” is a hybrid of the brook trout and 
the brook sucker, and the second subject being 
supplied by another angler who, contrary to the 
(Continued on page 772s) 
