982 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
Casting Tournament at Boston. 
Boston, Mass., Dec. 11 .—Editor Forest and 
Stream: The following list of events will be 
run off at the Sportsmen’s Show in Boston which 
occurs Dec. 24-Jan. 7, inclusive. We are not 
trying to give an extended list, on account of 
the water sports, which will take up most of 
the time, but there will be the following classes 
for which gold, silver and bronze medals will 
be given to the winners. Owing to the size 
of the tank it will not be possible to do bait¬ 
casting excepting for accuracy. Anything in the 
nature of professional ideas will be barred out, 
and Mr. Darling’s suggestion, as outlined in 
Forest and Stream of some weeks ago, will be 
followed out as an experiment, and also to ascer¬ 
tain how near correct he is in his scheme. 
FLY-CASTING FOR DISTANCE, II-FOOT ROD, UNLIMITED 
IN WEIGHT. 
One class for those who have never cast more 
than 70 feet. 
One class for those who have never cast more 
than 85 feet. 
One class for those who have never cast more 
than 100 feet. 
One class open to all. 
One class to those who have never cast more 
than 75 feet; five-ounce rod. 
One open class; five-ounce rod. 
One open class, fly-casting for accuracy, 50, 
55 and 60 feet. 
Half-ounce, bait, accuracy. 
Gold, silver and bronze medals. 
This will admit any so-called professional. 
(National rules in all these events to govern 
contestant.) 
We would like very much to run these on the 
second week, both afternoon and evening, so 
that those coming from New York will have 
the events in which they can enter so arranged 
that the New York contingent can send a good 
representation, and that they will not be com¬ 
pelled to stay in Boston longer than they feel 
it is necessary in order to win one of the gold 
medals. Under any circumstances it is all for 
the good of the sport and I know that many 
anglers will, if possible, arrange to be here. 
F. A. Niccolls. 
Tournament Casting Classification. 
East Orange, N. J., Dec. 6 —Editor Forest and 
Stream: I have read with a deal of pleasure 
the discussion, pro and con, on the question of 
professionalism, or has it been all on the pro 
side and none on the con, or “t’other way about?” 
Surely we have heard some from the pros. 
Where are our Western friends and what are 
they about? 
According to the programme as outlined at 
the last annual meet of the National Association 
of Scientific Angling Clubs; the lines of profes¬ 
sionalism are to be drawn even tighter by elimi¬ 
nating “not as his principal means of livelihood” 
from Rule 7 Section 5 of the definition of a 
professional. Therefore, because a certain mag¬ 
nificent caster has invented a measly little fish 
book and manages thereby to corral a few of 
Uncle Sam’s elusive simoleons, he is also to 
experience that “stomach trouble” and conse¬ 
quent bad taste in the mouth. Is it right or fair? 
Again: Suppose I should at some time ex¬ 
perience a flash of intelligence (which is not 
likely, so do not be alarmed) and invent some 
appliance whereby this splendid game would be 
greatly benefited. In the natural course of 
events the National Association of Scientific 
Angling Clubs would immediately draw its snick- 
er-snee, cut the gordian knot, entitling me to 
cast as an amateur and cast my tainted profes¬ 
sional carcass out into the aching void. Would 
it be a fair, square and decent deal? No! In 
such a case I reckon I also would be seeking 
for a remedy for indigestion. 
Again, I fail to see why we should put a ban 
and turn our thumbs down on the very men 
whose intelligence is responsible for the present 
appliances and equipment we now use to such 
good advantage in our contests. It is to our 
advantage as well as theirs that we should foster 
instead of discourage them in their constant ef¬ 
fort toward perfecting, even to a higher degree, 
the present tools of the craft. Is it fair? 
As for class casting, that is all to the mustard 
so far as club and open club contests are con¬ 
cerned. It seems to me the individual clubs can 
settle that question to their own mutual satis¬ 
faction. But, for the annual national meet— 
that is, for the championship—class casting is 
entirely out of the question and should not be 
considered. 
Were I to enter into the contests at the annual 
meets of the National Association of Scientific 
Angling Clubs, cast against such good ones as 
Kenniff, Darling, Mills, Leonard and others, to¬ 
gether with the present cracks of the National 
Association of Scientific Angling Clubs, and win 
out, I would consider it much more to my credit, 
and the consequent halo more gracefully worn 
and a much better fit. 
I say, let the bars down. Eliminate Rule 7, 
Section 5 from the definition of a professional. 
Allow all to cast, and bully boy for the fellow 
that wins. 
Our Western brethren appear to be studiously 
avoiding discussion on this question. Shame 
on you fellows! Get going and give us the bene¬ 
fit of your ideas on this subject. The sport is 
dear to us all and why not widen the scope of 
the National Association and take in these ster¬ 
ling men who at present are excluded.? 
A. Jay Marsh. 
Interstate Fisheries. 
Concerning interstate fisheries, President 
Roosevelt had this to say in his message to 
Congress: 
“I call the attention of the Congress to the 
importance of the problem of the fisheries in 
the interstate waters. On the Great Lakes we 
are now under the very wise treaty of April 11 
of this year, endeavoring to come to an inter¬ 
national agreement for the preservation and satis¬ 
factory use of the fisheries of these waters which 
cannot otherwise be achieved. Lake Erie, for 
example, has the richest fresh water fisheries 
in the world; but it is now controlled by the 
statutes of two nations, four States and one 
Province, and in this Province by different ordi¬ 
nances in different counties. All these political 
divisions work at cross purposes, and in no case 
can they achieve protection to the fisheries on 
the one hand and justice to the localities and 
individuals on the other. The case is similar 
in Puget Sound. 
“But the problem is quite as pressing in the 
interstate waters of the United States. The sal¬ 
mon fisheries of the Columbia River are now 
[Dec. 19, 1908. 
but a fraction of what they were twenty-five 
years ago, and what they would be now if the 
United States Government had taken complete 
charge of them by intervening between Oregon 
and Washington. During these twenty-five years 
the fishermen of each State have naturally tried 
to take all they could get, and the two Legisla¬ 
tures have never been able to agree on joint 
action of any kind adequate in degree for the 
protection of the fisheries. At the moment the 
fishing on the Oregon side is practically closed, 
while there is no limit on the Washington side 
of any kind, and no one can tell what the courts 
will decide as to the very statutes under which 
this action and non-action result. 
“Meanwhile very few salmon reach the spawn¬ 
ing grounds, and probably four years hence the 
fisheries will amount to nothing; and this comes 
from a struggle between the associated, or gill- 
net, fishermen on the one hand, and the owners 
of the fishing wheels up the river. The fisheries 
of the Mississippi, the Ohio and the Potomac 
are also in a bad way. For this there is no 
remedy except for the United States to control 
and legislate for the interstate fisheries as part 
of the business of interstate commerce. In this 
case the machinery for scientific investigation 
and for control already exists in the United 
States Bureau of Fisheries. In this as in simi¬ 
lar problems the obvious and simple rule should 
be followed of having those matters, which no 
particular State can manage, taken in hand by 
the United States; problems, which in the see¬ 
saw of conflicting State Legislatures are abso¬ 
lutely unsolvable, are easy enough for the Con¬ 
gress to control. 
“The Federal statute regulating interstate 
traffic in game should be extended to include 
fish. New Federal fish hatcheries should be es¬ 
tablished. The administration of the Alaskan 
fur seal service should be vested in the Bureau 
of Fisheries.” 
Did Horace Ever Go Fishing ? 
I ask if Horace ever went 
(Or if his mind was that way bent) 
A-fishing near sweet Tiber? 
Or if his rustic Chloe shy 
Posed on a fence as he passed by, 
So that he might describe her? 
Or if he ever heaved a sigh 
When a fine day in spring went by— 
An ideal day for fishing. 
When sterner avocations bound 
Him to his uncongenial round, 
When it was idle wishing. 
For the bright brook with silver sheen, 
Its banks of Asphodel between 
That flowed with soft caresses, 
Where Laloge in youthful charms, 
With finely rounded, ivory arms, 
Was gathering watercresses. 
O Horace, then you missed it fine; 
You never tasted joys divine, 
Superior to your Masic, 
When genial spring with vernal ray, 
Tempts truants from their tasks away, 
To taste of joys ecstatic. 
With gentle art to cast the fly 
Upon some eddying water by, 
And, splash, the trout is leaping, 
When struck, to feel a joyous thrill, 
And hear the reel go whirring shrill. 
As through the wave he’s sweeping. 
With patient skill to play him out, 
And land at length a salmon trout, 
Resplendent in his glory. 
Then ’midst your sympathetic friends, 
As each his ear attentive bends, 
To tell your fishing story. C. T. Easton. 
