Читать книгу Fishing Flies - Smalley - Страница 27

It was only when the reel and rods with rings became readily available in the second half of the seventeenth century that fly-fishing for salmon became really possible. With a fixed, short line attached to the end of the rod, playing a salmon would have been well nigh impossible. Leonard Mascall pointed out the problem in A booke of fishing with Hooke and Line (1590): ‘The Salmon is a gentle fish, but he is cumbrous to take.’ Gervase Markham agreed, in The Second Booke of the English Husbandman (1614):

Now, lastly, as touching the angling for Salmon, albe he is a fish which in truth is unfit for your Travaile, both because hee is too huge and cumbersome, as also in that he naturally delighteth to lie in the bottomes of the great deepe Rivers, and as neare as may bee in the midst of the Channell.

But with a rod and reel, a longer cast could be made and a large fish could be allowed to make long runs and tire itself out.

In his Barker’s Delight, or The Art of Angling (1659), Thomas Barker described a rod with a ring at the tip, the reel and how to tie a salmon fly. The fly, he wrote, ‘must be made of a large hook, which hook must carry six wings, or four at least’. The fly also had a palmered body hackle. Other than that, Barker’s salmon fly was really an overgrown trout fly.

Colonel Robert Venables was perhaps the first person who could really be described as a salmon angler. He fought in the English Civil Wars and then, in July 1649, was sent by Oliver Cromwell, leader of the Parliamentarians, to subdue the Confederate-Royalist alliance in Ireland. From October 1649 to 1654 Venables was governor of Ulster and he took the opportunity to fish that province’s many great salmon rivers. Alas he did not tell us, in his slender book The Experienc’d Angler (1662), the patterns of the flies he used, but gave tips that apply to this day:

The title page from The Experienc’d Angler. This was among the first published illustrations – albeit poor – of the artificial fly.

If you angle in a river that is muddied by rain, or passing through mosses or bogs, you must use a large bodied fly than ordinary … If the water be clear and low, then use a small bodied fly with slender wings … when the water begins to clear after rain, and is a brownish colour, then use a red or orange fly … In dark weather, as well as dark waters, your fly must be dark.

Captain Richard Franck was another Parliamentarian, who wrote his book Northern Memoirs in 1658, though it was not published until 1694. He had not enjoyed the salmon fishing of Ulster, but had remained in Britain where the idea developed that salmon fed like trout but preferred much larger flies, especially dragonflies, also then known as the devil’s needles because they could sew up people’s mouths. So Franck invented a dragonfly imitation:

FRANCK’S GLITTERING FLY

… the body composed of red twisted silk, intermingled with silver, and eye of gold … the wing of a dappled feather of a teal.

Today, many Pacific as well as Atlantic salmon, sea trout and steelhead fall to a fly that is the combination of red, silver and barred teal (or mallard or wigeon).

Following the restoration of the British monarchy and the coronation of Charles II in 1660, many leading figures of the English Commonwealth fled the country. Paul Schullery (American Fly Fishing: A History) provides evidence that Franck fled to the United States, remaining there until sometime in the 1680s. Assuming that he did, he would almost certainly have fished there, and probably with his Glittering Fly for salmon.

In 1681, in The Angler’s Vade Mecum, James Chetham came up with hackle pliers for winding a hackle, and the Horseleech Fly. Horseleech flies were nothing to do with leeches, but derived from a common name for dragonflies – the misbelief being that the flies would drink the blood of horses. They were still in vogue almost 90 years later, when Richard Brookes stated (in The Art of Angling, 1766) that they ‘are of various colours’ and ‘have great Heads, large Bodies, and very long Tails [abdomen], and two, some have three, Pairs of Wings, placed behind each other.’ Incidentally, Paul Schullery also provided evidence that Brookes visited North America, and again, if he did so then perhaps he would also have fished there for salmon, with his Horseleech Flies.

Brookes wrote 20 years after the first edition of Richard Bowkler’s The Art of Angling (1746) in which we are given the precise dressing for two dragonfly imitations designed for catching salmon.

DRAGONFLY

The wings are made of a reddish brown feather from the wing of a cock turkey, the body of auburn-coloured mohair warped with yellow silk, and a ginger cock’s hackle wrapped under the wings; the hook No. 2 or 3. Or it may be varied thus; the wings of a rich brown feather from a heron’s wing; the body drab, or olive-coloured mohair, a bittern’s hackle under the wings, and a forked tail. This fly is about two inches in length.

KING’S FISHER, OR PEACOCK FLY

The wings are made of a feather from the neck or tail of a peacock; the body of a deep green mohair, warped with light green silk; and a jay’s feather striped blue and white, wrapped under the wings; the hook No. 2 or 3. It may be thus varied; the wings of a dark shining green feather from a drake’s wing [in drake mallard the speculum is blue, in the teal it is green] the body of green mohair warped with chocolate silk; and a bittern’s hackle under the wings.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century the idea that salmon ate dragonflies held sway, George C. Bainbridge arguing, in The Fly Fisher’s Guide (1816), that ‘those [flies] made in imitation of the Dragon flies are the most to be depended upon …’. But then that century saw two major changes in the approach to flies that would catch salmon. The first was the establishment of a core of perhaps half a dozen drab patterns that could be used to catch salmon anywhere (see here) and then the sudden explosion of gaudy, what we now call ‘classic’, salmon flies (see here).

However there remains one more, old salmon fly to be described here, for it hails back to the eighteenth century.

In his Salmon Flies and Fishing (1970), Joseph D. Bates Jr. provided the following fascinating tit-bit:

A plate of salmon flies from G. C. Bainbridge’s The Fly Fisher’s Guide. Besides dragonflies, it was thought that salmon ate other bright insects, like wasps and butterflies!

Herbert Howard, a renowned angler, fly-dresser and angling historian, states that he has seen a family Bible which belonged to a Newfoundland family named Stirling in which are handwritten entries dating back between the years 1720 and 1896. One of the entries, dating 1795, described a hair-winged fly called the Red Cow Fly and says that salmon were caught on it.

RED COW FLY

Tying not known, alas. Perhaps a body of red cow underfur, and the wings from guard hairs or tail?

Although hair-winged flies had probably been in use for some time, this is the first published use of hair for winging flies.