The time when salmon were considered vermin

 

Greetings! I have often heard tell, back in the day, of a woman, both a lady of the realm and large estate owner on the upper reaches of the Test who detested the prospect of salmon spawning over her trout redds so much so that she would position herself on a bridge to blast any seaborne interlopers from the water.  In truth, I was never entirely sure as to the truth of the tale until last week when, from a pile of fishing books gifted to me, I chanced upon Fifty Years on the Test published in 1934. Now, I suspect the author C. Ernest Pain was a lecturing bore; I’d hazard the book would be better retitled Fifty Years on a Soapbox as he holds forth on fishing, flies, fly life, river management and fish. But Chapter XI is headed ‘Salmon as Vermin’ and opens with the question, ‘Should salmon be allowed in the upper Test?’

Romsey Mills in 1928

The genesis goes back to 1906 when a river owner just upstream of Romsey complained to the Hampshire Fishery Board that salmon were being prevented from running upstream by the mills at Romsey, presumably so that the impounded salmon could be harvested as a cash crop. However, those further upstream were alarmed at the prospect of the millowner being forced to encourage salmon upstream, thus destroying the famed trout waters, so a four day enquiry ensued. As a result, a line was drawn just below Romsey Mills. To repurpose George Orwell, salmon below this line were good and salmon above it bad, the current Test & Itchen Association coming into being after the enquiry to be standing ready to repel any future relaxation of the rules that might destroy the trout fishings. The case against the salmon was two-fold. Firstly, the previously mentioned competition for spawning beds. Secondly, competition for food from both salmon parr and kelts would impact on the development of trout fry. In aggregate the belief was that there was little point sacrificing good trout fishing water that would never be suitable for salmon fishing hence salmon being labelled vermin in all but the final five miles of the River Test from Romsey to the sea.  It seems incredible today, with the salmon run down to a few hundred annually, that such a debate could ever take place. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that salmon could have done such lasting damage to trout stocks, but it was clearly a passionately held belief. But such is the turn of the circle that today we are doing all we can to encourage the salmon run though whether our puny efforts will have any impact only time will tell. Salmon leaping at Romsey Mills in 1990; the sacking was in place to protect the fish from impact with the brick surround.

Why did the double taper line fall out of fashion?  When did we so completely fall out of love with double tapered (DT) fly lines? I was prompted to this reflection on reading an article in Hatch Magazine by a friend of this parish, John Juracek, who lives and fishes in Wyoming, USA. There was a time when DT lines were the only ones in town. If you wanted a weight forward (WF) line you took a pair of scissors to a DT line, cut it in half replacing the discarded section with some thick monofilament and voila you had a crude shooting head. Oh, how proud we felt throwing these homemade contraptions a few extra yards beyond our neighbours on the bank of a reservoir. Of course, the tackle industry soon spied an opportunity and three decades on the market for fly lines is dominated by the weight forward variety. But why? Well, distance matters. We are obsessed with casting as far as we can. Those of you who have been around Fishing Breaks for some years might remember Duncan Weston, the original grizzled and dour Scottish instructor with wit so dry it made Death Valley look like a swamp. He would often relate a tale from the Game Fair where you could try before you buy. A potential customer was about to reject a high-end rod purchase as he could not get out the entire fly line, an unlikely feat by the best of casters, an elite gang this guy was never likely to be invited to join. Not wanting to miss out on a sale Duncan disappeared inside the tent with the outfit on the pretext of changing the line. Out of sight he pulled the line off the reel to the backing, cut 10 yards off the fly line and reattached the fly line. A sale ensued. I won’t go as far to say that I hate WF lines, but I truly prefer DT for everything bar saltwater fishing. Now that is largely by virtue of most of the fishing I do. If I cast 20 yards its generally a long way and my favoured outfits are 5 weight or less. Now, at this point I am going to quote Juracek as I cannot put it better than him, “From a practical point of view, the only advantage a weight-forward line has over a double-taper line is the ability to cast long distances—say, over 75 feet. But even this advantage carries a caveat. To wit, you must use a line-size heavy enough so that a double-haul can exploit the difference in weight between the line’s head and running line (the heavier head essentially drags along the lightweight running line, adding distance to the cast). This means using a 6-weight line or heavier. Anything lighter and there simply isn’t enough weight difference between the head and the running line to gain significant extra distance, double haul or not. (One can argue here for 5-weights, but it’s a borderline argument.) Weight-forward 2, 3, and 4s … hmm … why are they even made?)”. Into this mix you can also add the dexterity of a DT over a WF. Done a poor cast? You can just lift the DT off the water and recast in a single motion. With a WF at any appreciable distance you lose time, accuracy and presentation that will cost you a quick shot at a fish on the move. Likewise, you simply cannot mend a WF line as effectively; the thin ‘running line’ does not lift from or hold to the current as well at the fatter DT. But most of all the turnover of a DT is smoother and gentler than that of the harsher front tip and short taper of a WF. I’ll guarantee you get fewer trailing loops, less snap offs and more flies that settle like thistledown with a DT than you ever will with a WF. All of which brings us back to the original question as to why WFs have achieved such dominance? My best guess it that it is generational as WF have become the default option for both the trade and the customer with DTs regarded at best as niche and at worst a poor choice of line. A quick scour of fishing store web sites (what a life I live …..) confirms this. You have to dig deep for double taper options with online sites preferring to pair a WF with any rod or reel purchase. If you were a newcomer to the sport, you could be forgiven for not even knowing of the existence of the double taper let alone its manifest advantages. Of course, a cynic might also point to vested interest: the DT offers you two lines for the price of one with the ability to reverse it for a new lease of life. A more current problem is that DTs are often out of stock as continuing post-pandemic supply chain issues drive manufacturing to focus on the bestselling lines. However, stock issues aside Cortland (3-9 wt.), Airflo (2-6 wt.), Orvis (3-5 wt.), Rio (3-6 wt.) and Scientific Anglers (2-6 wt.) all offer double taper lines in the weights as listed. I am sure there are other makes, so apologies for those I have omitted.

John Juracek at Bullington Manor

And the winner is .......  This has been an amazing year. I have said it before, but it is worth repeating, in my thirty years plus as a chalkstream professional I have never seen the rivers looking so lovely with clean gravel, great weed and clarity across a season, especially in the second part of the year. In terms of numbers the read out is 25% more rain during the past 12 months than average which, to put that in some sort of context, is big. Think of all the grief we had last year when the total was just 10% down on the average thirty-two inches a year for southern England.  Looking ahead the impact will be better spawning conditions over the winter with higher survival rates for eggs, fry and yearlings. Of course, it will make doing our winter works that bit more tricky such as the extensive bank reinstatement we have planned for Bullington Manor to make it easier to get around or new bridges for Breach Farm. But I’ll take a few logistical headaches every time if it means fuller and brighter rivers, plus the prospect of going into ’24 with brimming aquifers. Visit Nigel Nunn flies via this link So, to finally wrap the season, accepting that some of you will still have designs on grayling, I am delighted to announce that Michael Bray, who fished with friends at Coombe Mill on the River Avon in July, collects the 2023 Feedback Draw prize. In the post will be a specially commissioned selection of unique Mayflies in an engraved Wheatley fly box, with a hand drawn booklet from our vice master, Nigel Nunn. I cannot imagine, such is the beauty of the ensemble, the flies will ever be used in anger, but it is enough to keep the juices flowing in the drear of the winter month that stand between us and next May.

Quiz The normal random collection of questions inspired by the date, events or topics in the Newsletter. It is just for fun with answers at the bottom of the page. 1)    Which famous illusionist died on Halloween 1926? 2)    Who has won more Rugby World Cups, South Africa or New Zealand?  3)    Name three materials that have historically been used to make fly lines.

Have a good weekend.  Best wishes,

Simon Cooper simon@fishingbreaks.co.uk Founder & Managing Directorwww.fishingbreaks.co.uk

Quiz answers: 1)    Harry Houdini 2)    Both have won 3 each 3)    Horsehair, silk, nylon, polyester and plastic. In 1952, the Cortland pioneered the use of vinyl to coat braided cores creating the first plastic coated fly lines that are mainstream today.