By Gregory S. Butler, Oct 23, 2009 in Musings
In my last post I laid out some brief reflections on the sport of fly fishing and its relationship to Aristotelian natural law teaching. The reaction has been predictable among some of my close acquaintances. Evidently I have succeeded in living up to my reputation (undeserved!) for undue magniloquence. Well, I am sorry to report that I have more to say on the subject.
First, I will submit that the trout is the only species worthy of the serious fly fisherman’s attention. I subscribe to a magazine called Southwest Fly Fishing, which is a fine publication except for the fact that its contributors often feel compelled to write on bass, panfish, and even carp as suitable prey (this might be due to the fact that Texas is in their geographic region, which has exactly one trout stream). I find this bordering on the blasphemous. Bass and pan fish (which are very closely related biologically) are the goats of freshwater—their natures are such that they will eat almost anything. My father once caught a bluegill on a mushroom. And bass have been known to eat everything from insect nymphs to small ducklings. They have a tremendous range in habitat, occupying waters from the frozen north to the subtropics, and they reproduce prolifically. These natural characteristics convince me that they are a lower life form than the trout, and are the reason why they are so popular among kids and amateurs. These fish simply give themselves up to predators too easily. As such, their natures are not capable of drawing out the full capabilities of human reason, in the Aristotelian sense, which “more than anything else is man.” The absence of this element obviates the possibility of a “bass fishing aesthetic.” Such a notion has a rather absurd ring to it. This is why the logical end point of bass fishing is the professional tournament with high-powered boats, flashy sponsor gear, and crowds of onlookers gawking at huge stringers of fish. This conquest of nature has become a crude substitute for the more authentic and refined integration with nature that is trout fly fishing.
Carp may be another matter, but I am not sure yet. I once met a couple of guides on the Green River in Wyoming that loved to fly-fish for carp (which are large, fat fish that look like a giant minnow). Evidently they are wily creatures that demand skill from the fisherman. I have not yet been able to bring myself to it, however. For one thing, it would take away from my limited trout fishing time. Moreover, the things are so ugly that I have a hard time respecting them. A friend of mine accidentally snagged one through the back once. The fish had to be euthanized, as much for the fisherman as for the fish. Outward beauty does count for something.
But while fishing for trout as a species is necessary, it is not sufficient. It must be done in the proper way. First and foremost, the fly rod must be used. As intimated in my last post, no other equipment is capable of bringing the fisherman into close conformity with the trout’s nature. Of course, natural bait cannot be used with a fly rod because the equipment is not designed to carry a lure with such weight. Moreover, natural bait always defeats the aesthetic purpose. It is poor sportsmanship to achieve the end without using that which is distinctly human (also an argument for always tying your own flies). Bait fishing compromises the practice or craft of the sport and thereby diminishes its aesthetic. I consider it a form of cheap grace. (And don’t even ask me about fishing for trout that have been stocked in a stream from a hatchery). Secondly, I believe that fly fishing must be done in a stream. When on a lake, it is impossible to achieve any intimacy with the trout’s world. It is just too mysterious down there, and the fisherman is usually cast in a very passive role. Too often you end up either trolling around the lake, or casting blinding to the bank hoping that a fish might be lurking there. Unless you can spot a hatch going on (which is relatively rare; the vast majority of trout feeding occurs beneath the surface), you are largely dependent upon fate.
I promise that this is all that I will write on fly fishing in this forum. After all, it is just a sport. I will end by reassuring you that, appearances notwithstanding, I am not entirely insane. I know a couple of guys who refuse to fish with flies that have hooks (no point in it, they say, because the real object is simply to draw the strike). And there are some guys from the UK who insist that the wet fly is a bastardization of the sport. But we all agree that there is something more going on here than catching fish. I hope that my words have been able to capture at least some of that.
