pike and the habits of eels. But the winner of casting tournaments is not, from that fact alone, a good angler. He is a long caster. And the student is very seldom a good angler. He gains distinction in a totally different field. He is in the same plane of existence with the Astronomer, the Classic, and Mr. Datas. I do not say that the Fly-casting Champion or the diligent reader of angling books cannot be also a good angler, but if he is, it is not by reason of his medals or his library.
An angler—let us confine ourselves to chalk-stream fishing—a chalk-stream angler may be a good caster of flies, may have a good knowledge of water insects and of the fishes' ways, and yet not be a good chalk-stream angler. He may be a good strategist as well, and a good man to boot, but unless he catches fish (honourably always understood) he is not a good angler. Again, I do not insist on his always catching fish. There are days when the Sainted Peter himself should return with an empty creel. But any man who can go forth day after day to this teeming stream and not have trout or graylings to show, though he cast like Marry at and know like Francis, I say that he is a bad fisherman. Something is wrong. Such a man will come in at night with nothing but a tale of woe. There was no fly; there was
