What makes somebody an angler?
- Details
- Published on Monday, 28 May 2007 12:32
- Written by Mike Connor
What many people completely fail to understand is that the number or size of fish is basically irrelevant to a true angler. Indeed, a true angler will quite happily spend hours trying to catch minnows, or even just watching a fish! What matters is the fascination and quality of the experience. Even very many "anglers" nowadays also simply fail to understand this.
Their expectations are different. They have fallen foul of the propaganda machine and the massive commercialism which now governs much of angling. Modern reservoir angling probably has more in common with golf than with real angling. People fondly imagine they can "learn" angling by going through some prescribed set of motions, learning a certain set of skills and these will then allow them to catch limit bags of fish under any given set of circumstances. Even if one does all this, it does not make one an angler. Being an angler is a state of mind.
Angling is not learned, although of course one learns a great deal if one so desires, it is a spiritual experience and although one can considerably deepen the experience by gaining knowledge and skill, neither are necessary. Success is not measured in numbers or size of fish and most certainly not artificially stocked fish. A true angler goes angling to angle, because something in his soul forces him to. He is driven by the same force which causes small boys to spend hours dabbling in a beck for minnows. An old friend of mine once told me that "anglers are born that way". I think he was probably right.
One of the main reasons I personally catch fewer fish nowadays (at least trout and grayling), is that I do not fish as often, as I do not need the fish and the rules have changed in any case. I have never taken fish I could not use. It is years since I even attempted to catch a large number of fish in as short a time as possible. In actual fact, I tend to target individual fish (often the larger ones, but not always) and I might spend several hours, or in some cases, even days finding such fish; observing them and planning my strategy, dressing a specific fly perhaps, studying possible approaches, casting vectors and the like. I prefer difficult targets as well, simply because this is more challenging and satisfying. It leaves considerably less room for error and also allows me to fish longer.
Years ago I would never have done this. Then I "fished the water", or targeted every sizable fish I found, taking every one that came my way, using methods which were extremely effective and I got very, very good at it. This doubtless sounds remarkably arrogant, but it is a simple matter really. I needed the fish, I spent a great deal of time in pursuit of them and as a direct result of this, I got very, very good at catching them. For quite a few years, I was out on the water somewhere every day and often for long periods of time in order to catch as many fish as I could. These fish fed my family, in one way or another. I NEVER blanked, I could not afford to. The motivation for such is not easily understood unless one has experienced it. Of course I often also enjoyed myself immensely, but this was secondary at that time.
The bag limits on the waters I fish now are very strict and I usually take far less than these limits in any case, even when it would be relatively easy to reach them. When I have guests, any fish they catch also go on my catch returns. Any fish I take nowadays are eaten by my neighbours and friends. My wife liked a nice trout now and again, or a smoked sea-trout or grayling, but since she passed away, I no longer have any real motivation for catching much anyway.
On my main club waters (which are pretty exclusive), the general limit is a maximum of forty fish in any one season, four fish in any one day. This also limits the trips I can make to these waters quite severely. For this reason (among others), I belonged to a number of clubs, until fairly recently. Now I only belong to two. I like to spend a full day on the water as a rule, usually dawn to dusk and often beyond. If I went and caught four fish in the first twenty minutes, I would be obliged to pack up and go home. (Remember, the rules here demand that every sizable fish be killed immediately). I invariably prefer not to do this and concentrate my efforts on certain tactics and fish, in order to avoid it. These are invariably tactics which would be generally less effective for catching large numbers of fish. Single fly, barbless hooks, no indicators, or similar aids, are part of the regulations in any case.
Also, I fish the Baltic in Denmark quite a lot (although again, not recently, due to personal circumstances). There are no bag limits there (although I have my own) and the fishing is very challenging. One has the chance of the occasional red-letter day and the fish may be very large. Thanks to the foresight of the Danish government and others, the fish stocks and the waters are steadily improving and the fishery can be absolutely magnificent. Wild fish in wild surroundings, clean water, fresh air and a lot of other things. Of course there are problems there too, but they have grasped that it is actually more profitable to improve things rather than destroy them and are reaping the benefits, along with ever increasing numbers of anglers.
As a general rule, the fishing for wild fish was a great deal better years ago (in England , and also elsewhere in Europe) and not just for trout. The average size was usually less, but there were far more of them, not least because there were fewer anglers. Using a three fly cast on some of my former waters, I have had upwards of sixty sizable fish between 04.00 am and 10.00 am. This would be quite impossible now on those waters. The angling however was much the same, there is a considerable difference between angling and fishing. It is a matter of motivation and intent. Either one wants the fish, or one wants the fishing. One may want the fish, and still enjoy the fishing of course.
Many waters simply no longer contain as many fish as they did (even assuming large catches were allowed), the reasons for this are many and varied. In England and in many other places, the vast majority of the fish which people fish for are now stocked. This was not the case when I was a boy. All the fish I caught in fresh water (and they could be found in large numbers in every single moorland beck and stream), were wild browns and wild grayling and I also fished regularly for eels which abounded almost everywhere. Apart from the eels, which could be quite large, half pounders were good fish, a pounder was a "big un" and anything much over that was considered a rare prize indeed. Many anglers at that time had never seen a three pounder (in fresh water, and excepting seatrout and salmon), and would have had virtually no chance of landing one, even had they managed to hook it in the first place.
The same applies to the North Sea. As a boy I fished a great deal in the North Sea and I caught untold numbers of fish: lots of species, both large and "small" and very many of them, sometimes taking very large bags of fish. Nowadays you would be hard put to catch a single sizable fish in many places of any species at all. As to the reasons for all this, as far as the Sea is concerned, commercial over-fishing and pollution has brought many species of fish to the brink of extinction and in more than a few cases beyond.
With regard to many of the streams and becks, they are all almost without exception totally overfished and the fish are given little chance to recover. Pollution has also taken its toll here. Insect hatches have declined rapidly, in many places quite a few species simply disappearing. In England the vast majority of anglers now fish stillwaters, drinking water reservoirs in the main, for stocked rainbows of high average size and this is also a very expensive pastime, not only for those so engaged, but for the environment as well! As a boy and youth, much of my fishing was either very cheap, or free. It had to be or I simply could not have done it and the main object of the exercise, which was in the main to support my family, would have been completely futile. This is once again impossible nowadays. Anybody with a trickle of water containing fish, immediately attempts to capitalise on it.
When I was a boy, I could wander along quite a number of rivers all day, becks and streams in any case, and never see another soul. This has also now become completely impossible. Some of the remote streams I fished, often cycling twenty or thirty miles to do so and later on various motor-bikes, are no longer remote. Anybody can reach them in twenty minutes or less in a car. Also, small boys (I was ten when I started fishing seriously) wandering alone around the countryside nowadays is probably unthinkable. At the time, the chance of being molested or otherwise bothered by anybody at all were just about zero!
Fishing was indeed better then, there were certainly a great many more fish and the places where they were found were still relatively pristine. In a small town, I was the only fly-dresser. There was only one tackle shop in another much larger town, a fair distance away. Considerable effort was required to obtain equipment and materials and fly-anglers were a comparatively rare species. Most I knew, dressed their own flies (they "tied" their shoelaces!) and their families or forerunners (many farmers, or water keepers, in some cases both!), had done so for generations. Many built there own equipment and apart from a few "rich gentlemen", most were in one way or another subsistence fishermen. They all had the uncanny knack of knowing exactly how many fish they could take without exhausting a water. I, like many others at the time, have taken literally hundreds of fish from even small becks without noticeably depleting the population, year after year.
All this has changed, in my opinion, very considerably for the worse. Fly-fishing has become a sport for the masses, not for a few dedicated or wealthy individuals. This has resulted in massive angling pressure, and massive commercialism, both extremely detrimental. Other outdoor activities have also increased to such an extent (climbing, hiking, canoeing, etc, etc) that they are also extremely
detrimental to the countryside and the sport. This is an automatic result, it is not because people who engage in these things are particularly destructive, it is a result of the numbers involved.
There are countless other factors. All this has occurred in my angling lifetime, actually less than fifty years. These things were already starting to worsen when I was a boy and even then many complained at the decline of fish and insects. Bags of fish which were taken regularly but a short time before, became quite impossible to achieve, regardless of the methods used, the skill involved, or the time spent. At one time, grayling were removed by the ton from various waters and thrown on the bank without noticeably denting the population, These were all wild fish and the rivers and streams had no trouble producing such numbers. Pollution, abstraction and other things have also contributed to the general decline in many places.
Some anglers always did well, within the limits of the possibilities. One basically indefinable thing which most really successful anglers have (in terms of being able to catch fish at will), almost independent of their knowledge and skill, is a completely inexplicable "sixth sense" and also an equally inexplicable "luck". I am blessed with this particular "luck" as well. I can not explain it and neither can anybody else. I have known some few anglers with it, to varying degrees, but most do not have it. It has very little to do with skill or knowledge. It is an independent thing. Even when I knew little about fishing, I had it. I still have it now. I "know" when a fish is in a certain lie, I "know" when a fish has taken my fly, I "know" what fly to use when and various other things. I can not explain these things, it is simply so. It is not a matter of skill or knowledge, although of course the more skill and knowledge you have, coupled with attention to detail, the "luckier" you become!
To answer your final question. Yes, the general "going to hell of the world", factors in very considerably. There are too many people and not enough resources. This has also resulted in severe social changes. This can only worsen unless steps are taken to stem the tide and this does not appear likely at the moment.
I have no idea why people wish to fish in "put & take" ponds and places like this, with all sorts of weird and wonderful flies and equipment, indeed, most of which have no counterpart in nature, for artificial fish, in artificial surroundings, under artificial conditions. Once, I visited a "twenty-four hour floodlit" fishery which was basically a concrete bowl. I did not "fish". For me, this is so far removed from what I consider fishing, that it is impossible to compare. If people enjoy doing these things, then I would not say them nay, but it is anathema to me and I would never do it. It also causes lots of problems in itself, merely as a result of the stock fish required and the environmental damage caused by their very existence.
Although I would never have believed it possible, I am a passionate angler, always have been, and I imagined I always would be. The day is rapidly approaching when I will hang up most of my rods, and refrain from fishing in freshwater altogether. I have already ceased to do quite a lot of fishing and resigned from a number of clubs. I will confine my attentions to the ocean, mainly the Baltic, although it is not the same and even that probably a great deal less than I do now.
Much of the magic and freedom has disappeared and more is disappearing every day. It saddens me and I want no part of it. Much of the angling nowadays is so far removed from what I knew and loved, that it simply pales in comparison and it will continue to do so. Much of the angling I have done in recent years and the changes I have observed in that time, more rules, more regimentation, fewer fish, etc, etc, was a compromise with myself and has caused me much pain and disappointment. This also will only worsen. I see little point in continuing.
As is probably quite obvious to practically everybody who knows me, I still have a great interest in angling of any nature, especially fly-fishing, but the drive and passion I once had is slowly decreasing. It may well be that I cease altogether one day. Who knows?
I am glad that I had the opportunity to experience the things I have experienced and I would not have had it any other way. At the same time, I am not unduly unhappy at my lack of children, as I fear I would be unable to face not being able to offer them at least a modicum ofsuch experiences and I feel sorry for others who will be obliged to do so.
All very depressing really, but you did ask!