Letters

Does the fly matter in trout fishing?

BMJ 1999; 318 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7194.1356 (Published 15 May 1999) Cite this as: BMJ 1999;318:1356

Study broke hallowed tradition among fly fishers

  1. Anthony Alment, Retired obstetrician and gynaecologist
  1. Boughton, Northampton NN2 8RR
  2. John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX2 6HE

    EDITOR—The authors of the CRACKPOT study in evidence based trout fishing are to be congratulated on a study protocol that broke the hallowed tradition of competitiveness and individualism among fly fishers.1 However, the study's design omitted two major considerations: the time scale used and the character of the respondents.

    Firstly, within what random periods did the 125 angling hours take place within the 3696 (5 months × 24) available to them in the season? The relative values of a Gold Ribbed Hare's Ear and a Cinnamon Sedge, if transposed between a May morning and a September dusk, could give very different results. Secondly, the artificially reared Kennet trout in what is mainly a “put and take” fishery will have had little exposure in their nursery to natural examples of ephemeroptera on which replicas are based. Selection from CRACKPOT's limited trial range will have had relatively little significance to trout conducting their …

    View Full Text

    Sign in

    Log in through your institution

    Free trial

    Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
    Sign up for a free trial

    Subscribe