The article is a good summary of how the extravagant salmon flies became popular in the 1800's. The author, Mike Daunt, accuses Francis Francis of abusing his "power" as fishing editor of The Field to promote these unnecessary fancy flies which use the feathers from rare endangered birds. He cites the recent success of hair wing salmon flies to infer that the older patterns were probably as effective as the fancy new flies. While he admits that Francis Francis "may have been an essentially decent man..." Mike Daunt believes that Francis Francis acted primarily to enhance his social position, and personal power.

I have 3 thoughts about the article.

1. While other authors of the period (Halford, Theodore Gordon) believed that new patterns were necessary because trout were more "educated," I find it hard to believe that salmon (most of which spawn once) would grow "tired of" old drab patterns! On the other hand, the use of color and contrast in the new patterns may have increased catches at times. Modern hairwing salmon fishermen still report that one pattern or color may outfish another on a particular day.

2. Mike Daunt gives no evidence of Francis Francis' supposed character defects. The fact that Francis Francis was successful in his career and highly regarded is not enough to convince me that he misled the fishing public intentionally or through willful neglect. Francis Francis strikes me like other authors I have met - passionate, opinionated and a lot of fun to be around!

3. Use of feathers from endangered species was a failing of the times. While fly tying was probably less important to the feather trade than women's hats, there seemed to be no sense of responsibility for the preservation of rare species.