R
Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)
Guest
Why is it that the vast majority of anglers shy away from using the scientific name for species of fish.
By the late 50s, I knew the scientific name for all our common species of freshwater fish. During the late 19th century, angling writers used the scientific names all the time in some cases. These names sound so romantic when compared with "Roach" or "chub" or "Eel".
Just imagine how a conversation beween two anglers should really sound if we got back to basics.
"Ah goodmorrow kind sir, I see thou art a noble exponent of the piscatorial art. Hast thou had any luck perchance?"
"Aye, a brace of Leuciscus cephalus, a Leuciscus leuciscus and a Gastero aculatus pecking at my worm."
"Such a shame noble piscator, I tried the stream above the bridge and yesterday landed a fine Salmo trutta which took an artificial danica."
"But I also had a problem with Phoxinus phoxinus and Gymnocephalus cemua, the beastly things."
Get my drift. It does sound better doesn't it?
Now I must make preperations to catch a few Onchoryncus mykiss.
By the late 50s, I knew the scientific name for all our common species of freshwater fish. During the late 19th century, angling writers used the scientific names all the time in some cases. These names sound so romantic when compared with "Roach" or "chub" or "Eel".
Just imagine how a conversation beween two anglers should really sound if we got back to basics.
"Ah goodmorrow kind sir, I see thou art a noble exponent of the piscatorial art. Hast thou had any luck perchance?"
"Aye, a brace of Leuciscus cephalus, a Leuciscus leuciscus and a Gastero aculatus pecking at my worm."
"Such a shame noble piscator, I tried the stream above the bridge and yesterday landed a fine Salmo trutta which took an artificial danica."
"But I also had a problem with Phoxinus phoxinus and Gymnocephalus cemua, the beastly things."
Get my drift. It does sound better doesn't it?
Now I must make preperations to catch a few Onchoryncus mykiss.