I have read that John Woods, chief of the Fisheries Division of Florida, had discovered that bourbon obscures fish-frightening human odor. I don't know Mr. Woods personally, but I do know several fairly well-thought-of scientists, and while they might admire this "discovery" they would assuredly question his methods. His laboratory technique and the consequences are what capture my imagination.
Why bourbon? Or why only bourbon? Did Mr. Woods similarly try blended Scotch whiskey, rye, wine, beer, brandy, and gin? What about that old bass-fishing standby, corn liquor? How about applejack? Hard cider? And now, what kind of bourbon? Sour mash? Straight whiskies, blended bourbon, Kentucky bourbon, Tennessee bourbon, or Virginia bourbon?
I further must assume that Mr. Woods, though he may know Florida bass fishing down to its common fractions, does not know Florida bass fishermen. I am fortunate enough to know several, and telling them that bourbon makes bass feel secure in their presence is like telling them that you just caught two 15-pound fish on a plug. Whereupon fishermen would endanger your life if you didn't tell them what make plug, what size, what retrieve, what color, and so on.
Every Florida bass fisherman (let's just say every bass fisherman and not single out Florida) has several hundred lures--that's just types, I'm not counting color and size variations. Nor am I adding plastic worms, pork rinds, flies, popping bugs, jigs, and live bait rigs. I want to be conservative and believable. You go on and tell a bass fisherman that using bourbon will help him catch more bass, and you'd better either complete the sentence you started or stand back.
I'm afraid that in the short piece I read, Mr. Woods further neglected to say how this bourbon was to be used by the bass fisherman. I can guess how most bass fishermen would interpret this, but I don't think that's how Mr. Woods meant it to be taken: although I see no harm in it, used judiciously.
Using the same logic he used in plowing his daughter's dowry into bass boats, motors (gas and electric), fish-finders, electronic thermometers, lord knows how many spinning rods, casting rods, worm rods, fly rods, and matching reels, along with 24,000 miles of various kinds of lines, leaders, and not counting swivels, snaps, sinkers, and so on, what drastic steps is the average bass fisherman going to take regarding bourbon? The mind reels, if you will permit.
Did Mr. Woods try his secret bourbon method on trout or catfish? These fishermen have a constitutional right to know. Or is the work in progress? If that's so, then perhaps we should all pitch in and shorten the research time. I, for one, am perfectly willing to carry a small flagon of Scotch whiskey in my trout waders, and I'm reasonably sure that if I asked similarly scientific-minded fishermen that I know to do likewise, they would, like little soldiers, to a man, do likewise.
I personally find drinking bourbon or Scotch, or whatever, less tiring to my eyes than tying No. 18 bivisibles in various shades, and would substitute one for the other occupation like a shot. (Should the type of whiskey turn out to be a greater factor in successful fishing than patterns and sizes and presentations, I would invest in a fishing tackle company or a distillery, or both.)
I think we'd all like to know more about this. What about smallmouth bass? Bream? Yellow perch, walleyes, shad? Are we close to needing less than 1,000 casts per muskie if we dip a Dardevle in Wild Turkey? Will gin be outlawed for Atlantic salmon along with the weighted fly? Will fish become "lure shy" if a lake is bombarded with bourboned plugs and refuse all but the rarest blends? Will white wine work better on clear days and red on cloudy days?
If this is the long-sought secret, what will happen to fishing writers who, by now, are unable to do an honest day's work? Will they devote their lives to research in this new field? Will tackle box manufacturers start building portable bars? Will the hollow glass rod now serve a new function? Will plugs be made in 86-proof and 100-proof sizes?
We'll have to revise all the old jokes like "we planned to fish for a week but we ran out of whiskey and had to come home in three days." Will this create another era of bootleg stuff? Will all the guys who write on new patterns of flies and new lures and so on start experimenting with yeast, sugar, and grain? Will the whiskey sour replace the muddler minnow? I don't really know how fish react to bourbon, personally, but I do know how a lot of fishermen react to it. And if fishermen and fish are as alike as a lot of people think--I know a lot of lakes I'm not going to fish on a summer Saturday night.
There's an old saying that goes "When the fisherman feels good, so do the fish." I once believed this had its basis on barometric pressures. Now I'm not sure. Maybe someone stumbled over the whole fish and whiskey idea some time ago.
Sometimes man's brightest ideas are out of phase with the essential character of man as a whole. Alfred Nobel invented dynamite as an aid to society and never dreamed it would be used in heavy weapons and bombs. Men first split the atom to find a source of cheap power to replace oil and coal. When Dom Perignon discovered champagne he said, "I am drinking stars." He had no idea it would be used at weddings.
What will be the ultimate outcome of Mr. Woods' discovery? I don't know, I'm a bit too cynical to scoff right yet. Some men take new ideas with a grain of salt. I'll take this one with a dash of bitters.
This story originally appeared in Hill Country by Gene Hill. Copyright 1974-78 Gene Hill. All rights reserved.