si Peta} ) ti} thos qiae say Wah ay ‘ Ths : 7 MOA aa ea satel \ H ch ‘ ye u de " git arty TOT har bane) ahs shel vie iy fe yy hy its i inte Wind ail ih ined Ait ee Pane ihe 4 i yah nt AAT IE Ith (te i) th gach nase ; i ae a : iis an hi i DAL RLM a 4 TORU: a AL eatin le Obie : Me ated Wiad 4 oe wth iH) Tari Veet ih ray Le he Away ‘4 ‘ Mit ie MQ ta )t coi Ne RAMA HN Nivebyad | ni OIL: fab ganties esa Ha AN avi x ea alee itd iia bh eben bed yi if) Lea ta Mi mg i} ratte Ls Va yh LAURE M AR Te Sie Lh i i vi) pak a rr al a ‘ “4 hit, ‘ ay ‘I inden abut tpl) «i i H pet | int arrays 4! PAA IAEA Hy Aen Eno) SRY HRS ait iy evdebee ay i (pei Nas Wine a Hi at nt , ili ihtels Hit ion 4 : Wie ht 4M tise \! ) Hi ey seca +f i uy i Hi) Ne HU HI Oboe rice HOW ans eneolantat * ‘i UL WEAR TA} nia Lif aga My ay agate Ay) 1 : LAV) ae Eat My Had ih ) fi Hinks i git Re sanity a rent A Anh; Sep - ah Pa ie ce MEY nei is pari ie HN " : i Hae ae a iN i e “a Sadat tathh aaa til BN 14) Tegnays M ° it tips oe i Bing Meant tits Henn Ut nheine HHH wield rarer nhs eves et is i hy heath Vin vay ¢ el a ye sta eteat ny ‘ihe " iy siya) an rn Ye) i, ttt Pays ye nit ai 1M Hh ae Phin “ee sist NENT : bi ws tasy a ats 3) air Seed I ae wnt ' at i 4a : 7 Has fee bal AAA te aa | tol Hannay bet oe Ae el " pa a GIG mseay si ct ey i} GANT Rtaet eH aint : * $1) beste ty is vevir4 vers a) see bi Hit ay int Yb D4 anit H nt ay, A f ite Shi Mises helt oe a a vi He Hi i iti ii ee ii) ian hi Ve cinta Me aM ae al me) il tH in oy Hiden tat a ri aN ratte Wah ey 4 al nt i sah " he {iis Wes Ce hst ae Won i a oe i ey tl i) com tt hat ree ne ih ua } este Wh oe 2 it ii iD tH ue a uy ata ie ui pessris a i MD ASiea a eK it a at “yt waa yey Lets a Aaa Warne tet ‘t i Wi (\y eae ie ay Ne 4 os ith iti i amps i y betty itt git are i 4 i by i a His 4 sah a ite ih uN. nay) Ak ne Si viv hh ae bat ate oe) fi W at By AGA tf rashes ru ageat malate ak i 4 hah et fee Pate 1 an A Ht 4 Hear Ne Mae isda aaah yl et ae iil Te Teuey heky4 Teds iy i iste Ree Dh phn si « fire st 7 it — ah i Ha it ny ns he tie a di ies Mi # pie it i = ahi talias) ae iN4 He rN Bi pote ae bt ? ch ; Wand any mee Hike ‘ ae ne! Y vt | haat eye very ; ih Sib an Do iy Sustsibs Asset barnei ae ai ee ere spite ar as is betage ee glirt re ietsen 4) si MaAal pert Gy elves ita ait Sess = =e Ext ba Sr es == rate ss pu . be we jahe oi We i (eat had ) ff | | TRANSACTIONS OF THE = AMERICAN — FISHERIES © SOCIETY « 252319 ittional Muses- yw ge FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY MEETING OTTAWA, CANADA SEPTEMBER 20, 21, 22, 1920 y, Pin ‘ty i ey Y i, f = sae TRANSACTIONS of the American Fisheries Society “To promote the cause of fish culture; to gather and diffuse information bearing upon its practical success and upon all matters relating to the fisheries; to unite and encourage all interests of fish culture and the fisheries; and to treat all questions of a scientific and economic character regarding fish.” ke FIFTIETH ANNUAL MEETING OTTAWA, CANADA SEPTEMBER 20, 21, 22, 1920 VOLUME L 1920-1921 lis i ” \\ (252318) Edited by Ward T. Bower QAational Musev®: ¥ Published Annually by the Society WASHINGTON, D. C. p Che American Fisheries Society Organized 1870 Incorporated 1910 @Offirers for 1920-1921. PV RSIGCNE. os. odio es NaTHAN R. BULLER, Harrisburg, Pa. Vice-President........ Epwarp E. Prince, Ottawa, Canada Executive Secretary....Warp T. Bower, Washington, D. C. Recording Secretary........ S. B. Hawks, Bennington, Vt. DP COSWT ET fc bie eikiel'e 6 a's ARTHUR L. MILLETT, Boston, Mass. Hice-Presidents of Bibisions BUSI MOM GUTE ia asa bole Wie ace Mire James Nevin, Madison, Wis. Aquatic Biology and Physics....E. A. BirGr, Madison, Wis. Commercial Fishing...... SEYMOUR Bower, Lansing, Mich. ALTA iy eae tae Joun M. Crampton, New Haven, Conn. Protection and Legislation....J. G. NEEDHAM, Ithaca, N. Y. Exerutibe Committee GRACE CNG MLON:,.). coRee Vee eee Washington, D. C. Ve OUND iis. 'c-s bic. 4 ct ate ARE ere eae ...Ottawa, Canada AW ers ABER yc ncacs che al Seen es a En Oe LaCrosse, Wis. Ri led TITIAN eos ek ae me ee Baltimore, Md. HOw. (GRAHAM. ..24 © seb RAtey eres Springfield, Mass. DwwiGare EV DELL og <6 eds ee Comstock Park, Mich. MSrELIN VV. LTE COMB ) 4s: 5:)4 ere hae eda te eee ernaieg le Albany, N. Y. A et Committee on Horeign Relations (EO. SHIRAS, Chairman... soem Washington, D. C. eG AM a NETSITED 2,51. i.e Satie | eee e eaten ee Washington, D. C. PVR ANID AINE 8 iia. GT eI ae Boston, Mass. ee toes MOVE 6) 32s ete olathe Sena Ottawa, Canada Pa AeD . PRINCE). 45.0 0s ee eee Ottawa, Canada Committee on Relations mith National and State Gob errmrsis Been: W. Cops, Chairman. ooo. 0.0 be Pee St. Paul, Minn. PRUE SEVEN 50) 0/5.» yale ve 6, «imp nie ods cate POI BIC ee Madison, Wis. PAGCOR TEP AR BIGEPARD fi 0) oie an nies RENEE Ann Arbor, Mich. an CONE BOR S Jo 00's d eee a ae Quebec, Canada CaaRians I) snANEORD :).)..).)4. 2. Jo uune Hackettstown, N. J. ae peek ek Be ASRERSBYRRRSRESSHIAREON ES OMNANAYN SE Presidents, Terms of Service and Places of Meeting. The first meeting of the Society occurred December 20, 1870. The organization then effected continued until February, 1872, when the second meeting was held. Since that time there has been a meeting each year, as shown below. The respective presidents were elected at the meeting, at the place, and for. the period shown opposite their names, but they presided at the subsequent meeting. Wir ErAnn (Chien: 2 ere Aenean 1870-1872.. WIBEEAMD) NOLORP so eid trels 5 ain 4 u LOLER LOE Din ale Wiarrraney Crit 4). cass as. 1873-1874.... Rospert B. ROOSEVELT......... 1874-1875.... Ropert B. RooSEvELT......... 1875-1876... Ropert B. ROoSEVELT......... 1876-1877*... Ropert B. ROOSEVELT......... 1877-1878. . Rozpert B. RooSEvELtT......... 1878-1879.. Rozert B. RooSEVELT......... 1879-1880. . Ropert B. RooSEVELT......... 1880-1881.... Ropert B. RoosEVELT......... 1881-1882.... GEORGE SHEPARD PAGE........ 1882-1883.... JAMES’. BEN KARD e505 3.5 Sate 1883-1884... THEODORE LYMAN......... 2 1884-1885. MarsHALL McDonALD........ 1885-1886. . Nive Me MUS ON crarcveraa creyate cece 1886-1887.. Waren a itary en cane ee 1887-1888. . JOeUNT Fly CB USGBI e/a) eas Sia ate 1888-1889. . EuGeNE G. BLACKFORD....... 1889-1890. . EuGcEeNE G. BLACKFORD....... 1890-1891. James A. HENSHALL......... 1891-1892.. HERSCHEL WHITAKER........ 1892-1893... ENR Var GanORD nasal es 1893-1894. VV mT TAGE Toes? Seca oct aya 1894-1895.. L. D:; HuntiIncron....:..... 1895-1896. . HERSCHEL WHITAKER........ 1896-1897... IV TICIG DAE MDE ee VIRAGO Sruiats 1S cra 1897-1898 GEORGE, Fe UPEABODW 2 a ivie cic ersc 1898-1899... JORN Wo DITCOMB cc. cies 3 1899-1900. . [BB DICKERSON. cs e's sae 1900-1901.. IFA EES RAVAN eeice aa etavel Suelo! aye 1901-1902... (GEORGE M. Bowers........... 1902-1903. TRAININGS | GG ATRIRO icc schoo & 1903-1904. Ele NREL UROOM setae a are the difficulty in getting them to the streams. Many of the waters are frozen over, and often we have deep snow with which to contend. The people are beginning to ask more for fingerlings, but heretofore we have not had the quality of water at our hatcheries to grow large numbers of fry to the fingerling size. We now think we have the water at our new hatchery at St. Croix Falls, in the north- western part of the state, in which with care we can grow fish with very small loss. We intend to raise more brook trout fry to the fingerling size, and not plant until all danger of spring freshets has passed. Whether we shall get any better results is a question in my mind. One thing we do know, however, is that we shall be pleas- ing a great many more people; also that we shall be able to make annual allotments to all the streams we think adapted to brook trout, though, of course, not giving each stream as large numbers as if we sent out fry. For many years I have been studying the quality of waters we use for the raising of brook trout, and have learned which are suitable, simply by comparing the num- ber of fish planted in various streams with the number taken from them in after years. Streams that we for- merly thought were excellent for trout often did not show Nevin.—Fifty Years’ Experience in Fish Culture 215 the results we had expected. This applies also to certain varieties of fish planted in the lakes. The spring water at our new St. Croix Falls hatchery is a regular cure-all and sanitarium for fish. Trout that are hatched from weak eggs seem to receive such in- vigoration that we have practically no losses. The water is much superior to any I have ever had to do with for the raising of trout fry. We have given it a thorough test during the past two hatching seasons, so we feel at this time that we can go ahead and spend money in mak- ing this hatchery one of the best and most useful of any. There may be many more fish-cultural stations in this country that possess water as invigorating to brook trout fry, but I know of only one, namely, that privately owned by Mr. G. Hansen, at Osceola, Wis., about five miles south of St. Croix Falls. It is a commercial trout. hatchery where Mr. Hansen has raised and sold many tons of brook trout annually for the past thirty years. His fish have been clean and free from disease during all that time. I claim that this is due to the quality of the water. The inbreeding of fish is something that has never been brought to the attention of this Society, to my knowl- edge, and it is a matter which I think is very important. I would be pleased to hear regarding it from those en- gaged in the propagation of brook trout. For the past twenty-five years we have been exchanging and buying eggs from different places, each year endeavoring to get new blood into our stock, but have never had the success desired with the fry hatched from the purchased eggs. In fact, we did not have as good results as we did from our own stock. For the past few years we have been getting more soft eggs at spawning and more weak fry with blue sacs at hatching than formerly. We have attributed this to _ the inbreeding of fish. At every possible opportunity we 216 American Fisheries Society now secure eggs from wild trout. Last season we got one hundred wild male fish and impregnated 125,000 eggs at our Bayfield hatchery, and the result has been mar- vellous in the production of strong, healthy fry, there being no weak fish or fry with blue sacs among them. Every fish culturist knows that fry with blue sacs are doomed to die. We have kept separate the one hundred male fish obtained last year, and will watch the results this season. We are in hopes of getting a much larger num- ber of wild male trout for use at spawning time this fall. Should anyone in the business having a number of soft. eggs when taken, let them remain in the milt in the vessel in which taken, and set it in cold running spring water for an hour or more, or until the eggs get hard before putting them on the trays, results will be very beneficial. At one of our hatcheries it is difficult to carry a large percentage of brook trout fry until they begin to feed, con- sequently for a number of years we have been sending the eggs to other stations to hatch and distribute. The resulting fry were always stronger and there were fewer losses than among those of the home product. After the fry from the eggs thus transferred began to feed when about six weeks old, some were returned to the parent hatchery without serious loss thereafter. This shows that there is something in the water that affects the fry from the time they are hatched until the sac is absorbed and feeding begins. If the eggs had remained at their home station we would not have raised twenty per cent of the fry to the age of two months. As to rainbow trout, I think we keep a larger stock of breeders and take more eggs than any of the middle or eastern states. We do not have the trouble in raising them that we do with brook trout in the same waters where we hatch and distribute millions of fry. These fish have been bred from the same stock for the past forty Nevin.—Fifty Years’ Experience in Fish Culture 217 years, and the eggs and fry from our stock of breeders last season were as strong and vigorous as any we had ever taken. One might naturally think that if there is anything to the inbreeding of fish, results would be the same with rainbow as with brook trout. We intend to increase our capacity and keep a much larger stock of brown trout in the future than we have in the past, as the fry planted in our streams have done ex- ceptionally well. I do not find from observation that the brown trout are any more destructive in the way of can- nibalism, of which they are accused, than any other va- riety of game fish. Their food qualities are almost equal to those of brook trout and their ability to fight will always give the angler a thrill. If the fish is of any size, the fisherman will have a tale to tell of a hard-fought battle and the time it took to land the catch safely. Diseases of fish are many, and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Salt has been the cure-all for most of our trouble with fish in the past. We have found another remedy, however, which we think is an improve- ment over salt, if properly used, for the removal of fungus or the killing of copepods on the gills of the fish, or in fact any germs that attack fish. If taken in time the use of potassium permanganate, one-half grain to a gallon of water, varying slightly according to the age of the fish, will bring results. A bath of a couple of minutes at a time in this solution about twice a day for several days if necessary, will kill most of the germs and keep the fish free from disease. Hereafter in the spring and fall we shall give all of our brook trout a bath at sorting time, hoping to thus keep them free from all germs. To be successful in brook trout work, one must be alert and wideawake at all times in watching over the stock on hand. Close attention must be given to the feeding and care of the fish, or trouble is bound to result. A care- 218 American Fisheries Society less man has no business with the raising of fish in any manner. Fish culture today is recognized by some as a big business proposition, although but few people truly realize the importance of it. Millions of pounds of food products are taken annually from our waters in a commercial way. This goes on from year to year. In addition, there is the recreation and sport for the angler as well as food he thus obtains from our waters each season. The many varieties and great numbers of game fish are worth un- told millions to our country each year. The only way that this vast wealth can be kept with us, so that future generations shall be able to realize the importance and reap the benefits of the industry is by the propagation and planting in our waters each year of more millions of fish. This together with regulations governing the size, daily catch and the season when they may be taken, will make it possible to maintain the fish supply for all time to come. If it had not been for the propagation of whitefish on the Great Lakes, there would be practically none in those waters today. More whitefish have been taken from the waters of Wisconsin, Lake Michigan and Green Bay dur- ing the past two seasons than were taken in the previous decade. The fishermen say there are more lake trout in the waters of Lake Michigan now than there were forty years ago. This speaks well for the many plantings of fry which have been made. It is remarkable to consider the large numbers of fish taken from year to year from our Great Lakes system, and then remember that the numbers caught annually have not diminished. When we recall the great waste result- ing from the capture of immature and practically value- less No. 2 whitefish and trout, we are prompted to call attention to what they would have been worth to the fish- Nevin.—Fifty Years’ Experience in Fish Culture 219 ermen at present prices if left for another two years to have reached a satisfactory size and weight. The result- ing big addition to the food product would not have cost anyone a cent. Something more should be done by the several states immediately concerned and by Canada to replenish Lake Superior with whitefish. It is almost fished out as far as this species is concerned, and some united action should be taken at once. The international waters should be gov- erned by uniform legislation by the two countries, so that it will be possible to prevent waste of small trout and whitefish. The taking of these valuable fish before they have reached proper size should be strictly prohibited by both countries. Discussion Mr. E. T. D. CHAMBERS, Quebec, Canada: May I be allowed to ask if the author of the paper can give us the date at which the gentleman whom he styles the “Father of Fish Culture” in Canada began his operations? Mr. Nevin: He began about 1866. Mr. CHAMBERS: As a matter of historical accuracy, if the state- ment made in this paper is correct, I wish to correct a statement I made in the “History of the Canadian Fisheries,” published about eight or ten years ago, in which I stated that the father of fish culture in Canada was Richard Nettle, who commenced operations in the city of Quebec— only in an experimental way, of course, at his own place of residence in the city. He succeeded in hatching in the late fifties, and the result of his operations has been published in his book entitled “Salmon Fish- ing in Canada,” published by Lovell, of Montreal, in the year 1859 or 1860. The facts which I mention in the work to which I refer are also recorded by Mr. Rodd, of this city, in a paper which he read before the (Canadian Fisheries Association—I do not remember the date—at its meeting last year at a point on Lake Erie. The facts can be very easily ascertained because Mr. Nettle’s book is in print; and there is also in existence a report made to Sir Edmund Head, who was then Governor General of Canada. I am enabled to fix the date approximately because of the fact that Sir Edmund Head’s only son was drowned while bath- ing in the St. Maurice River at the Falls of Shawinigan, and Sir Ed- mund was so heartbroken that he returned to England. That was before 1860 and Sir Edmund Head was a great patronizer of Richard Nettle in connection with his first hatchery and the operations which he carried 220 American Fisheries Society on at his residence in the city of Quebec. His work may not have been upon a large scale but he certainly started the idea and in quite a prac- tical manner. He took salmon eggs from the St. Charles river and hatched them at his place in Quebec; he also hatched trout eggs taken from waters in the province of Quebec. [Mr. Chambers later said that he had ascertained the exact year in which Nettle hatched trout at Quebec and planted them in Lake Beauport, and that it was in 1857.] Mr. Wm. C. ApaAms, Boston, Mass.: Mr. Nevin spoke about the question of transporting fry. Mr. Nevin: Those were fingerlings from six months to one year old, from three to five inches in length. é Mr. AvamMs: We have had difficulty in transporting small finger- ling fish from a hatchery over a distance of about eighty miles to a rearing plant. When in forty gallon cans we lost our shipments, but when in ten gallon cans we had no trouble. ‘Mr. Nevin: This last fall we transferred a carload of about 10,000 fingerlings to the Wild Rose hatchery. These fish were placed in troughs in the hatchery building. I watched them for two hours and there was no sign of any fish dying; they were in perfect condition, and I went to supper. I had not been gone fifteen minutes when the foreman of the hatchery came rushing up to the hotel, telling me the fish were acting badly, a lot of them turning on their sides as if they had spasms, and beginning to die. I went to the hatchery with him, ordered several pails of salt placed in the troughs, and left the fish in this solution for some five minutes and they all revived. In fact, we lost only about 75 fish out of the 10,000 transferred. In my opinion, if I had not been on hand and used the salt as we did, we would have lost from one-half to two-thirds of the fish, judging by their looks when I reached the hatching house. Mr. ApAmMs: Would that be practical treatment for fingerlings as small as an inch and a half in length? Mr. Nevin: Yes. That has been happening to us for years. In transporting fish we have better results in November than in any other month. PROGRESS IN PRACTICAL FISH CULTURE By Dwicut LyDELL Michigan Fish Commission, Comstock Park, Mich. Perhaps the animal kingdom affords no more striking example of waste and loss than occurs in the reproduction of young fish in a wild or natural state. When a parent fish must be provided with reproductive germs in such lavish numbers—often a thousand or more in order to produce a single adult—or, in other words, when nature must gamble at odds of a thousand to one in order to insure a posterity, it is timely to inquire into the extent to which this remarkable waste may be conserved and utilized. It is therefore the mission of the practical fish culturist to rescue from peril, to salvage natural waste and so shape its destiny as to add enormously to our food resources. It is obvious that he will succeed only to the extent that he is able to determine what are the real con- structive forces of nature, then provide ways and means of utilizing, in proper balance, such of these forces as are in harmony with the special work at hand; and at the same time to constantly safeguard against all adverse conditions and natural forces that blight and destroy. It is my purpose merely to refer briefly to improved prac- tical methods that have stabilized and increased produc- tion to an extent that many additional millions of young fish have been added to our output in recent years. Advancement in practical fish-cultural work depends to a great extent upon the fish culturist himself. He must thoroughly investigate natural conditions in his lo- cality, and must devise mearis to control or modify any features inimical to satisfactory results. Certain kinds of pond fish: will, with ideal weather conditions, reproduce themselves to some extent, but the fish culturist, if he is observing, may develop such other conditions as to in- 222 American Fisheries Society sure a good output every season. Of course, the locality, kind and temperature of water, quantity of flowage and many other essential matters must be taken into consid- eration. The output of different kinds of pond-hatched and reared fish also depends a great deal upon the man- ner in which the pond is prepared for this particular work. PREPARATION OF PONDS The first requisite is that the ponds be in proper con- dition. If in a locality where freshets prevail and the bottom is covered with silt, the ponds should be drawn down the previous fall, cleaned, and allowed to remain dry until they become thoroughly frozen. This is to destroy undesirable forms of plant and animal life. To permit thorough cleaning, each pond should be provided with a concrete runway or gutter around the inlet, through the bottom, and connecting with the outlet. When the pond is being drawn down the mud is gradually forced with scrapers toward this gutter; when the pond is finally down, the mud is practically all in the center. Then a heavy flow of water is turned on and the mud is grad- ually washed out through the gutter. In the spring the ponds are again drawn down, and if they are to be used for the propagation of bass, the beds are placed where the fish culturist deems fit and according to the number of breeders he wishes to put in each pond. If the ponds are located where but little richness comes from the flood water, they are fertilized, especially around the shallow margins, with some good kind of pond fertilizer. If too much vegetation has been grow- ing in any pond, crayfish and adult goldfish are intro- duced to keep it down where it will not interfere with the subsequent collection of young fish. If not enough vege- tation grows, it should be planted. Chara, which is very desirable in pond culture, can be transplanted in the fall, late in September or early in October, by drawing a pond Lydell.—Progress in Practical Fish Culture 223 that has an abundance, letting it dry, and then scattering a goodly supply over the bottom of the ponds that lack vegetation. The reason for the introduction of goldfish and crayfish is that they do not prey to any extent upon the insect life that furnishes food for other kinds of young fish. As the goldfish breed about a month later than the other varieties of pond fish, their young furnish an abun- dance of food later on. A pond with plenty of shallow margin will yield a greater number of fingerling fish; this is because more food is produced in the shoal mar- gin areas. INTRODUCTION OF BREEDING FISH The breeding fish are carefully sorted, both with re- spect to their size and condition, and none but strong, healthy specimens of about the same size are placed in each breeding pond. The number put in each depends a great deal on its water area and the amount of natural food available for their young. Before the fish are trans- ferred from the storage to the breeding ponds, the tem- perature is taken, and it is determined with absolute certainty that the temperature of the water meets the requirements of natural spawning conditions. If the hatchery water supply is from a spring brook, it is shut off from the breeding ponds, and the temperature of the latter allowed to rise to a point where breeding will take place quickly after the brood fish have been introduced. The breeding stock is held in one or two of the deeper ponds with an abundant supply of running water, and thus Spawning may be retarded several days. The fish are con- stantly kept under close observation to see that breeding does not proceed too far before they are transferred to the warmer breeding ponds. It is far better to lose a few eggs in the retaining ponds than to lose them all in the breeding ponds, which latter will occur if the fish are sorted too early. After the fish have been sorted and 224 American Fisheries Soctety transferred, close watch is kept of weather conditions and temperatures every moment until the hatching season is over. Only enough water is introduced into the breed- ing ponds to keep them at normal level, as this is better than having too large a flow. If the temperature starts downward, the water is shut off immediately. If the fish culturist has studied different varieties of fish during the breeding season, he will probably recall that some streams in his vicinity failed to produce any fry during certain seasons. If he will study this matter closely he will find that proper conditions did not prevail. There may have been a few warm days and the fish came on the spawning ground and actually laid their eggs. Later on there was a cold spell, one or two cold nights when the temperature of the water dropped, thus caus- ing the fish to desert their nests and practically the whole season’s output was a total loss. The farther north the fish culturist is located, the more trouble he has with temperature conditions; but there is nothing to hinder him, if he keeps in close touch with the situation, in bringing about almost whatever he desires in this respect. REARING YOUNG BASS IN PONDS When the young bass are about to rise from the nest, they are screened, if for no other reason than to determine how many should be left in a certain pond to be reared to fingerlings. If there are too many, the surplus is trans- ferred to other ponds or planted in public waters. Too many fry in one pond will result in their destroying the food supply, and then they would naturally all starve. The practical fish culturist after looking over his ponds carefully and estimating the amount of food therein, should be able to determine about how many thousand fry ought to be released. Scattering finely ground clam meal around the borders of the ponds increases the nat- Lydell—Progress in Practical Fish Culture 225 ural food supply. This was tried in 1920 at the Mill Creek Hatchery in Michigan, with results which con- firmed our former experiments. No doubt fish scrap meal or any other form of meat or fish meal would serve equally well. After several years of experimental work it has been found that better results have been obtained in raising bass in ponds with the adult fish than otherwise, provided the adults are well fed every day. The reason is the im- possibility of keeping out of the ponds during the breed- ing and rearing season beetles, tadpoles and other forms of aquatic life which naturally prey upon the food that the fish culturist has provided for the young fry. Adult fish in the pond eat these larger aquatic forms, and therefore the minute crustacea are saved for the little fish. If it happens that too many fry have been released in a pond, close watch is kept of the young fish and food conditions, and before the food supply has become exhausted a num- ber of the fish are removed to insure the remainder a food supply sufficient to last until they reach the fingerling stage. This is done from time to time, in fact, it is often necessary to resort to this thinning-down operation four or five times before the final cleanup of number one, two and three fingerlings. REARING YOUNG BLUEGILLS IN PONDS The propagation of bluegills is as yet in its infancy, especially in Michigan. Other states may have pro- gressed further, but we find that the adult bluegills do not live any too well in small or medium ponds, and for some reason about two-thirds of the breeding stock is lost each season. Good results have been obtained, al- though it has been necessary to provide new stock each year, which in a way is a drawback. We have been very successful in the last two seasons in securing fingerling stock of this variety without any breeders. We _ simply 226 ) American Fisheries Society - went in the breeding season to some of our inland waters where bluegills were quite plentiful and obtained an abun- dance of fry. We noted that a large percentage of the fry were destroyed if left in the lake. Close observation disclosed that the young bluegills, when old enough, would rise from the nest and then toward evening settle back again. This happens four or five times before the fry are strong enough to swim away. During the operation many thou- sands are destroyed every time they attempt to rise. It ‘ was found that by taking a glass tube three or four feet long, and putting it down in the nest with the thumb over- the upper end, thousands of the young fish could be ob- tained at one operation. They were then placed in cans and taken to the hatchery. The young fish, just before they rise from the nest, have something of a golden ap- pearance. When approaching the bluegill nesting ground the operator can select the more desirable nests occupied by the large fish. Two men in a boat will have no trouble in securing several hundred thousand young bluegills in a couple of hours if taken at the right time. As the breeding season of this species covers quite an extended period, we have no trouble in getting the number de- sired. Upon arrival at the hatchery the fish are put into ponds that have been recently prepared. At first results were not absolutely satisfactory, as the fry settled to the bottom of the pond in the mud and silt and many of them were smothered before they were strong enough to rise. This trouble has been overcome by mak- ing small screen-like devices of cheese cloth stretched over a frame of any convenient size and submerged around the shallow margin of the pond. The sides of the screen frames should be about three inches high, so the fry cannot wriggle off into the muddy bottom of the pond. Less care is necessary in estimating the number of Lydell_—Progress in Practical Fish Culture Bal bluegills placed in a pond, provided there is food enough to get them started, as they can be readily fed upon pre- pared food. We have been successful in feeding fresh liver or clam meal, very finely ground. In one pond, three hundred feet long and two hundred feet wide, we have about sixty thousand fingerling fish. You will find that this experiment merits your consideration and trial, provided you are in a locality where bluegill fry can be obtained from outlying waters. COLLECTING AND HATCHING PERCH The best results so far in rearing perch have been ob- tained by preparing the ponds as above described, turn- ing on the water about the second week in April, in our locality, and then introducing several pairs of goldfish, according to the area of the pond. The young perch fry are introduced immediately after hatching. Nothing fur- ther is done until the perch show up around the shores, at which time they are about three-quarters of an inch in length. Then feeding is begun and continued until the latter part of August, when the fish are about three inches long. Several perch upon being examined have been found to contain small goldfish. The pond devoted to this work in 1920 yielded about 18,000 three-inch perch and several thousand young goldfish, the latter being re- moved during seining operations for perch. After ex- hausting or taking what they wanted of the natural food supply, the perch began to feed upon the young goldfish, and in addition took prepared food introduced three times a day. In former years it was customary to collect the adult perch for breeding purposes, and results were considered very successful. But it was found by holding them over and feeding until the next season, we did not get as many . eggs or as high a percentage of good eggs as we got from 228 American Fisheries Society the wild stock brought to the hatchery. In order to im- prove this situation, we set about to find a way whereby the spawn might be obtained from wild waters. At first we studied spawning conditions in our inland lakes. We found that invariably the perch spawn during the night, coming to the shallower parts of the lake and hanging their ribbons of eggs on brush or rushes or any fairly suitable place. We also found that nearly all of this spawn was destroyed by turtles and other enemies in the lake. Even the perch themselves fed upon it the next day. Early one morning we made a tour of a lake known to contain many adult perch and found that quantities of the spawn could be collected and shipped to the hatch- eries. We also found that nearly one hundred per cent of the spawn was fertile and in some instances far better than that obtained from the station ponds. But this only supplied us with a limited quantity; therefore, observa- tions were made on waters of the Great Lakes. At Wild- fowl Bay, in the Saginaw district, where adult perch were quite abundant we found that during the spawning sea- son hundreds of millions of perch eggs were destroyed by being washed ashore in great windrows along the beach. It is safe to say that two hundred million were lost in this one locality. Collecting operations have since been carried on there two seasons and the supply has been unlimited. There seems to be no reason why nearly all of these eggs could not be rescued and sent to our hatch- eries, provided equipment for handling them were avail- able. As most of them are in the eyed stage when they are washed ashore and are a total loss to the waters from which they come, I see no reason why other states should not profit by securing some of these eggs. Experiments heretofore in hatching the eyed spawn have always been carried on with the old Chase hatching jar, but this season we found that about ten million of the eggs placed in a fry tank twelve feet long, four feet wide Lydell_—Progress in Practical Fish Culture Ze and two feet deep, hatched out very nicely and yielded good results. This tank was supplied with water through a pipe running the length of one side above the surface and pierced with a small hole every two inches which pro- duced a nice spray and caused good aeration. The eggs are in semi-buoyant ribbons and are very easily moved; the least circulation will tend to stir them up from the bottom. When left alone they will settle to the bottom of the tank, and if left three or four hours the young fry will smother wherever they come in contact with any object. This can be obviated by taking a hand- net about ten inches square of fine wire cloth stretched tightly over a frame, and moving it through the water until the resulting currents cause the whole mass of eggs to move up from the bottom. This should be done at least once an hour until the fry are hatched, which, if the eggs are eyed when secured, will be only a few days. Discussion Mr. J. W. Titcoms, Albany, N. Y.: I would like to ask Mr. Lydell what temperature he finds most favorable to the hatching of fresh water mussels; also the nature of the fertilizer used. Mr. LypeLtt: The temperature is about sixty. For fertilizer we are using nothing but clam meal; we can get tons of it in our locality. Mr. W. C. Apams, Boston, Mass.: I would like to ask Mr. Lydell whether an excess of tadpoles is injurious to the pond for small-mouth black bass culture? Mr. Lypett: We have found them very injurious during the spawn- ing season. We have boys patrolling our ponds in the evening and picking up these toads. We pay them so much a toad and we get barrels of them. We find that one young tadpole will eat more natural food than seven or eight young bass. Mr. ApAMs: Even if the adult bass were to feed on the tadpole when the tadpole was two years old, it would still be disadvantageous to have these tadpoles in a bass pond, in your opinion? Mr. Lypett: When a tadpole is two years old it would be a frog. We have very few of them; they are collected and put into our lakes. Mr. ApaAms: Would the tadpole from the frog be any different from the tadpole from the toad? Mr. Lypett: I do not think so. 230 American Fisheries Society Mr. ApAms: So far as the principle is concerned the two would be similar? Mr. Lypett: Yes. I would clean them out of any pond in which I wanted to rear young bass. Mr. Titcoms: Do you ever use the tadpole for feeding bass? . Mr. Lypett: Often in the fall; we are feeding some now, collected from outside waters. Dr. R. C. Ospurn, Columbus, Ohio: The principle, of course, is that the tadpole is a vegetable feeder and will clean up the alge upon which these small crustacea and insect larve feed; therefore you will reduce the natural food of the bass by having the tadpoles in the pond at a time when the bass are too small to feed on the tadpoles. On the other hand, at a later stage the tadpoles will be gone before the bass are big enough to handle them. If, therefore, you want to grow tad- poles for bass culture, the thing to do is to have an entirely separate pond for them and put them into your bass pond at the proper time. Mr. Lypett: We have one pond more exclusively for bullheads, and into that pond we put all the large tadpoles. When we began to feed our young bullheads the clam meal, I noticed that it took more to feed the tadpoles than the bullheads. Wherever the bullheads congre- gated to take food, there you would see the tadpoles also; in fact, they were growing just as fast as the bullheads. But we were perfectly satis- fied to feed them, because we are using them now to feed our bass. Mr. Apams: Do you attempt to keep a stock of the adult bass throughout the year, or do you collect your breeders each spring? Mr. LypEtt: We keep a stock the year round. We have possibly six hundred now, but if our stock gets low we introduce some each sea- son from different localities. We prefer to collect stock fish in the late fall. Mr. ApAmMs: What do you feed your adult bass throughout the year? | hom Mr. Lypett: Clam meal, minnows and crayfish. We start feeding the clam meal right after the spawning season and continue until the fish are put into the wintering ponds. From then on we feed them minnows and crayfish. Mr. ApAMs: Do you see any objection to having a regular pond for minnows to breed your own supply? Mr. Lypett: I think it would be an advantage to have a pond of that kind. We have a great many crayfish in our ponds and they are fed alive. Every pond is prepared for bass in the spring, and the large crayfish are put in. Mr. Titcoms: Do the crayfish ever catch the young bass? Mr. Lypertt: Hardly ever. Occasionally, when seining them up we get too many crayfish in the net; then they will catch the bass. Mr. Apams: Adult fish of what size are generally collected for breeding stock? Mr. Lypett: About three pounds. We have a great many of the Lydell.—Progress in Practical Fish Culture 231 large size. If you put a lot of the small size in with them, you do not get very good results. True, we like to use as large fish as we can, because a large pair of bass does not take up any more room than a small pair, and they produce about four times as many fry. Mr. Tircoms: How many years do you keep your breeding stock of bass? Mr. Lypett: Until they die of old age; some may be ten years old. In the spring of the year, when we are sorting, if the fish look thin and not in the pink of condition, we throw them into the creek. Mr. ApAms: Would you say that a pond fifty or sixty feet in diameter, a round pond, is too small for bass culture? Mr. Lypett: No. When we started our work we had some ponds of that size, holding only about six or seven pairs of breeders. We had one pond that was only twenty feet across. We had one pair of bass in there and got just as good results from that one pair as if they had been in a larger pond; but we could not raise in that one pond the fry that came from the pair. I may say that our ponds, this year, are about 350 feet long by 130 to 140 feet wide. There is a kettle about 5% feet deep in all of our ponds. Mr. Apams: Do you have any trouble getting the fingerlings out of these kettles in the fall? Mr. Lypett: No. We find, however, that in the summer the large bass will collect in the kettle as long as they are well fed. If you see them going to the shore very much you can depend upon it that they are looking for something to eat. The small bass usually stay in the shallow part of the ponds, whereas the larger fish hardly ever go there. CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES CAN RE- STORE THE GREAT FRASER RIVER FISHERY By JoHN PEASE Bascock Provincial Fisheries Department Victoria, British Columbia Notwithstanding that the salmon fisheries of the Fraser River system have elsewhere been ably and adequately dealt with by the fishery authorities of Canada and the United States, it is so desirable that the transactions of the American Fisheries Society should contain a digest of the facts in this great international case that this paper is submitted. The sockeye salmon fishery of the Fraser River system was formerly the world’s greatest salmon fishery. The run of salmon in those waters was greater every fourth year than in any other waters. This fishery is no longer great. A dis- criminating study of the significant facts in the development and decline of this fishery demonstrates the necessity of deal- ing with them at once in an international way. These facts have been fully established, are no longer questioned, and should be more generally understood. The restoration of the sockeye salmon fishery of the Fraser River system is. the greatest, and at the same time the least expensive, reclama- tion project in which Canada and the United States can jointly engage, and if adequate measures are adopted its suc- cess is certain. The prominent facts in the history of the sockeye fishery - may be stated as follows: The waters of the Fraser River system as defined in the proposed treaty between Great Britain and the United States include all the fishing waters in the Province of British Colum- bia and in the State of Washington which are frequented by sockeye salmon in their migration from the Pacific Ocean to the spawning beds of the Fraser River basin. They include Babcock.—The Great Fraser River- Fishery 233 Juan de Fuca, Rosario, and Haro Straits, and the other Ameri- can estuary waters leading into the Gulf of Georgia, and the waters of that gulf as well as the channels of the Fraser River up to Mission Bridge, in British Columbia. Fishing for sockeyes began commercially in the channels of the Fraser in British Columbia in 1876. It was extended to the waters of the Gulf of Georgia immediately outside the mouths of the river in 1890. Fishing for sockeyes began in Washington waters in 1891 with the installation of traps in the vicinity of Point Roberts. Traps became an important factor in 1897. Purse-nets came into use in American waters in 1901 and in recent years have greatly increased in number. During the period from 1900 to 1918, when the industry was at its height, the catch of sockeyes in Canadian waters produced a pack of 5,030,730 cases. During the same period the catch in American waters gave a pack of 7,382,343 cases. This represents a combined total pack of 12,413,073 cases, of which the Canadians produced 40 per cent and the Americans 60 per cent. Dr. C. H. Gilbert, of Stanford University, in his ‘Con- tributions to the Life-history of the Sockeye Salmon,’’* has demonstrated by scale-reading that the sockeyes that run in the Fraser River system are hatched in the watershed of that river in British Columbia, live for the first year or more of their lives in its lake waters, then migrate to the sea, where they remain and grow until the summer of their fourth year, and then seek to return to the Fraser River basin in order to spawn, and after spawning die.+ The Fraser River basin formerly produced more sockeye salmon every fourth year, known as the “big year,” than any other known river-basin, and in the following years, known as the “small years,” produced runs of commercial importance. *See British Columbia Fisheries Reports, 1913 to 1918. ¢ There are however, exceptional cases in which fish proceed to sea immediately on hatching; and there are certain proportions which return in their third and fifth years. 234 American Fisheries Society The following statement gives the entire pack of sockeyes in American and Canadian waters of the Fraser River system for the years 1891 to 1919, inclusive: SocKEYE SALMON Pack oF FRASER River SysTeEM, 1891 To 1919 INCLUSIVE Year. Canadian waters. American waters. Total. Cases. Cases. Cases. 1891 176,954 5,538 182,492 1892 79,715 2,954 82,669 1893 457,797 47,852 505,649 1894 363,967 41,791 405,758 1895 395,984 65,143 461,127 1896 356,984 72,979 429,963 1897 860,459 312,048 1,172,507 1898 256,101 252,000 508,101 1899 480,485 499,646 980,131 1900 229,800 228,704 458,504 1901 928,669 1,105,096 2,033,765 1902 293,477 339,556 633,033 1903 204,809 167,211 372,020 1904 72,688 123,419 196,107 1905 837,489 847,122 1,684,611 1906 183,007 182,241 365,248 1907 62,617 96,974 159,591 1908 74,574 155,218 229,792 1909 585,435 1,005,120 1,590,555 1910 150,432 234,437 384,869 IQII 62,817 126,950 189,767 IgI2 123,879 183,896 397,775 1913 736,661 1,664,827 2,401,488 1914 198,183 336,251 534,434 1915 91,130 64,584 1555714 1916 27,394 78,476 105,870 1917 148,164 411,538 559,702 1918 19,697 50,723 70,420 1919 34,068 64,346 98,414 Totals 8,493,436 8,766,640 17,260,076 The foregoing table gives a complete record for six four- year cycles and for the first two years of the present cycle. The outstanding features therein shown are: (1) The great packs made every fourth year; (2) the comparatively small packs made in the three intervening years; (3) the gradual but pronounced decline in the runs in the small years; and (4) the startling decline in the pack in the last big year, 1917. As far back as written records exist, a phenomenally big Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 259 run of sockeyes to the Fraser is shown every fourth year. All the early explorers record it and quote the Indians as saying it had always existed. It has been a characteristic peculiar to the Fraser and unknown in any other river. Up to 1917 the Fraser River district produced more sockeyes every fourth year than the combined catches made in Alaskan waters dur- ing all but one of those years, as the following statement shows: SocKEYE SALMON PAcK OF THE FRASER RIVER SYSTEM AND IN ALASKA Year Alaska. Fraser River System. Cases. Cases. CIN Matata\atahutese stevecace sleloval cla’ aial ejaret sisrever ere 1,319,335 2,033,765 MGC iemefsteicicic alarainiestinieta cts steleisieraibrerstaris 1,574,428 1,684,611 SOOM ainvalcseleisieGiatebmieve clare. «isi viaselereeterete 1,705,302 1,590,555 BNSC SU alc) eywiist ove) ey'acie lai apeiiey stepe\eie! slovave ve auecepette 1,965,237 2,401,488 MON seaciete alalsrescicia\c sche is. sfarareichele jars 'eret sts 2,488,381 559,702 The sockeye salmon runs to the Fraser River system in the big years have been alarmingly depleted, and the runs in the small years are no longer of commercial importance. Both are threatened with extinction. Complete records exist of conditions on both the fishing and the spawning grounds of the Fraser system since 1900. The record of the pack shows the catch, because the entire catch is marketed in cans. The number of fishermen em- ployed and the amount of gear used are also recorded. There are adequate data also for a comparison of conditions on the spawning beds since 1900. Dr. Gilbert, in “The Sockeye Run on the Fraser River,’’* says: ‘No other sockeye stream has received such close and discrim- inating study. Annual inspection has been made of the spawning beds of the entire water-shed, and predictions of the run four years hence have been fearlessly made. It is a matter of record how consistently these prophecies have been fulfilled. The observations of conditions on the spawning beds have been made by the same observer since 1900. * British Columbia Fisheries Report, 1917. 236 American Fisheries Society The records for the fishing grounds show that the runs of sockeyes to the Fraser River system in the big years 1901, 1905, 1909, and 1913 produced an average pack of 1,927,602 cases, and that in 1917, the last year in the cycle of big years, it produced a pack of but 559,732 cases, or 70 per cent less than the average of the four preceding big years. The start- ling decrease in 1917 is due to the fact that the great runs of 1913 did not reach the spawning beds of the upper section of the Fraser basin, for the reason that the river’s channel at Hell’s Gate was blocked by a great slide of rock following the construction of the Canadian Northern Pacific Railway through. the canyon of the Fraser. A tunnel was driven through the rock cliff that overhangs the narrow channel immediately above Hell’s Gate. During the spring of 1913 the action of frost caused a section of that cliff, including a portion of the tunnel, to slide into the river’s channel, which formed an ob- struction that the main portion of the run of fish could not get over. After frantic and continued efforts to surmount the’ obstruction the fish became exhausted and were swept down- stream by the rapid current, where they died in the channels below without having spawned. The British Columbia Fisheries Report for 1913 states that the number of sockeyes that escaped capture on the fishing grounds, and that later reached Hell’s Gate that year, was fully as great, if not greater, than in the four preceding big years. The condition at the principal spawning beds of the Fraser created by the obstruction is described in the following excerpt from an article by the author, in the British Colum- bia Fisheries Report for 1913: I feel fully justified from my investigations in concluding that the number of sockeyes which passed above the fishing limits was as great this year as any preceding big year of which we have a record, and I think even greater. The sockeyes made their appearance in the canyon above Yale in June, and during the high waters of that month and July large numbers passed through to Quesnel and Chilko lakes. The greater proportion of the run of sockeyes in late July, and in August and September, was blockaded in the canyon by rock obstructions placed in Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 237 the channel, incident to the construction of the Canadian Northern Pacific Railroad, so that few were able to pass through during that time. No humpbacks succeeded in passing through the canyon. The blasting of temporary passage-ways enabled a large proportion of the sockeye run of October and November to pass through the canyon. In August, sockeyes were seen drifting down-stream between Hell’s Gate and Yale; the movement was very pronounced in September, and con- tinued until the middle of October. The streams which enter the Fraser between Hell’s Gate and Agassiz were filled with sockeyes from the middle of August until the end of October, while they had not been observed in those streams in previous years. Very few sockeyes spawned in any of those streams and most of them died without spawning. Great numbers of dead sockeyes which had died without spawning, were found on the bars and banks of the Fraser between Yale and Agassiz in September and October. The number which reached Quesnel Lake was little more than an eighth of the number which entered that lake in 1909. The run to Chilko Lake was equally small. The sockeye run to Seton Lake was 30,000, as against 1,000,000 in 1909. The August and September run of sockeyes to Shuswap and Adams Lakes was much less than in any former big year, and the October and November run was also less. The sockeye eggs collected there this year totalled but 9,000,- 000, as against 27,500,000 four years ago, and 18,000,000 in 1905. The run to Lillooet Lake was less than in any recent year. Finally the run to Harrison Lake was slightly better than in 1909, These facts, in my opinion, warrant the conclusion that the number of sockeyes which spawned in the Fraser River watershed this year was not sufficient to make the run four years hence (1917) even approx- imate the runs of either 1905, 1909, or 1913. The disastrous effect of the 1913 blockade was manifested on both the fishing and spawning grounds in 1917, since the run in the latter year was the product of the 1913 spawning. The catch of 1917 produced a pack of but 559,732 cases as against 2,401,488 cases, or 76 per cent less than in 1913, not- withstanding the fact that more gear and more fishermen were employed than in 1913 and the price paid for fish was higher. Small as was the catch of 1917, too great a proportion of the run of that year was captured; that is, a sufficient number of fish was not permitted to reach the spawning area. In place of the millions of sockeyes that reached Hell’s Gate in 1913, only hundreds of thousands reached there in 1917. The ob- struction having been removed, the fish had no difficulty in 238 American Fisheries Society passing through to the spawning beds above. The numbers that passed through in 1917 were far less than in 1913, not- withstanding the blockade of the latter year. In place of the 4,000,000 that entered Quesnel Lake in 1909 and the 552,000 that entered its waters in 1913, less than 27,000 passed into that great spawning area in 1917, and the numbers that reached all the other great lake sections were proportionally less than — in 1913*. The number of sockeyes that reached the Fraser basin in 1917 was not, in most sections, greater than in some recent small years. The result of the spawning in 1917 will not produce in 1921 a run even approximately as great as that of 1917. In other words, it may be expected to be very much less. The great run of the big years was destroyed by the 1913 blockade. The remnant of that run cannot withstand the drain made upon it in 1917. It is already so small that it must hereafter be classed with the runs in the small years. And like the runs in the small years it will be completely wiped out if present conditions continue. The runs of sockeyes to the Fraser system in the small years are no longer of commercial importance. Dr. Gilbert, in his article entitled “The Sockeye Run on the Fraser River’ says: The history of the Fraser River sockeye runs shows unmistakably that the three small years of each four-year cycle were over-fished early in the history of the industry. During the early years, when fishing was confined to the region about the mouth of the river, and drift-nets alone were employed, no evidence exists of overfishing. The last cycle in which these conditions obtained was 1894-96. During each of the small years of that cycle (1894, 1895, and 1896) there were packed approx- imately 350,000 cases on the Fraser River and about 60,000 cases in Puget Sound. During each of those years, therefore, about 5,000,000 sockeyes were taken from the spawning run and used for commercial purposes. It should have been considered at that time an open question whether enough salmon to keep the run going had been permitted to escape to the spawning grounds. Apparently, however, a third of a million cases a year could be safely spared, for the following cycle shows no decrease. If from the beginning the pack had been limited to a third * British Columbia Fisheries Report, 1917, p. 21. jIbid., pp. 113-114. Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 239 of a million cases for each small year, apparently the runs would still have continued in their primitive abundance. During the following period of four years (1897, 1898, 1899, and 1900) the traps on Puget Sound became an important matter. While the British Columbia pack shows little or no reduction, it was met by a pack on Puget Sound which nearly equalled it. The total captures during the three off-years of this cycle nearly doubled those of the preceding years and exacted an average toll of about 10,000,000 fish from the spawning run of those years. The total pack of the three small years of this cycle was over 2,000,000 cases. The result was quickly apparent. If 5,000,000 fish could be safely spared, this figure nevertheless must have been near the upper limit of safety, for when 10,000,000 fish were abstracted, the small years of the following cycle showed such a marked decline as to indicate that we had far overstepped the line of safety. It was then during the cycle of 1897- 1900 that the first serious damage was done to the sockeye run of the Fraser River. By doubling the pack of the three small years, not only was the surplus fully taken, but the necessary spawning reserve was seriously encroached on, with the result that in the small years of the following cycle (1902, 1903, and 1904), in spite of the increased amount of gear employed, the pack was cut in half, while the spawning beds at the same time were but sparsely seeded. The inevitable and disastrous trend of events should have been evident to the dullest. But the parties in interest refused to hold their hands and proceeded with the slaughter of the spawning remnant. The result was quickly apparent. In 1902, 1903, and 1904 the total sockeye pack of the Fraser River system was cut to 1,200,000 cases, and in succeeding years it has suffered still further reduction. The pack of the three small years never again equalled 1,000,000 cases. In 1906-08 it was 750,000 cases; 1910-12, 880,000 cases; in 1914-16, 796,000. And with each year the amount of gear employed has increased by leaps and bounds. The small years of the present cycle may be expected to register a smaller total than any which have gone before. The total catch of sockeyes in the Fraser River system in the past two small years of the present cycle demonstrates the correctness of Dr. Gilbert’s forecast. The catch of 1918 produced a pack of but 70,420 cases, as against 534,434 cases in the preceding fourth year; and the catch in 1919 gave a pack of but 98,414 cases, as against 155,714 cases in 1915. The evidence of the decline in the runs of sockeyes in the Fraser River system is overwhelming. The runs in all years have already become so depleted that it is evident that under 240 American Fisheries: Society Te SMNOOWGNMBRRH MEE: CCAP SAHAEUREDEAD LEHAE CCA 2,400,000 > = aa ———— ES —— | Watk=- = oom ae = aan 600,000 kau \i TNT IRA NI CS UNECE EET CELE DPA IP NET AN NT A NA V2 ER Ree ea Ty BEE CLEA EEE ie oie S828 228 22822225235 225955 5 8 8 CATCH OF SOCKEYE SALMON. Fraser River System, 1891 to 1919, inclusive. 300,000 hl wait (i 50,000 Te01 7 898 Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 241 existing conditions the sockeyes will be exterminated within a short period. The Fraser River basin has an area of 90,903 square miles. It contains sixteen great lakes and many rivers that have a total area of 2,351 square miles. No other river on the Pacific Coast drains so extensive an area of lake water adapted to the propagation and rearing of sockeyes. In the past it has produced greater runs of sockeyes than any other river because this great spawning area was abundantly seeded every fourth year. It has been shown that sockeyes spawn in streams tributary to lakes and on the shoals of lakes, and that their young remain in the lake-waters for a year or more after hatching and then migrate to the sea. Knowing that the sockeyes were bred in the watershed of the Fraser, we therefore know that the great runs of sockeyes in the big years 1901, 1905, 1909, and 1913 originated there. The runs of those years produced an average pack of 1,927,602 cases and at the same time afforded in the first three named years a suff- cient number to seed the entire spawning area. Therefore the amount of the average pack of the big years 1901, 1905, 1909, and 1913 may be safely taken from the run without an over- _ draft, whenever the spawning beds are as abundantly seeded as they were in 1901, 1905, and 1909. The spawning area of the Fraser has not been lessened or injured. Its spawning beds have not been damaged or interfered with by settlement, factories, mining, or irrigation. Its gravel beds and shoals are as extensive and as suitable for spawning as they ever were. Its lake-waters are as abundantly filled as ever with the natural food for the development of young sockeyes. The channels of the Fraser are open and free to the passage of fish. All that is required to reproduce the great runs of the past is a sufficient number of spawning fish to seed the beds as abun- dantly as they were seeded in 1901, 1905, and 1909, and in former big years. The fishery cannot be restored in any other way. The great sockeye salmon fishery of the Fraser River sys- 242 American Fisheries Society tem has not been destroyed without efforts having been made to prevent it. Canada throughout has stood for conservation. She has put forth earnest and conscientious efforts to con- serve the supply and to prevent depletion. Her record is clear and unmistakable. She failed because she did not have juris- diction over the entire system. She alone could not provide adequate protection, but she did all that was possible under the circumstances. Commercial fishing for sockeye salmon began in Canadian waters in 1876, under the general fishery regulations of the Dominion. In 1878 Canada passed an Order in Council providing that “Drifting with salmon nets shall be confined to tidal waters” and “that drift-nets for sal- mon shall not obstruct more than one-third of the width of any stream,” and further that “fishing for salmon shall be dis- continued from 8 a. m. Saturdays to midnight Sundays.” All fishing in her waters has been under license and none but bona fide resident fishermen have been permitted to fish. In 1889 the Dominion fishery regulations for British Co- lumbia were amended to provide that “the Minister of Marine and Fisheries shall from time to time determine the number of boats, seines or nets or other fishing apparatus to be used in any waters of British Columbia,” and all the provisions of the regulations of 1878 were continued. In 1894 the order was further amended to include the provision that ‘‘the meshes of nets for catching salmon other than spring salmon, in tidal waters shall not be less than 534 inches extension measure and shall be used only between the first day of July and the twenty- fifth day of August and between the twenty-fifth day of Sep- tember and the thirty-first day of October.” Canada has main- tained close seasons in her waters ever since. In recent years the weekly close time has been extended and the fishing limits further restricted. During the period 1876 to 1890 sockeye fishing was con- fined to Canadian waters alone, and it is a matter of record that the catch did not in any one year produce a pack in excess of 300,000 cases, representing a catch of less than four mil- Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 243 lion sockeyes, and that during that period Canada hatched and planted in the Fraser twenty-five millions of sockeye fry. Canada began the propagation of sockeyes in the Fraser in 1885 with the establishment of a hatchery at Bon Accord. Between 1900 and 1907 Canada built five hatcheries on the Fraser having a capacity of one hundred and ten million sock- eye eggs, and she has since built two auxiliary stations. The hatcheries built in 1901 at Shuswap and in 1903 at Seton Lake, have been closed since 1914, because a sufficient num- ber of eggs to warrant operations could not be collected from the tributaries of those lakes. With the exception of the years of the big run, the hatcheries of the Fraser River have never been filled beyond thirty per cent of their capacity since 1905, because eggs to fill them were unobtainable. Canada established a patrol force on the Fraser in 1878 and her waters have been effectively policed every year since. Canada inaugurated a method for the inspection of the spawn- ing area of the Fraser River basin in 1901, and has annu- ally conducted such investigations every year since. No other sockeye stream has received such close and discriminating study. The reports from the spawning beds since 1901 have been the basis of Canada’s contentions. Following the disclosures made in the reports from the spawning beds in 1902, 1903 and 1904, that there had been a great reduction in the numbers of sockeyes that reached the beds in those years, and with the knowledge that the catches in those years were also far less than in the preceding four years, Canada laid the facts before the Governor of the State of Washington, and obtained the appointment of a joint commission to investigate conditions affecting the salmon fishery of the Fraser River system. That commission, consisting of five representatives from the State of Washington and five from Canada, unanimously reported that the runs of sockeyes to the system in the small years had been seriously depleted by excessive fishing and were in danger of being destroyed, and recommended that all fishing 244 American Fisheries Society for sockeyes in both state and provincial waters be suspended during the years of 1906 and 1908. It was believed by the Com- missioners that by prohibiting fishing in those years, the runs four years later would be restored to their former propor- tions. Canada accepted the finding of that commission and at once passed an Order in Council prohibiting sockeye fishing in 1906 and 1908, provided the State of Washington passed a similar act prohibiting fishing in her waters. A bill to that effect was rejected by the Washington Legislature in 1906. Consequently Canada recalled her order, and fishing was con- ducted in both those years with renewed vigor and with dis-_ astrous effect. The catches were smaller and the spawning beds less seeded. Following the failure of the State of Washington to adopt the measure Canada turned for help to the Federal Government at Washington, D. C., and secured the appointment in 1907 of an international commission to inquire into conditions in the Fraser River system. After a year of investigation that commission unanimously recommended, as necessary to pre- vent further depletion, the adoption of joint and uniform reg- ulations restricting fishing. A treaty embodying its recom- niendations was drawn and signed at Washington in 1908, by Great Britain for Canada, and by the President of the United States. The United States Senate rejected it. Therefore fishing was continued as before and, although the amount of gear was greatly increased, the catches in the small years con- tinued to decrease, and the reports from the spawning beds grew even more alarming. The progressive decline in the catch in the small years, and the disastrous effect of the blockade in the Fraser channel at Hell’s Gate in 1913, caused Canada to renew her overtures to the United States Government for the adoption of remedial measures. In 1917 Canada and the United States created a joint international fishery commission to deal with the sub- ject, consisting of the Honorable Sir J. D. Hazen, Chief Jus- tice of New Brunswick, G. J. Desbarats, Deputy Minister of Babcock.—The Great Fraser River Fishery 245 Naval Service, Ottawa, and William A. Found, Superintendent of Fisheries for the Dominion of Canada, representing Great Britain; and the Honorable Wm. C. Redfield, Secretary of Commerce, Edwin F. Sweet, Assistant Secretary of Com- merce, and Dr. Hugh M. Smith, United States Commissioner of Fisheries, representing the United States. Following an extended investigation, that commission, like the commissions of 1906 and 1908, unanimously found that the situation was critical and recommended joint action on the part of Canada and the United States. Subsequently a treaty was signed at Washington, D. C., in 1919. Canada at once approved the treaty. That treaty now awaits the action of the Senate of the United States. Canada stands today, as she has stood since the beginning, ready to adopt any measures which promise to restore the runs of sockeyes to the Fraser River system. She can accom- plish nothing without the cooperation of the United States. Neither Canada nor the United States acting singly can pro- vide measures that will ensure restoration of the salmon. Deplorable as the conditions on the Fraser system are, the runs of sockeyes can be restored by concurrent action on the part of Canada and the United States. It has been shown that in the big years 1901, 1905, 1909, and 1913, the Fraser system produced an average of 1,927,602 cases of sockeyes, and at the same time afforded an ample supply to seed all of the spawning beds. The average catch of the four big years named may again be ‘taken whenever the beds are again as abundantly seeded as they were in the brood years that pro- duced those big runs. The spawning area of the Fraser basin has not been lessened or damaged in any way. Its spawning beds are as extensive and as suitable for salmon propagation as they ever were. Its lake waters are as abundantly filled as ever with the natural food for the development of young sockeyes, and the channels of the Fraser are open and free to the passage of fish. All that is required to reproduce the great 246 American Fisheries Society runs of former years is to seed the spawning beds as abun- dantly as they were formerly seeded. The spawning area of the Fraser requires no expenditure of money to bring it into bearing. If permitted to reach the beds in sufficient numbers, the fish will seed them, the young will feed themselves, and furnish their own transportation to and from their feeding grounds in the open sea. If permitted to do so, the fish will do all the work necessary to produce a catch worth thirty million dollars a year. All that is neces- sary is for the Governments of Canada and the United States to adopt measures which will afford a free passage through their waters to a sufficient number of sockeyes to seed the spawning beds. The runs of sockeyes to the Fraser River system cannot be restored in any other way. FISH RESCUE OPERATIONS By c.f. CULLEE Superintendent, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Homer, Minn. Perhaps no branch of the fish-cultural work of the Bureau of Fisheries has attained more rapid development during the past few years than that addressed to the res- cue of fishes from the overflowed lands bordering the Mississippi River. The development and growth of the work is manifested not only by the ever-increasing num- bers of food and game fishes rescued each season, but it is also marked by a decreasing unit cost of production. Several times each year the Mississippi overflows its banks, but it is the annual freshet known as the June rise that is of greatest importance to the fisheries. As the river rises the adjacent lowlands are submerged. The quiet backwaters thus formed provide very attractive spawning areas for the food and game fishes indigenous to the river. The eggs are laid under conditions favorable to their development and the young fish attain a rapid growth before the freshet begins to subside. At this time the adult fish find their way to safety in the main channel, but the young do not react promptly to the falling waters, and enormous numbers are cut off and become per- manently landlocked. The pools and lakes left by the falling waters are of var- ious sizes; some of them may become dry in a few days or weeks, while others may persist into the winter months. In either event, the fish remaining in them are doomed to cer- tain destruction unless a rescue party comes to their aid and returns them to the open waters of the river. If any of the fish are able to survive the frightful conditions that exist in these landlocked pools, and which as the summer advances become more aggravated, the arrival of cold weather is sure to end the story. The shallower pools freeze solidly, while in the deeper ones the fish are so highly concentrated that 248 American Fisheries Society death by smothering is inevitable even though the pool does not freeze to the bottom. The need of some sort of salvage work has long been rec- ognized, and the first attempts to save a few of the stranded fishes were made in the late nineties. It is only in very recent years, however, that the work may be considered as approach- ing a point commensurate with the need. During the fiscal year 1920 the number of fish rescued by the Bureau of Fisheries was 156,657,000. All of the im- portant food fishes are represented in the collections, but the staple fishes, which contribute largely to the food supply and support the commercial fishery, largely predominate. The territory covered by the rescue operations during 1919 extended from Minnesota and Wisconsin to Arkansas and Mis- sissippi, though the so-called upper river districts, with head- quarters at Homer, Minn., and substations at La Crosse, Wis., and North MacGregor and Bellevue, Iowa, were by far the most prolific fields. Of interest in connection with this work is the very moder- ate cost of operations. A few years ago when the work was first undertaken and when comparatively small numbers of fish were secured, the cost per thousand was about $3.18. During 1919 the average cost per thousand was less than 20 cents, while between 75 and 80 per cent of the total number were rescued at a cost of only 13 cents per thousand fish. To further show the moderate cost of rescue operations, it may be interesting to compare the work with that of a sta- tion devoted to the artificial propagation of the warm-water species similar to those rescued. Such a station may produce from 250,000 to 1,000,000 fingerling fish 2 to 3 inches long in a season. The cost varies from $4.50 to $5.50 per thousand fish. From these figures it appears that it would have re- quired at least 345 established plants to produce the numbers of fish rescued during 1919, and that the actual cost of pro- duction would have been in excess of $800,000. These figures do not include the cost of the regular station employees, nor Culler—Fish Rescue Operations 249 any consideration of the initial cost of construction. The ag- gregate cost of the rescue operations for the fiscal year 1920 was $31,000. Following this line of thought, it is surely a conservative estimate to assume that 25 per cent of the fishes may be expected to survive and reach a legal marketable size, with an average weight of not less than 1% pounds in two or three years. If they are then placed on the market and sold by the fishermen at the prices prevailing in December, 1919, the salvaged fishes have a prospective value of $6,527,000. A rescue crew consists usually of six men and a foreman. A launch is employed in going to and from the field of opera- tions, and the equipment consists of two seines 50 and 75 feet long, 6 feet deep of 14-inch mesh, six galvanized iron tubs of 1% bushels capacity, small dipnets, two tin dippers, and a small flat-bottomed boat, the latter being used in ponds too deep for wading. After a haul has been made, the fish are sorted in the tubs by species and size. The number of fish per tub is ascertained by noting the displacement of the water in the tub, one or more rings having been made on the inside of each tub and the number established by actual count. The count is verified several times during the season, as the fish are in some instances subject to rapid growth. Inasmuch as the fish when first taken from the warm wa- ters will not safely stand a long railway journey, those in- tended for distribution are taken to the nearest holding sta- tion where they are hardened for several days in cool running water. While the numbers of fish diverted for supplying ap- plicants in other parts of the country may seem large in the aggregate, they represent less than one per cent of the total collections. Such diversions during the past year amounted to 983,794 miscellaneous fishes. Included in this number are more than 500,000 allotted to the fish commissions of the states bordering the Mississippi River where the Bureau’s work is conducted. It is more than probable that many of these fish were replanted in waters connected with the Mississippi River drainage system. 250 American Fisheries Society The importance of this work is receiving each year more recognition from members of state fish and game commis- sions and from other public officials having the interest of the fisheries and the conservation of the country’s resources at heart. The Bureau of Fisheries receives numerous letters from various sources urging the extension of this valuable work to new fields; but until such time as Congress recog- nizes its importance by providing adequate funds and a suit- able personnel, new fields cannot be opened. The possibilities for the further extension of operations are very great. Even in the districts where it is now being conducted, the field is only partially covered, while there are many unbroken miles of river, on which no rescue work has been undertaken, where the floods are annually causing the destruction of large num- bers of fish. The major tributaries also offer a field of un- known possibilities. Under present arrangements, Congress makes no special appropriation for this particular work. It is financed by a part of the general appropriation for the propagation of food and game fishes, while the regular personnel and equipment are drawn temporarily from other branches. What is needed in order that operations may be conducted on the scale that their importance justifies, is direct recognition by Congress. through the provision of special funds and personnel. Thus the work would not be more or less contingent on the necessi- ties of other duly established activities for which money from the general fund must be allotted. It should be made evident that the rescue work is of more than local interest. The food fishes of the Mississippi River receive a wide distribution in the trade, while the numbers di- verted for the stocking of other waters is of importance. In fact, the importance of this work as a means of maintaining and increasing the food supply of the country, can hardly be equalled in any other field, when cost, results, and quick returns are considered. TROUT FEEDING EXPERIMENTS By Cuas. O. HayFrorp Superintendent State Hatchery, Hackettstown, New Jersey In the accompanying tables an attempt has been made to in- dicate as clearly and concisely as possible, the results obtained from some experiments in the feeding of fingerling brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and brown trout (Salmo fario) conducted at the hatchery operated by the State of New Jersey at Hackettstown. The work was carried on under the imme- diate supervision of Robert W. Hodgson, chemist, formerly instructor in bacteriology and assistant to Prof. William F. Foster in pathological and bacteriological work at the A. E. F. University, France. A large stock of trout is constantly maintained at the Hackettstown hatchery, the fish varying in age from newly hatched fry to adults two and three years old. To feed this large stock, from 75 to 100 tons of meat products and fish are required annually ;‘and it was for the purpose of determining the relative values of the different articles used as fish food, and by a comparison of prices to effectuate a possible reduction in the maintenance cost of the fish, that the experiments were un- dertaken. Careful arrangements were made to hold all the fish involved in the experiments under identically similar conditions, in order that any possible variation in the results might be at- tributed solely to the kind of food used. Nursery troughs of the same size were used, each being supplied at uniform rate with an independent flow of water from the same source. The water used was derived from five springs with a minimum flow of two and one half million gallons per day. A chemical and gas analysis of the water gave the following results: Parts per million ONS ST Gy CeAEnn OCR a Rn CaM UR US pe oe Ee 11.5 eA ARE eke es sys 2 5, egal 2 esa ae aR eS ER Tato 129.0 Tota narduess (Soap method). 2.4. 2.ccsise ceeds cose ces 162.5 mpc tet bist SLI CSI ey casera. Whchasck are Sbakers peers UNIS Cea EUR aA Rau de tats 75% MVE Halll’ MEST Sm Tete som aay srs aie arctan Te CPs fakes (oil yilavers aves N52; SS OU MINLIGIN oie. cs a cn ve matinme ema aieare salsa ered. te 20: ICA ayoba rab VobtekG bes Lee Se IR Ma CET Ree 4.2 imyecn (Gove Saturation at SPR vies ec. eee ees oes 252 American Fisheries Society As the materials in most general use for the fish food at the Hackettstown hatchery are pork melts, sheep plucks, beef liver, and butterfish, these articles, either singly or in combination, were the ones principally considered, though certain insects and their larve were introduced. The average cost per pound of the different articles used is as follows: Beef liver, 13 cents; sheep plucks, 5 cents; pork melts, 314 cents; and butterfish, 4 cents. It is difficult to estimate the cost of maggots, but since waste material was used in their production it is safe to say that the cost was low. As it appeared important that each lot of fish should be uni- form in size and weight, they were carefully graded as to size before being placed in the troughs selected. Several lots from each trough were then weighed and the average weight from each trough recorded. In weighing the fish, a uniform method was followed throughout the course of the tests, and the aver- age weight of each lot of fish was obtained and recorded every ten days. Two waxed paper cups were filled with water and balanced on a standard laboratory scale. The fish were taken from the troughs with a small dip net and allowed to drain for one minute. They were then transferred to one of the cups and weighed. By exercising care, there was no loss of weight through splashing or slopping of the water. Feeding occurred twice each day, the daily ration of food being approximately two per cent of the weight of the fish. The food was prepared fresh each morning, weighed, and placed in the troughs in the usual manner. The food chopper was washed thoroughly after each lot of food was prepared to prevent mixing of foods at the time of preparation. In all other respects the fish were treated in a manner similar to all hatchery fish. The dead fish were removed each day and the losses properly recorded. Each morning unconsumed particles of food and other refuse were removed from the troughs, and every second morning the troughs were thoroughly cleaned in the usual manner. It should be noted that the brown trout used were culls, Hayford.—Trout Feeding Experiments 253 and that the troughs in which they were confined were divided by wire screens into three compartments, each compartment con- taining 100 fish, or a total of 300 fish per trough. The object of the screens was to provide a more equal distribution of the food. The troughs containing the brook trout were not so di- vided, and only 100 fish were allotted per trough. With this ex- ception all of the fish were held in environment identical in all respects; the only point of difference was the variety of food supplied. The brown trout were considerably smaller than the brook trout. Among the more pronounced points developed from a study of the tables are the wide variations in mortality and growth, brought about, it seems fair to assume, by the different varieties of food. Sheep plucks at 5 cents per pound seem to be entitled to first consideration, while beef livers at 13 cents per pound, and perhaps quite generally considered one of the best of fish foods, is only a poor second. The fly larve or maggots also produced very satisfactory results. Water temperature throughout the course of the experiment was unchanged at 51° F. or 28.3° C., and the percentage of hemoglobin remained constant in all cases, regardless of the kind of food used. The insect forms of food were: Corixe; black- fly larvee ; and Mayfly and stonefly nymphs. The difference in results obtained from feeding the various foods to fish of different ages is surprising. When the fish are two or three months old they seem to do well on certain foods, and at five or six months they do better on other foods. This goes to show that in order to obtain successful results, we ought to administer a balanced ration. We blame many of our troubles to the temperature of the water, and other things, whereas it may be that the difficulty is caused by a lack of vita- mines or something that we can furnish. American Fisheries Society 254 ‘sAep Qf jo potted © 10} panulzu0o jJusUtIedxy f ‘skep gb jo poliod e JO¥ panutju0d jusutIedx| } ‘skep ob jo poiaed & I0¥ penutju0d yusuisdxy , zgiz 0o'f9 6z S6L°Z 696°1 gzg's OOL Ce i i i er i i s}09suTy T° ‘IIL INaN1aqaxy cbr oo'gh 6z 2.496 916" ogs"1 oor PES OCESOD LICE ICD ODO DIIC HO Commo OIG Ga Tag pls of'61 oo'fy gv 069°2 OzZI'l ogs*t oor olaedeslinhepelassieischelehsiepe/eie (sides S200 0 Ue DUubieh} {oui Offi FEor oo'zP zs ool'z OII'! Ogs*I oor sipieielelopsls) eapipescleieve oiere/ see Fir SOT se. DUS exon advan s €L°9£ 0o'rS 1¢ o1Z'z OfI'r ogs'r OOorL CCE CUEENCICICCON OSCE SEICRCRUSICR IIS OOOO hel 5 pue ysyso}ng AAT AA oo't9 gz zbg'z zgz'l ogs'r OOrL 080 Ged e ec se ose eo ciee 6 ss:00 0 0 ER OTSBIE pue ysyia}qng Lo‘vz 009 Iv gorge ggz't 0g S°I OOoL ovbgakenn Abese Seer, Sseiteiey pehelier spare OCA TOL yiod pue ysyi9}ng o6'0£ oo'sSte gt ose oZS‘1 ogs'r ool ee SAH ca) 4 (al daays pue ysyiojjng bg’gt oo'1e gs g61'e gig't ogs*r oor sjeepeusinisie e\cieesiaeic\isie lac sjOscbUle ue eon tadoats : {II ININIaadxy £S'g 00'gI cZ 1bg'z 196° 09g'I OOL eee ere eee eee eee eer eseeeeseeseeeeseseeeseeeee JIAT] yoog £S'g oo'gt CZ ogg'z Ozo'!L 09g’! Oo. i syonjd daays r6'Sz oo'fz LS Lzf°z zlo'L oo£f'r ool sy siebeles sass) ore inxs teldieie: seth ster siefexeide les STI BIS pue I9AT] yrog os'Sz oo'rL $9 o1o'¢ oSi'L 09g’ OOL eee ccc ence c ee see ese nesneeeeeneneneessee s}[ou 410g Qe’ oo'bz 1S I1o0'¢ ISi'1 09g°I oOoL Ce i eC eC ysysoqqng £9°6 oo’Zr1 CZ tobz bor! Oo£'r oot nriegece (Sie Sashs Shep eee 8 Auamese:4 Asie) Sees SST Tose pue J9Al] yoog pre 00°91 gf giS‘z gizr oof'r ool eetoeceeeceeeeceseneeeveweseeseseseseetenene sere s}033e €ESz oo'Sz 9s bg6°e bger ooL'z ool siplciese'eiskeKeioceisielebs)sivioisiepap0apapamnanaEeEe——————————————— — — ————_—_—_—”—= = >; 2 27770008 SyYya—g—&_—_ (‘3uruuiseq ye plo syjuou S J] pue J sjuawtiedxy url ysty) LNOUL HOON ONIGAAA NI SLNAWIAdxs 259 “ = 8 x i) = 98°F 99°bz 2) 11’S €e°sr zg'Ol €e'sr > cc 99°91 S gl 2 g9g9°SI 2 tog 99°41 ky, 61‘! £es1 12h 00°g +> = ‘abpyuarsagd | *ab6pjuaI4ad XX i "Zrey puooas | “Fey say | *A}IELIO mS I Ww NN S = =) = *pua je ysy jo Jaquinn 948° *“SUDAD) ara 692° 6ee° 19f zov bit: 6zr Lov: SrS* *"SUDAD) “aseotouy ‘JY31IOM BdeIBAY eee >?-..._—_ (‘Buruurgeq 3 plo syjyuou F Ysy YAM skep og 30 ported & 10; panutjuos yuouttiedxq) 19t 19f° 19e 19 19f° 19t* 19t° 19f° "SUDAN ‘yenuy “SulUULseq ye ysy jo 1aquinyy ee ee ee Se a a bette teen eee eeeeeeeeeeeseeeeesiBus pue JOATT Jo9q settee ee esse eeeeeeeeeeeesesessniase pur IAAT] Jo9g teeeeeeeeeeeees usyrayNg CC S}JOZ3e ‘*+sjosseul pue IAAT] Joo seteeeeeeeees syaur y10g se eeeeeeeeeeees JoatT Joog see e wrens syon[d daays ‘pasn poo INOUL NMOUd ONIGASA NI LNaWTYadx4 256 American Fisheries Society Discussion Mr. JoHN W. Titcoms, Albany, N. Y.: Would it not be possible to get these same comparisons between different species at the same age? Mr. Hayrorp: It would be possible, but the difference is in the weight. Mr. Titcoms: In comparing the growth of these different species, did you get a record of the weight of different kinds of food used? Mr. Hayrorp: We gave each species one-fiftieth of its weight daily, divided into two foods. It might be possible to use a cheaper food and more of it. This is a matter that requires a good deal of considera- tion because under different temperatures it works differently. What might be good at 51 degrees might work differently at another temperature. Mr. Tircoms: Do I understand you to say that in feeding you used sheep plucks and livers ground together? Mr. Hayrorp: Yes, all ground together. The best results were obtained from the beef liver and maggots in the case of the brook trout, and from the sheep plucks in the case of the brown trout. Mr. Titcoms: I suggest that anyone who wants to carry this test along with the maggots produced from fish will find that it is a very much less offensive operation than producing maggots from meat. It is a very simple matter to produce tons of maggots from cold storage fish, and the odor does not extend very far beyond the building where they are produced. In connection with our fish-cultural operations we catch a great many carp and bill fish. They are placed in cold storage and eventually taken to one of the game farms and changed into maggots for feeding the pheasants. Every particle of the fish is used except the skin and the bones. It is a very simple process. THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE SO-CALLED BLUE PIKE AND YELLOW PIKE OF LAKE ERIE AND LAKE ONTARIO By Dr. WILLIAM CONVERSE KENDALL Scientific Assistant, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries Washington, D. C. The relationship of the pike perches, locally designated as blue pike and yellow pike, has been more or less a moot ques- tion, and the status of their idenity has, from time to time, given rise to investigation of the subject. Each inquiry, how- ever, has resulted in the conclusion that there was no distin- guishable difference. In connection with the name given by Rafinesque to the Mississippi Valley fish, Jordan and Evermann say: The name salmoneum has been applied to the so-called “blue pike” originally described from the Ohio river, but more common in the Great Lakes, particularly Ontario and Erie. It is smaller and deeper in body than the ordinary vitreum and different in color, but it is not likely that any permanent distinctions exist, this species, as usual among freshwater fishes, varying largely with the environment and with age.* The fact referred to by Jordan and Evermann, that it is usual for freshwater fishes to vary largely with environment and age, is without significance in a study of the relation- ships of fishes unless the way in which they vary and the cause of variation are considered. Their statement implies that distinctions to be of taxonomic value must be permanent. Conversely, if a distinction is permanent it is of specific value. So far as the blue pike concerns the fishermen and fish dealers, there is a permanent distinction, that of color. The question, then, is how permanent this distinction is. Is it restricted to young fish and is it therefore, a distinction that disappears with age and maturity? If it is a distinction deter- * Jordan and Evermann. Fishes of North and Middle America. Bull. 47, U. S. National Museum, vol. 1, p. 1021. Washington, 1896. 258 American Fisheries Society mined by environment, and not particularly restricted to young fish, what is the environmental factor affecting certain aggre- gations of fishes associated, at least part of the year in the same waters, with other aggregations in Lake Erie and Lake On- tario, which latter are at all ages distinguished by color? And does the distinction disappear if removal from one environ- ment to another takes place? These are points which cannot. be determined by cursory inspection of a few individuals. In connection with a biological survey of the Great Lakes, the U. S. Fish Commission Report for 1902, page 127, states that Dr. Raymond Pearl undertook a demonstration by statis- tical methods of the relations of the blue pike to the yellow pike (Stizostedion vitreum) of the Great Lakes, and that enough was learned to know that the wall-eyed pike is a species of remarkably low variability, and that there are no structural differences between the blue and the yellow varieties, this being in accord with other observation. It is not my purpose to discuss the question of nomencla- ture of the pike perch, or so-called wall-eyed pike. But, as concerns the species which Rafinesque called Perca, or Stizo- stedion salmoneum, there is no indication in his description that it is the form recognized in Lake Erie and Lake Ontario as blue pike. It is the common pike perch of the Mississippi Valley which, as Rafinesque stated, occurred all over Ohio, and in the Kentucky, Licking, Wabash, and Miami Rivers, during the spring and summer and was known as salmon, white salmon and Ohio salmon. In accordance with the wishes of the United States Com- missioner of Fisheries, I have recently examined a series of each form, for the most part representing Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. In view of the fact that previous discussions have been to the effect that the blue pike were immature fish, I selected a series of 20 specimens of yellow pike which in their maximum lengths would include the lengths of the available blue pike. The yellow pike ranged from 91 mm. (about Kendall_—Blue Pike and Yellow Pike 259 3 2-5 inches) to 600 mm. (about 23 2-5 inches), and the blue pike from 280 mm. (about 11 inches) to 436 mm. (about 17 1-6 inches). The majority of each form in which the sex could be distinguished, were either gravid females or females just past the spawning season. The fish were first laid out and compared as to general appearance. The contrast in color was most pronounced in fresh specimens. The blue pike were darker, and had no trace of yellow which the yellow pike always showed as tints or reflections. The fins were never yellow, while in the yellow pike they were often so colored. The belly of each was al- ways white, although in the larger yellow pike and a few of the smaller it was sometimes tinged with yellow. Most of the blue pike had ventrals and anal strongly marked with dark shades or spots, in some faint, but never entirely absent. In the case of most of the yellow pike, these fins were plain, but in a few faintly spotted. Aside from color, the general appearance of the blue pike suggested a more slender head, narrower interorbital width, and noticeably larger eye, particularly in the smaller specimens, than the yellow pike. Fin ray and scale counts, though vari- able, revealed nothing distinctive. Closer inspection showed that as a rule, the preopercular teeth were more numerous and finer than in the yellow pike, in which the teeth were simple and not bifid or trifid as in the blue pike. One specimen each was skeletonized and no difference detected in the cranial bones or number of vertebre. Besides counting series of scales and the fin rays, various measurements were taken of the head and body and reduced to percentages of head or body. The percentages were then tabulated in the order of the total lengths of the fish, from the smallest to the largest, regardless of whether they were yellow or blue pike; the two kinds were indicated by different colors of ink. Thus those of similar lengths were brought in juxtaposition. 260 American Fisheries Society In following the figures down the column, it was found in practically every instance that each form contains measure- ments so close to the other that very likely one would unhesi- tatingly pronounce the fish specifically identical. But with a little closer scrutiny, it was observed that the percentages practically throughout graded variably from a higher to a lower or from a lower to a higher percentage in each form, in some of the measurements in the order of the size of the fish. . This fact suggested averaging available percentages of the two forms and flattening the variation by overlapping the percentages from one group to another of equal number. Taking 18 specimens of each form, five groups of six figures each resulted. Group 1, composed of the smaller sizes, and Group 5, of the larger sizes, were, of course, unaffected by the overlapping. In this way it was found that there were con- siderable variations, irrespective of the size of the fish, some of which variations were possibly attributable to inaccuracy or lack of uniformity of measuring between two points not always positively determinable. Graphs of these results show, in many instances, more or less crossing, which suggests individual variation not associated with difference in size of the fish. But in others, they show distinctly, and, in some cases, widely separated, more or less parallel, converging or diverging upward or downward trends. In but one or two instances, however, does the percentage of one or more groups of one form remain wholly distinct from that of one or more groups of the other. But where they are alike in size ranges, the larger blue pike are nearly always like the smaller yellow pike. The study of these measurements has not been completed, but enough has been learned to suggest a divergence of the two forms. An important point is that there are mature breeding fish of both kinds in practically the same range of sizes. In order to ascertain, if possible, the ages of the fish, Kendall.—Blue Pike and Yellow Pike 261 scales were taken and mounted; but they have not been studied carefully enough to arrive at any positive conclusion. Photo- graphs have been made of several of each which show, al- though not as distinctly as one could wish, certain lines of growth, whatever they may signify. If the crowded lines are interpreted in the same way as in the case of salmon scales, they indicate that some of the smaller blue pike are older than some yellow pike of larger size. The lack of time and the incompleteness of study of the measurements do not permit a detailed consideration of results at the present; but I shall refer to six of them which will indicate what measurements may be of importance in deciding the relationship of these two forms, especially when a large series of each of an equal range of size is studied and compared. The overlapping groups referred to were respectively com- posed of fish of average total lengths, as shown in the follow- ing table of total lengths, given in millimeters. AVERAGE ToraL LENGTHS oF GROUPS Group numbers and averages General Kind 1 2 3 4 5 Average mm mm mm mm mm. mm, Mellow Pike....... 210° 209 * a0 SS 416 306 fie, Pike 20. 1) 8. 296° NOTA 34a dG 2400 344 These averages, arranged in the order of size from the lowest up, are as follows: Yellow, 210 mm.; yellow, 269 mm.; blue, 296 mm.; yellow, 303 mm.; blue, 317 mm.; yellow, 331 mm.; blue, 342 mm.; blue, 367 mm.; blue, 400 mm.; yellow, 416 mm.; yellow, average, 306 mm.; blue, average, 344 mm. These figures show a fairly close running sequence of both forms, with the exception of the first average of yellow pike, which reduces the general average of that form. In order to check up the results shown in the group averages, 6 fish of each form of approximately the same lengths were selected. These range from a little over 280 mm. to 370 mm. in length. The sexual condition and the over- 262 American Fisheries Society lapping groups of averages in which each fish appears are shown in the following table: Grours INto Wuicu INDIVIDUAL YELLOW AND BLUE PIKE oF APPROXIMATELY SAME LENGTH FALL YELLOW PIKE. | BLueE PIKE. Group Total length. Group Total length. from which sane LOM SE eh eel iron which Sexual ene ee selected. cat Mm. Inches. selected. condition. Mm. | Inches. 2 Immature 288 11-11/32 I Mature 284 II- 6/32 2 Immature 205 11-24/32 I Immature, 295 11-24/32 3 Mature 302 11-29/32 I Mature 303 11-30/32 3 Immature 325 12-25/32 2 Mature 327 12-28/32 4 Immature 342 13-18/32 2 Mature 346 | 13-20/32 4 Mature 370 14-18/32 4 Mature | 370 14-18/32 Average |.....-.. | 320.33 | 13-13/32||Average | +---+-ee5 i 320.83| 13-14/32 HEAD MEASUREMENTS Distance from Tip of Snout to Posterior Edge of Preopercle. The averages show a converging difference from the smaller to the larger fish, thus indicating a decrease in the distance with increase of size of the yellow pike, and an increase of distance with increase of size of the blue pike, the yellow pike having the greater average. The average of Group 4, of the blue pike, reaches the average of Group 2, of the yellow pike, which are respectively composed of fish averaging 367 and 269 mm. in total length. The six individuals of each form show that this dimension in the second yellow pike 295 mm. long equals that of the fourth blue pike, 327 mm. long, the yellow pike being immature and the blue pike a mature fish; this suggests that youthful characteristics of the yellow pike are maintained in older or larger blue pike. Interorbital Width—A narrower interorbital width ob- tains in the general average of the blue pike than in the yellow pike. The yellow pike changes but little from the smaller to the larger fish, while the blue pike, at first considerably narrower than the smallest yellow pike, approaches the yellow pike in Groups 4 and 5 of larger fish. The next to the largest Kendall.—Blue Pike and Yellow Pike 263 of the six individual yellow pike has the narrower interorbital, which corresponds to the interorbital of the largest blue pike. Evye.—The length of the eye affords the clearest example of the manner in which the blue pike differs from the yellow pike. In the general averages there is a uniform decrease in size of the eye with the increase in size of both forms, the blue pike having the larger eye of the two. Here the very smallest of the yellow pike has eyes equal to the average as shown in Group 3 of the blue pike, and the very largest blue pike equals Group 3 of the yellow pike. As to eyes, the six individuals of each kind are widely different, comparatively speaking; the blue pike have constantly the larger eye, though in this kind it is the most variable. The larger eye of the blue pike is a youthful characteristic, as all young fishes have proportionally larger eyes than adults. BODY PROPORTIONS The only dimensions to which I shall refer in this con- nection are the position of the ventral and anal fins and the distance between dorsals. Distance from Base of Pectoral Fin to Base of Anal Fin.— The distance from the base of the pectoral fin to the base of the anal fin, as shown by the general averages, is greater in the blue pike than in the yellow pike, but the dimensions are equal in the different groups. The blue pike of Group 1 with an average length of 296 mm. equals the yellow pike of Group 4 of 331 mm., and the blue pike of Group 4, averaging 367 mm., equals Group 5 of the yellow pike which averages 416 mm. in total length. In the six individuals of each form, the same tendency to increase the distance with increase of size of the fish is main- tained, as in the general averages, and the blue pike maintains the greater dimension. In this characteristic, the blue pike is the more variable, and it is the smaller blue pike which equals the larger yellow pike. A blue pike 295 mm. long is slightly less in this dimension 264 American Fisheries Society than a yellow pike 325 mm. long; and a blue pike 303 mm, long about equals a yellow pike of the 342 mm. length. A blue pike 327 mm. long equals a yellow pike 370 mm. long; a blue pike 370 mm. long differs from a yellow pike of the same length by about one per cent. In both forms, the dimensions approach each other with increase in size of the fish, but the average greater dimension is that of the blue pike. | Distance from Base of Ventral Fin to Front of Base of Anal Fin.—In the general averages of both forms, the dis- tance increases with the increase of the size of the fish; the blue pike has the more posteriorly situated anal fin as relates to the ventral. The difference, however, decreases with increase in the size of the fish. In the six individuals of each kind examined, the same tendency to increase the distance with increase of size of the fish is observed, but it is very irregular and variable. The blue pike is the more variable, this dimen- sion sometimes being less than that of the yellow pike. Distance between Dorsal Fins.—In the general averages, the distance between the dorsal fins is constantly greater in the blue pike than in the yellow pike and it decreases as the size of the fish increases, while in the yellow pike the distance increases with the increase in size of the fish, so that the averages converge, although they do not meet. The greater difference, by far, is in the smaller fish. In the six individuals of each kind, the blue pike still maintains the greater distance, but with the increase in size of the fish there is a slight ten- dency to increase the dimension. This dimension in a blue pike 284 mm. long is equal to that of a yellow pike 302 mm. long; in a blue pike 295 mm. long it is equal to that of a yellow pike 342 mm. long. CONCLUSIONS The study has not proceeded far enough to warrant any positive conclusions, and the material is hardly sufficient to permit of generalization. Certain indications, however, some Kendall.—Blue Pike and Yellow Pike 265 of which I have mentioned, suggest possibilities of our being able to find positive proofs of the structural divergence of these two forms, not depending upon immediate ecological relations, but of phylogenetic significance. Some of the dis- tinctive features, such as that of the size of the eye, indicate that the blue pike maintains youthful characteristics, as judged by the young of the yellow pike, in well-advanced maturity. So, while there are no specific differences recognizable by the ordinary methods of the systematist, there is in each an aggregate of correlated small differential characteristics. The fish are constructed on two somewhat different models, so to speak, the yellow pike on the whole being the more symmetrical. The adult blue pike resembles younger yellow pike, and is more variable than the yellow pike. Except in color, there appears to be scarcely a single characteristic in the one, so far as the inadequate number of specimens examined reveals, that is not found in the other; but it is believed that even with the specimens at hand, a careful study of the tables of measure- ments, combined with age determination by means of the scales, will show that all blue pike will differ constantly from yellow pike of corresponding ages. If so, what does this fact mean? To me, the youthful, and more generalized character- istics suggest that the blue pike is a retarded development more closely resembling the ancestral form of the species. It is pos- sible to absolutely prove this point only through biometrical studies of a large amount of material, and by study of the life history, habits, and geographical distribution of the pike perches. Particularly should the geographical limits of the blue pike be defined. Yet this limited amount of study has revealed that the blue pike are not all young:and immature fish; that the color appears to be constantly correlated with certain though small differences of structure; and that blue pike, even as small as some immature yellow pike, are mature fish. So, whether or not taxonomical rules permit them to be endowed with a bi- 266 American Fisheries Society nomial or trinomial designation, for all practical purposes, it would seem to me, they should be regarded and treated as distinct species. Discussion Mr. J. W. Titcoms, Albany, N. Y.: This is a very important paper. In the matter of blue pike and yellow pike, a curious situation prevails on the Great Lakes, affecting Ohio as well as New York and Pennsylvania. In these districts the law protects the yellow pike under a certain size, but it does not protect the blue pike. I was hoping it would be settled definitely whether they were two distinct species or not. But it is a fact that young blue pike, or blue pike in a spawning condition, are allowed to be taken in the Great Lakes, while the yellow pike is protected. Dr. KENDALL: The name does not amount to anything. A taxo- nomical species is one thing, and a natural form another. Taxonomi- cally, we are considering these fish as we find them on a horizontal plane. In this case it seems to me that we should take into considera- tion more than their relation to each other on this horizontal plane. The fact is that you have a divergence, and whether you call it a species, or a subspecies, or a variety, or what not, does not affect the situation at all. You have two things that are recognized by the fisherman and by the markets and by everybody as two distinct forms, and for all practical purposes they are as distinct as though taxonomically so re- garded, and it does not matter what you call them. Dr. R. C. Ospurn, Columbus, Ohio: Mr. President, in the first place I want to express my admiration for Dr. Kendall’s nerve in tack- ling these two very much mooted questions as to the relationship between the rainbow trout and the steelhead trout, and the blue and yellow pikes. I desire also to commend him for the admirable scientific way in which he has undertaken to solve these problems by such careful and minute study. It is the only way in which such questions can be handled if we are ever to arrive at a solution of the problems involved. It seems to me that these forms may be still very closely related; they may be physiologically different species, but, perhaps, have not diverged suffi- ciently so that we can separate them satisfactorily by structural char- acteristics, and that as the ages progress, such data as Dr. Kendall has worked out will enable the William C. Kendalls of a few thousand years hence to make comparisons with the figures of the present day and to say whether the divergence is growing wider as the ages go on. I do think that such studies as these have a biological importance in addition to any practical value they may have in connection with the fisheries. Dr. E. E. Prince, Ottawa, Canada: I agree with Dr. Osburn that these two studies are really among the most beneficial contributions to Kendall.—Blue Pike and Yellow Pike 267 our proceedings of this meeting. Dr. Kendall has taken up some of the problems which have been causing trouble wherever the steelhead and rainbow trout are known, and wherever the blue and yellow pike are marketed. The markets have always distinguished between the edible qualities of the blue and of the yellow pike. One other point I would like to mention in this connection is this: I visited New Zealand some time ago and saw a great deal of their fisheries. Much importance has been attached to the size attained by rainbow trout in New Zealand. There the brown trout, which in Europe is a comparatively small fish, frequently run to ten, twelve, or fourteen pounds. In the case of the rainbow trout, I saw a catch of 200, none of which was under 20 pounds, some of them even going up to 25. The large steelhead trout I used to be familiar with on the Fraser River were unlike these large rainbow trout. I hope that Dr. Kendall will continue his studies and that we shall have something further from him at future meetings of the Society. The study of the blue and yellow pikes is, of course, of great importance from a com- mercial standpoint. RELATION OF CERTAIN AQUATIC PLANTS TO OXYGEN SUPPLY AND TO CAPACITY OF SMALL PONDS TO SUPPORT THE TOP- MINNOW (GAMBUSIA AFFINIS) By R. L. Barney, Director and B. J. Anson, Scientific Assistant U. S. Fisheries Biological Station, Fairport, Iowa In attacking the broad and complex problem of furnishing fish with those conditions which best fulfil their requirements for growth and propagation, there are three considerations of paramount importance. These have been well discussed in a recent publication by Dr. R. E. Coker,* U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, who suggested therein as the biologically fundamen- tal factors governing the success of fish-cultural enterprises, the provision of sufficient oxygen, the provision of sufficient food, and the proper association of species. Much is known generally of each of these necessities; comparatively little ex- perimentally. A fish culturist and a stock raiser know very well that their charges require plenty of oxygen and plenty of food if they may be expected to attain maximum size and maximum productiveness. The stockman takes no thought of the first factor, knowing that oxygen for his purpose is as free as the air, whereas, for the fish culturist, such a condition does not always exist. There is, too, the relatively larger consumption and possible utilization of all the oxygen in the fish pond, since depletion of this life-supporting element occurs from the chemical oxi- dation of much material in the water, as well as through consumption by the respiration of aquatic animals. To be *Coker, R. E.: Principles and problems of fish culture in ponds. The Scientific Monthly, Vol. VII, No. 9, August, 1918. Garrison, N. Y. Barney and Anson.—The Top-Minnow 269 added to these facts, indicating the limitations of oxygen supply in water, there is that of the limited capacity of water to dissolve oxygen—its period of greatest capacity occurring when the water is cold and when, apparently, it is of less value to the fish, since metabolism of all cold-blooded animals is very slight through the winter months. It seems a paradox that the increased need for oxygen for metabolic processes during the spring, summer and early fall should come when the power of water in dissolving and in holding oxygen should be continually decreasing, the capacity of water to dissolve oxygen decreasing with the increasing temperature. There is, however, the compensating factor of increased oxygen pro- duction by submerged plant life during the warm weather, which factor is negligible in winter. In this general connection there also arises the question of the actual capacity of a pond or body of water to support animal life; how much fish life a body of water of given size can be expected to bring to maturity and hold under certain conditions where predacious species have been eliminated. There is, of necessity, in this problem a consideration of the means whereby, and of the quantity in which, oxygen and food reach the fish, since oxygen and food, other factors being the same, become, possibly, the most important criteria on which the capacity of a pond may be estimated. EXPERIMENTAL OBSERVATIONS In 1918 four small ponds were built by throwing dirt em- bankments across the very sluggish stream, Cypress Bayou, Mound, La. These ponds average in size 30 by 12 feet, varying in depth of water, because of seepage, from 10 inches to 2% feet. The banks were kept clear of weeds, while the waters were provided with four differing habitats by introduc- ing into three of the ponds certain aquatic plants of different habits of growth and by keeping one pond free of all vegeta- tion other than microscopic. A description of the vegetative environment of each pond follows: 270 American Fisheries Society Pond 1. Supplied abundantly with the submerged aquatic plant Cera- tophyllum. Surface kept entirely open and clear of all surface- growing plants. Pond 2. Kept entirely clear of all visible vegetation. Pond 3. Supplied with a quickly and thickly growing surface-trailing plant, Jussiaea diffusa. No other surface plants present; no sub- merged plants present. Pond 4. Supplied with a heavy surface covering of Lemna and Spiro- dela, in which Wolffia filled in the interstices between the leaves of Lemna and Spirodela. After removing predacious species, there were introduced into each of these ponds ten male and forty female Gambusia affinis, all adults, the females being heavily gravid. - The date of this stocking was July lst. On September Ist, sixty days afterward, the ponds were seined, with results as follows: GAMBUSIA PRODUCTION OF PoNnpDs IN 1918 Pond Gambusia No. Surface vegetation. Submerged vegetation. production. a3 None. Abundant Ceratophyllum. 2575 2. None. None visible. 1361 3 Trailing plant Jussiaea None visible. 1040 diffusa. 4. Heavy mat of Lemna, None visible. 247 Spirodela and Wolffia. The ponds, averaging in content about 450 cubic feet, had doubtless reached their capacity for supporting animal life; and a further month’s opportunity for increased output would have changed the above figures very little. These results quite plainly indicate the effect aquatic vege- tation may have in partly supplying fish with the conditions which best suit their requirements. The pond having the submerged vegetation produced a much greater output than any of the others, the production decreasing by approximately half in the pond with the open surface and the pond with the surface trailing Jussiaea diffusa. The pond having the heavy surface mat of Lemna, Spirodela, and Wolffia seemed to be least able to support Gambusia life. Barney and Anson.—The Top-Minnow 271 By careful approximation and averaging of the volume of the different organisms found in the stomachs and intestines of 105 Gambusia collected at Mound, La., during the summer, fall, and early winter of 1916, there were found the following: Crustaceans, mostly entomostracans, 23.9%; insects, mostly dipterous larve and pupe, 7.2%; rotifers and protozoa, 6.1% ; algze, mostly blue-green filamentous, 47.7%; and un- recognizable debris, 14.4%. These examinations were made at the U. S. Biological Station, Fairport, Iowa, by H. Walton Clark. Referring to the most important considerations of pond culture outlined on a previous page, we may now well take up the matter of food production in these ponds. Gambusia is a plankton feeder. For this study, then, the production of plankton and the factors that influence its abundance must be given especial consideration. The extent of plankton production in fresh water, as is the case in plant production on land, depends pri- marily on the amount of nitrogenous material available for the metabolic processes of the plankton organisms. Needham and Lloyd* point out that: The supply of nitrogen for aquatic organisms is derived from the soluble simple nitrates (KNO3, NaNO3, etc.). Green plants feed on these and build proteins out of them. And when the plants die, their dissolution yields two sorts of products, ammonia and nitrates, that become again available for plant food. Kofoid has indicated the effect of temperature on plank- ton production in a planktograph in his work on the plankton of the Illinois River.; In the four ponds herein considered, abundant plankton production was guaranteed, before the vege- tative features of the habitats were added, by the presence on *Needham, James G., and J. T. Lloyd: The life of inland waters. Ithaca, N. Y. moro. P. 48. 7Kofoid, C. A.: The plankton of the Illinois River, 1894-1809, with introductory notes upon the hydrography.of the Illinois River and its basin. Part I. Quantitative investigations and general results. Bulletin, Illinois State Laboratory of Natural History, Vol. VI, Art. II, November, 1903, p. 626. Pl. VIII. Champaign, Ill. afe American Fisheries Society the bottom of each pond of layers of decaying vegetation, the result of the annual deaths of aquatic plants. It is evident that plankton abundance in ponds 3 and 4, which were thickly covered with Lemna and Jussiaea, would be considerably de- CHARACTER OF PONDS .| Open Surface Surface mat * Submerged Open Surface | of Lemna,ete. I No Vegetation No Submerged Ceratophy}ium Veq oe ee ae Ue cS al a ins crs sac Oxygen Gambusta creased, as the matted condition of the surface vegetation tends to keep the temperature of the water under it lower. The production of plankton may also be regulated to some extent by the amount of light. The introduction of certain plants Barney and Anson.—The Top-Minnow 273 in ponds also has a tendency to modify plankton production, as the plants become competitors with the plankton organisms for the available nitrogen. In his conclusions, Kofoid says: Summer heat pulses often attend plankton increases. * * * Light affects plankton production. The half year with more illumination and fewer cloudy days produces from 1.6 to 7 times as much plankton as that with less illumination and more cloudy days. Seasons of unusual cloudiness are accompanied by depression in production. * * * Lakes rich in submerged vegetation produce less plankton than those relatively free from it.* In view of the fact that plankton production is modified by temperature, light and the presence of vegetation in the water, it is safe to say that our open-surfaced pond 2 produced more plankton than pond 1 with submerged vegetation, and that production in ponds 3 and 4 was smaller than in either 1 or 2, since the waters of the former ponds had lower temperature, less light, and contained competitive plants. Inasmuch, how- ever, as pond 1 produced more fish than pond 2, the conclu- sion can be fairly reached that the quantity of food in each was at least sufficient, and hence was not a determining factor in Gambusia production. Very possibly the production of Gambusia in the surface-covered ponds 3 and 4 was limited because of scarcity of food. At least, this is probably one cause for the small output of these ponds. | Passing from the consideration of food supply we are confronted with the question of the other important factor, oxygen supply. Oxygen may become dissolved in water by two methods, mechanical and natural. Oxygen is introduced into the water through the surface by mechanical means, such as the effect of the wind, waterfalls and current, by the addi- tion of falling rain, by the movement of animals on or in the water, or by means invented to churn the water and cause air to bubble through it. The natural means are of equal, if not of greater, importance in ponds and small lakes, oxygenation “Tbid., pp. 572, 57-3. 274 American Fisheries Society occurring through the liberation of infinite numbers of tiny bubbles of oxygen from the leaves of submerged plants, a by- product of their metabolic process, photosynthesis. The re- sults of the pond studies previously outlined being so indicative of the value of certain plants of differing habit of growth in pond culture—more ultimately of the value of dissolved oxygen in different quantities—a number of observations on oxygen content of three of the four type ponds were carried out in 1919. The banks of the original ponds having been destroyed by high water and by the burrowing of crayfish, four new ponds of larger capacity were built in another section of the bayou supplied with the same vegetative environmental fea- tures as had obtained in the former observations, with the exception of pond 3, which was supplied with a heavy sub- merged growth of Ceratophyllum in addition to a solid surface mat of Lemna, Spirodela and Wolffia. The new ponds were supplied as follows: Pond 1. Submerged Ceratophyllum. Pond 2. Open surface; all visible vegetation removed. Pond 3. Heavy growth of submerged Ceratophyllum and heavy surface- mat of Lemna, Spirodela, and Wolffia. Pond 4. No submerged vegetation, but a heavy mat of Lemna, Spirodela, and Wolffia. Beginning our determinations approximately at the time of the stocking in the year previous, and extending them through August 15th, two weeks before the date of the seining operations of 1918, twenty-six determinations of dissolved oxygen for each pond were made, water samples being taken at about 3.00 p.m. on days representing differing weather con- ditions. The method of collection and determination of these samples was that outlined in detail in Standard Methods of Water Analysis. The determinations are listed and averaged as shown in table on the following page. It will be noticed from this tabulation that the pond with the open surface and the submerged vegetation, Cer- Barney and Anson.—The Top-Minnow 205 atophyllum, averaged 5.73 parts of dissolved oxygen per mil- lion, the average amounts for each of the other ponds being lower. The lowest average record was 0.26 parts per million for the pond with the heavy mat of vegetation and with no submerged plants. The pond with a similar mat of vegetation but containing a quantity of submerged plant growth averaged nearly five times this record, with 1.23 parts per million. The DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONTENT OF EXPERIMENTAL PoNpDs Date lok Dissolved oxygen in parts per million observation Pond 1 Pond2 | Pond 3 | Pond 4 1919 une 2A eis bell) 4eor 4.81 2.75 1.33 ge eros Sally “Seo 4.83 2.93 2.19 Airp he ilh CeRa 9) 5-40 0.60 0.35 ABH signile < 7.90 4.90 0.43 0.15 Si en. cea! aa 5.69 1.50 0.79 juily= x 7.00 4.68 2.10 0.10 2 7.44 6.76 1.16 0.00 Antenne VSO 5.96 0.81 0.00 5 7.08 6.10 0.61 0.05 4) 8.50 5.80 0.70 0.07 ZZ oie ei|) oe 5.48 1.70 0.00 Td ara deena 4.68 4.26 0.72 0.00 2} sc) ol) ERD 5-49 1.41 0.05 24 - + + +! 6.79 5.50 1.73 0.06 a, (agen, 8 4.70 4.14 0.97 0.00 25p vipat il|) gee 5-37 2.02 0.09 Geet ca | Waar 5.05 1.56 0.14 ENERSA oi le 16 || este 4.15 bine Abo 5 4.12 3-47 2.00 0.36 4 4.25 4.31 1.40 0.08 Gath re tg 3.87 I.II 0.09 BAS) Sy er lh) wetrtexa) 4.00 0.53 0.00 7 5.20 4.20 Ris fare 0.00 9 6.20 4-75 0.36 0.12 ED" venagis © 55 25 25 25 o 2 |56 -60 fe) 50 50 fe) 2 | 61 -65 fo) fe) 9 BUS ve yelniee 27.4 12.1 Copepods, as shown by the table, are the most important article of diet in the food of the young bass. They were found in 61.9 per cent of the bass examined. The copepods are util- ized as food principally in the younger stages. They are very abundant up to the 35 mm. stage, after which there is a sudden decline to 45 mm., and from here on no copepods were found Twenty-six bass ate copepods exclusively, and the number eaten varied from 1 to 500. The copepods eaten in order of their prominence are: Epischura lacustris, Cyclops leuckartt, Cyclops bicuspidatus, Diaptomus sicilis, Diaptomus minutus, Cyclops serrulatus, and Cyclops albidus. Cladocera, like copepods, are very important in the food of the young bass. They were found in 39.9 per cent of the bass. Wickiiff—Food of Small-Mouth Black Bass 367 In 1919 Cladocera ranked fifth in importance in the fish ex- amined, and only at one island (Old Hen) did they surpass the copepods in number. In 1920 they were found in much greater numbers than the copepods in the food of the young bass, and ranked second. This makes the difference in the 8%-15 mm. stage. The percentage of bass eating copepods in this stage (814-15 mm.) is lower than the next (16-20 mm. ) because of the smaller number eating copepods in 1920, and the percentage of bass eating Cladocera in the 814-15 mm. stage is much higher than the rest for the same reason. The table shows that cladocerans, like copepods, are important in the younger stages, but are eaten up to the 50 mm. stage, or a little later than the copepods. The number eaten by a single fish varied from 1 to 202. Thirteen bass ate Cladocera exclu- sively. The cladocerans eaten were, Daphnia retrocurva, Dia- phanosoma leuchtenbergianum, and Sida crystallina. Midge pupz ranked third and were found in 27.4 per cent of the bass. They ranged in number from 1 to 41. Midge pupe are unimportant up to the 21 mm. stage, but from here on up to the 45 mm. stage they are very important. After the 45 mm. stage there is a dropping off in the number of bass eating them. Some of the important midge pupz eaten were, Chironomus, Cricotopus, and Tanytarsus. Adult insects were found in 24.9 per cent of the bass. They are unimportant up to the 21 mm. stage, but from here on there is an increase, and the larger the bass the greater the num- ber eating insects, up to 45 mm. Eight orders of insects are included in the food of the young bass. Of the total number of bass eating insects, mayflies were found in 52 per cent, two- winged flies in 32.4 per cent, caddis flies in 10.8 per cent, moths and bugs each in 8.1 per cent, beetles in 2.7 per cent, and Hy- menoptera and Physopoda each in 1.3 per cent. Taking insects as a class and including the larve, pupe, and adults, 180 bass or 57.4 per cent of the total number fed upon them. Midge larve were found in 19.8 per cent of the bass, and 368 American Fisheries Society ranged in number from 1 to 85; twelve bass ate them exclu- sively. Midge larve are important in the food of the bass throughout the period they were examined, although they are less important in the 8% to 15 and 41-45 mm. stages than the others. They are particularly abundant between 16-40 mm. The most important larve are: Chironomus, Tanytarsus, Or- thocladius, Cricotopus, and Tanypus. Fish are not important in the food of the very young bass between 844 to 15 mm. but increase as the bass grow older. Above 16 mm. they are common in the diet of the bass, and gradually increase except in the 36-40 mm. stage. The young- _ est bass to eat a fish was 12 mm. long and 25.4 per cent of the bass eating fish ate them exclusively. Fish were found in 17.8 per cent of the bass. The fishes eaten were the ones most often associated with the bass, except in the case of the perch. Those eaten, in order of their importance, are: Minnows (spot-tail, most important), stone rollers, fan-tailed darters, carp and the darter Cottogaster copelandi. One young bass was eaten, which points to a slight amount of cannibalism. Mayfly nymphs rank last of the seven important foods of the young bass, being found in 12.1 per cent of the fish. They are unimportant up to 15 mm., as they were found in only 1 bass below that length. They are very important between 16 and 45 mm., and are not found after the 45 mm. stage. The number eaten varied from 1 to 41, and three bass ate mayfly nymphs exclusively. The most common mayflies were Hexagenia, Ephemerella, and Betis. The 29 remaining articles of diet will be grouped together, as they are found in from one per cent to 5.7 per cent of the bass, and are unimportant. Caddis pupze were found in 5.7 per cent of the bass, about equally distributed between the 21-45 mm. stages; none was found above or below these stages. Ostracods were in 3.8 per cent of the bass; like the copepods and cladocerans they are more abundant up to the 25 mm. stage, and after that decrease in importance. Seven bass between 21-45 mm. ate caddis larve. Wickliff—Food of Smail-Mouth Black Bass 369 The greatest number, 4, eating them occurred between 26- 30 mm. Four bass ate crayfish. Their lengths were 40, 45, 48 and 51 mm. respectively. Four also ate amphipods. These were distributed throughout the various stages. Three bass between 12-30 mm. ate mites. One bass 33 mm. long ate two spiders. One stonefly nymph was found in a bass between 41-45 mm., and one damselfly nymph in a 12 mm. bass. Cole- opterous larve were found in two bass between 21-30 mm. Vegetation was found in 9 bass ranging in size from 8%- 45 mm. It was in such small amounts that it was no doubt either accidental in swallowing the prey, or occurred in the food of the animal eaten. Vegetation does not form a part of the diet of the young bass, although in an indirect way the vegetation forms the basis of all fish food, as the animals the fish feed upon in turn feed upon the vegetation. Small amounts of unrecognizable material were found in about 5 per cent of the bass. One bass 43 mm. and another 65 mm. long had eaten nothing. From these results it seems the bass fry and early finger- lings eat practically all the time, and from observation the adults eat intermittently. COMBINATION FOOD EATEN BY THE YOUNG BASS The best two-food combination for bass fry between 8%- 15 mm. is copepods and cladocerans. Above 15 mm. midge larvee and pupz form the best combination. The chief three-food combinations up to 45 mm. in length, were either copepods, midge larve, and pupz, or cladocerans, midge larve, and pup, depending upon the season. Between 15-45 mm., midge larve, midge pup, and mayfly nymphs also made a good three-food combination. The best four-food combination was either copepods or cladocera with midge larve, pupz, and mayfly nymphs. Add adult insects to the four-food diet and you have the best five- food combination after the 20 mm. stage. In the 8%-15 mm. stage, 17 different jkinds of food 370 American Fisheries Society were eaten. Although the very young bass is a specialized feeder at first, feeding almost entirely upon entomostracans, it soon becomes a generalized feeder, and up to 45 mm. feeds upon an average of twelve different kinds of food. The 14 bass examined above 45 mm. show a gradual restriction in the kinds of food eaten. As to the number of stages in which each of the seven most important kinds of food occurred, it is noted that cope- pods and mayfly nymphs were found in the first seven stages of bass from 814-45 mm. Cladocera were in 8 stages from 814-50 mm., midge pupz in 9 stages from 8%-55 mm., adult insects and midge larve in 10 stages from 814-60 mm., and fish all stages from 814-65 mm. This shows that in all stages between 814 and 45 mm., bass ate the seven important kinds of food, a fact which indicates that the bass at least between these lengths is a versatile feeder. The following table gives the total list of all the materials found in the stomach contents of the 313 bass examined: MaTERIALS FouNp IN SToMACH ConTENTS OF 313 BAss EXAMINED Order of 5 Kind of food. No. of fish. | Percentage. importance. I CQNEPOUS! cseimiminie lois ee saratioiec lors Teel 193 61.9 2 GClidocera tock siststieaie tetersiein lee mpotel 125 39.9 3 inte: suo s Maeda aac cae St onoaon ao 86 27.4 4 INGRIE FINSCCES eis © wie) avelerssele ete. « =e (ele jelaele 78 24.9 5 Miadbetilaryvennieceitaccion cite ites seer oie 62 19.8 6 IBESH. We taiete cieieioiersteloieheteieietsiscerevelets fekehnliciers 56 17.8 7 Mayfly anymphs) cnisiocsie cena asieeieee a2 38 12.1 8 @addis span ai seco ayer ererel ale ieee 18 5-7 9 ENSECE CASES Vitter! os iore. cierto ereleiels Gloleielarerers 15 4.7 10 Ostracads') crak! sshaveine a em tone’s slelsesle wiaisiots - 12 3.8 II Vesetation wrsiees ciscicts sisicis cheine stele oe 9 2.9 12 Gaddis TaryieSasiecteaiasiniersiateteressecieeieierae 7 2.2 13 Copepod. “eggsy \i dis cialis cisyelecioist elo yovers 6 1.9 14 Mayfly) 228 icity eesice ols eiareleieie cls ae spe 5 1.6 15 Gray fish! \si:'< Site tisitels ete etisie eis ietole ete icetcte 4 .3 16 Am ohi pods. icc Saiores Stemi siten micinvetayore 4 1.3 17 Statoblasts of Plumatella princeps..... 3 .96 18 Watiplin’ i..)2 444 < widaietetareare sibele mielelele tale le 5 -96 19 IVESEES) fac 5ic. 2: Susuahsaybyeiecese eivinie a eatereia ie abueis 3 -96 20 ENTS WWOTENS: [iisieycrate ve abs\olersreiaieis av arel ole 8 ohe 2 -64 21 Coleapterous Warvie s.apeiesc oielslele'e aela’ viele 2 -64 22 Wamselily ay orp yertys eieyee vistsrs im cteleleistate ts I -32 Wickliff—Food of Small-Mouth Black Bass 371 23 SSEGNE Avast Van ph ayele sisi ejeiarciaisie(ais’«/<|e] «(ar0ys I 32 24 (CHIMES) sca coriogadoceboc coe soo camer I +32 25 WTTRITEETAA Sh yavajancycl'ore. avers til av arelarers inet a haley os I -32 26 SPLGery ers aha tas ots a ahster ais er eke level ciate eeeeietae I 32 27 Parnidiibectie larvie: <5 0s cle sccc serene I saz 28 Nematode ug wort ifs, «)s;s:2 or. eb sherechatee Gre I “32 29 San Giierie ce stetcistelt's. oe ikte a once alate slate I 32 30 PED DIES verse. o 8 «, stergiane lard Sesverorencheketiebereaers I 32 31 | Unrecognizable material ............ 12 3.8 Eight orders of adult insects give 36 different types of food. SUMMARY Copepods and cladocerans are the first food of the young bass. They are found in from 80 to 90 per cent of the young bass, depending upon the general abundance of each. These minute animals are important up to the 40 mm. stage. From this point on they are not important, and were not found in the 8 bass examined between 50 and 65 mm. Mixed with the copepods and cladocerans in the 814-15 mm. stage are a few midge larve, pupe (12 per cent), and adult insects. After the 15 mm. stage, midge larve and pupz, mayfly nymphs, fish, and adult insects become more important, the midge larvz especially so up to 40 mm. and the pupz to 45 mm. The larve are important after the 15 mm. stage, and the pupe after the 25 mm. stage. Adult insects and fish become more important as the bass increase in length, and these, with crayfish and a few midge larve and pupe, are the chief articles of diet in the food of bass between 45 and 65 mm. From the few yearlings examined, I would say that cray- fish and fish with a few insects are the three important foods. The food cycle seems to be copepods and cladocerans of an almost pure diet to 15 mm.; then from 16 to 45 mm. mixed with these are mayfly nymphs, midge larve and pupz, with fish and adult insects; and above 45 mm. fish, adult insects, and crayfish are important. Although these overlap, the series is: (1) entomostracans, (2) insects (larve, pupz, and adults), and (3) crayfish and fish. FOOD OF YOUNG LARGE-MOUTH BLACK BASS IN SOME OHIO WATERS By Dr, C. Li: DuRNER Beloit College, Beloit, Wis. and W. C. KRAATz Ohio State University, Columbus, Olio Selected specimens of young large-mouth black bass taken, were immediately immersed in 5 to 10 per cent formalin and the contents of the alimentary canal later studied with the aid of binocular and compound micro- scopes. The large-mouth bass is well distributed over the state, and probably occurs in every body of water which offers suitable environment and is free from pollution. As compared with the small-mouth bass, the large-mouth prefers relatively quiet and deep waters containing much vegetation, such environment being found in most of the larger inland lakes, sometimes in the larger streams, but seldom in the smaller streams. The large-mouth bass in Ohio spawns from the last of May to the middle of July, but for the most part spawning is completed by the middle of June. The young bass remain in schools for a few days after hatching, but they rapidly be- come individualistic, and hunt singly. They appear to be game fish from the time they begin to take food, darting about on the surface and snapping at any small object that moves. In suitable localities they remain near the surface in large numbers, but dart below when disturbed. There is apparently little migration, merely a general scattering out of the school, as food is usually abundant in and about the vegetation. The young bass considered here are all in their first sum- mer or first year’s growth. While a reference is made to one yearling bass examined, it is not considered in the tables, nor within the range of this particular study. Turner and Kraatz.—Food of Large-Mouth Bass 373 Twenty-six different articles of diet, that is, kinds or groups of organisms or remains of such, were recognized in the contents of the stomachs and intestines of the young bass. These have been arranged in Table 1, giving the length in millimeters of the fish examined; the total number of fish of each length examined, and the percentage of the entire volume of food which each article of diet forms in fishes of all the various lengths. Cladocera, Copepoda, and the larve and pupe of midges (Chironomid) are the most abundant articles of food. Ostracoda occur rather evenly distributed in the stomachs of young of all sizes, but they are found only in very small num- bers at best. Amphipoda constitute a fairly important food for the intermediate size of young bass, but are relatively un- important in the larger ones. Nymphs and adults of Corixa and small fish are taken very freely by the largest of the young bass. Mayfly nymphs are occasionally found in stomachs of the intermediate-sized and larger fish, as was the case of a few coming within the range of this report. How- ever, in a larger yearling fish, 92 mm. in length, 22 mayfly nymphs were found, constituting 95 per cent of its food. Insects recognizable by the hard chitinous parts, but too much broken up for identification, often formed the major part of the diet of a fish, and were sufficiently abundant in the inter- mediate and larger stages to form a fair proportion of the total diet. The occurrence of filamentous algze was exceed- ingly irregular. Sometimes such algz occurred as small frag- ments, making a negligible proportion of the food, but in a few exceptional cases formed nearly 100 per cent of the stomach contents. The filaments, wadded together into small pellets, proved to be Spirogyra and C£dogonium. Material, undoubtedly animal remains, but so well digested as to render further identification impossible, was listed as animal debris. The other articles entered in the table were irregular in oc- _ currence and in most cases were very small in quantity. American Fisheries Society 374 *sum0}eIq | ‘Sligep olues10UTy | SSVq MOVIG HLNOW-ADUV] ONNOX sO G00 JO AWNIOA IVLO][, OL G0Oy AO GNI, HOVA ADVINAUAG ‘T ce |iws | ween +. OLE ate} stores ah 0g-04 oe | oe] eee . Teese ‘*s* Jor] o£-09 Seon sora! | aero oa Sh ire Yon 09-0S oof ee | og os 81 Oz Pz, for oS-ov ce fee | gz os ee | sees ve jor ob-Se ++ | 9: o1 oan ee | eeee b'6£ | o1 S£-of se | ee I I Sith | Aes ore gee | or O£-Sz Soa wane eoeccr on oe [eee €z | o1 Sz-oz axenilierem liisatens on ee [eee 6'£S | or 61 ee oe soos oe oe eee S‘9 r gi ee oe eeee “* ee ee I I ZI Pony | Lae aii o. v tee S°gr | o1 gi 6.2 |)-oe |ppacns an Ee | bods g°St | or $1 Ae oer pastes ‘+ se [vee oz | oI v1 See, | AO: | Porras on se [eee S‘oz | o1 fr rol ee|eree o. ce lees bt | or fae oe ee eeee “. ee oe ct z rie Arai Mazon |aleters on se [eee of|1t or oo | oe | eens oe oe [eee zz |e 6 “Uy : ee re it lees Z| ll rm Q ioe] Q oO (2 e ae ba a 6 fe = 5 = ® = tar g 4 lees o ° DB > ° © tae ° o 3 5 rt) o ol] = uo] oO. j=> Ls) & roe o be q Q. i 3 5 Salo EB 5 3 ® Gia lala } mo |e |o le 71 ry ° 09 ry N | p as =| q ba o}]°@ 4 a fa 4 4 | © rt) ° ° fas eB 1o/S8] S |al gB m: m | eas ete] eG a fer a 4 @|o a + 5 = + | ® 3 x : ry) i=} Qu La oes Qu = Q @ ° 77) cat @ Qa © 5 © + = © p o ® = S ® abel AS Eg. & |< 4 & <- |o| @ te) >) =] 6B ST stale na = 3 3 % g 7 ° 8 + |" 5 a Sai 3 = . v ; : ov a 4 8 a gq o rt) B 7) 8 FA 5 *poulwmexa ¢ E a¥) ysty tn 9 : Q S > 2 Turner and Kraatz.—Food of Large-Mouth Bass 375 This arrangement of the various articles of diet of the fishes examined, brings to light some interesting facts as to changes in food. For convenience the six chief articles are shown in the graph, the figures and spaces running upright in- dicating the percentage of the whole which each article forms, and those running crosswise, the length of the fishes in which each was found. First: The food of the very young specimens consists of few forms and these are all minute. The Cladocera are mainly Bosmina longirostris and Chydorus sphaericus, and the Copepoda nearly all are species of cyclops. The midge larve are fairly abundant, but are very minute, the average length being 1.97 mm. in the 10-15 mm. fish. Second: The food of the intermediate forms becomes more complex. There is a distinct decline in the number of Clado- cera, Copepoda and midge larve, while the Amphipoda, of which there are only a few very minute ones in the small fish, become more important, forming 45 per cent of the total food mass in fish of 35-40 mm. in length. There is also the intro- duction of insect larvee and nymphs, such as those of may- flies, damselflies, beetles and Corixa, and also of fish remains. Third: The larger forms have a relatively simple diet again, in which larger insect larvz, fishes and crayfish become more important. Rarely a larger fish is taken in which the Entomostraca, Amphipoda and very small insect larve con- stitute a considerable part of the stomach contents; but the tendency, as shown by the graph, is for the Entomostraca, Amphipoda and midge larve to disappear almost entirely. The question arises at once as to the reason for these defi- nite changes in diet, and several solutions suggest themselves. It is possible that part of the change may be accounted for in the cycles of organisms that develop within the habitat of the young bass. If this were the case, however, we should expect a correlation between the appearance of an organism in the habitat and its use as food. But in the case of Corixa, _ for instance, one rather small species was found abundantly 376 65 %o 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20 % 15% 10% 57% American Fisheries Society 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-50 30- 35 35-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 aane yi sass Key to Graph. Cladocera ne Copepoda eeenes a Midge larve and pupe covvsgssseo Amphipoda SEH Corixa nymphs and adults —~“7www Fish remains — o—o—o— Turner and Kraatz—Food of Large-Mouth Bass 377 throughout the summer in the same localities with the bass; and likewise Amphipoda and Entomostraca, of apparently the same or very similar kinds, were generally present. Yet the young bass consumes largely first one, then another, and later still another of these foods. It might be urged that the bass is by nature a selective feeder, choosing certain definite kinds of food. But this would not furnish adequate reason for a definite change in diet. The young bass is not a random feeder, on the other hand, otherwise the stomach contents would offer more promiscuous collections of food. Neither is there any marked change in habit or mode of living that would correspond to the periods of change in diet. The results of a careful study of the lengths of the chief different articles of food, together with the lengths of the young bass, are shown in Table 2. It seems that the size of the food as compared with the size of the bass is the most important factor. It is likewise the same factor which brings about a change in the diet later. It will be noted from Table 2 that the 10-15 mm. bass eat Cladocera which average only .35 mm. in length and that with an increase in size of the fish, larger species of Cladocera, such as Daphnia and Camptocercus and others, are eaten. The same general correlation is shown in the size relationship of the Copepoda and of the midge larve. Some very minute amphipods appear in fish 12 mm. in length, but in 45 mm. fish the average is 4.31 mm. The table shows that in bass 45 mm. in length the average size of all food animals is ap- proximately 4 mm. to 4.5 mm. Corixa have not been taken, up to this time, although they were present abundantly in the waters. The species is one in which the adult is only about 4.5 to 5 mm. long; a number of old nymphs, 4 mm. long or slightly longer, were found in the food. Corixa nymphs and adults become important in the food of fish 45 mm. in length and upward, and it seems reasonable that the bass turned to them at this stage because it had at- tained a size when 4 mm. animals were not too large to be 378 American Fisheries Society taken most conveniently as food. After 45 mm. the young bass turns more to fish, and there is a definite increase in the size of fish taken, as the bass grows larger. The same prin- ciple of size relationship is still more evident in the grand 2. RELATION BETWEEN INCREASE IN LENGTH OF CHIEF Forms or Foop AND INCREASE IN LENGTH OF YOUNG LARGE-MouTH BLAckK BAss Length of food eaten by —— Fish | Fish Fish Fish | Fish } Fish | Fish | Fish | Fish | Fish Chief article 10-15 15-20 | 20-25 | 25-30 | 30-35 | 35-40 | 40-50 | 50-60 | 60-70| 70-80 of food mm. | mm, | mm. | mm. in in in in I’gth | l’gth | I’gth| I’gth Cladocera: Mm. |\Mm. |Mm. |'Um. Maximum Minimum “ Average. Copepoda: Maximum... o7t) a exe20u) ele SSi|et-O5 sl) Oz) lan.4'5 Minimum .. . 42 | .68 .56 55 84 75 Average. .. . -52 | .85 | 1.04] 1.09 | 1.17] 1.22 Midge larve and pupe: Maximum . . .]| 4.00 ! 2.10] 4.00] 9.00].....] 5.50] to.50 Minimum 7 os) 2] r-20! | e1egOll) D255) |e Se2Oil) ere en |) o0-40)| ea .cO AVETAZE.. & (s/s 1.97 | 1.80] 2.67] 5.41 |.....| 3.96] 5.16 Amphipoda: Ma ximmgmal yr Sy sa) | eralots ull se siats 2.80] 5.25 Vira tease ie fa eeV este feels) bielaie 2.15 | 3.00 Average. . .. Z2ESC ALK Corixa nymphs anc adults: Bulebobm eh hs 114. || Diddeo Hinsdos Minimum ‘ sree Average. (553s) (a) cetes oleae 4.00 | 4.00] 4.50] 4.50 Fish: Miaximitimt 5) fe, sil areissrell ls tmere 26.00 | 36.00 | 24.00 NBT ty Phe lees oil icco.c 12.00 | 10.00 | 14.00 Average. chains 16.66 | 16.50] £9.00 Grand average.. sO) s TeOU died4i))) aee55 -98 | 2.15] 4.49 | 10.33 | 10.50 | 11.75 average of the lengths of all the chief forms eaten. The aver- age rises with more or less regularity from .95 mm. in 10 to 15 mm. bass, to 11.75 mm. in the 70 to 80 mm. bass. The young bass is a game fish from the time that it begins to feed independently, and takes for its food moving objects which it is physically possible for it to capture and eat. As Turner and Kraatz.—Food of Large-Mouth Bass 379 it grows larger and swifter, it takes larger and more active animals for food. If an animal be of suitable size the only limitation to its use as food is its relative abundance and there is little or no choice indicated for any particular animal of the suitable size as long as it is active. This is the most simple explanation. It does not seem necessary to invoke any other complicating factors such as changes in habit, migration, or definite selection on the part of the young bass. A comparison of the food cycles of the young large-mouth with that of the young small-mouth bass is of interest, owing to differences in their general habits, causing minor differences in their food cycles. The predominance of Entomostraca and midge larvz in the food of the very young is common to both species. In the next stage the small-mouth bass turns imme- diately to other insect larvz, while the large-mouth bass takes amphipods principally. This is to be accounted for by the fact that the large-mouth bass frequents quiet waters where masses of submerged vegetation afford feeding grounds for innumerable amphipods, while the small-mouth bass is to be found in waters freer of vegetation, and where insect larve probably supplant the amphipods. Both species take fish and large insect larve principally during the late summer, but the small-mouth bass becomes definitely piscivorous at an earlier age than the large-mouth, the former at 12 mm. and the latter at 35 mm. It is probable that the small-mouth takes up the fish-eating habit earlier because of the lack of other food of suitable size. Crayfish also play a larger part in the food of the small-mouth, which is naturally to be ex- pected in view of the fact that the small-mouth bass and the crayfish both abound in the same habitat. SUMMARY 1. The food of the young large-mouth black bass under- goes two rather definite changes between the 10 and 85 mm. ‘stages. 380 American Fisheries Society 2. Up to 30 mm. in length the food consists almost en- tirely of Entomostraca and minute midge larve. 3. From 30 to 50 mm. in length, Entomostraca become negligible in quantity and midge larve diminish rapidly, while amphipods form the principal article of diet, and larger insect larve and fish are taken in small quantities. 4. From 50 to 80 mm. in length, Amphipoda, Entomos- traca and midge larve practically disappear from the diet, the food being principally larger insect larvz and fish. 5. The factors governing both the food taken by the young fish and the changes in diet are: (a) The abundance of suitable food in the water; (b) the size of the food organism; and (c) movement on the part of the food organism. 6. The food cycles in the young of the large-mouth and small-mouth bass are similar, though the changes occur at slightly different ages, and there are minor differences in the animals used as food which follow as a result of the differ- ences in the habitats of the two species. THE GIZZARD SHAD IN RELATION TO PLANTS AND GAME FISHES By L. Fy Vieeany Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio It is the purpose of this preliminary paper to record some observations on the food and feeding habits of the young giz- zard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum Le Sueur), and the place it holds as a connecting link between microscopic plants and the game fishes. This species, often called the hickory shad, is very abundance at Buckeye, Indian, and Loramie Lakes, often more than a thousand of the young being taken at one haul of the collecting seine. It is less common in the other localities covered by the survey in Ohio. The fish collected were put into a five per cent solution of formalin, thus preserving the contents of the stomach and intes- tine and preventing further digestive action. The examination of the contents of the digestive tract was made with a com- pound microscope, the highest powers often being necessary for identification of the food. Adult fishes are not considered in this paper, examination being limited to young specimens under seventy millimeters in length, measured from the point of snout to the base of the caudal fin. About two hundred in- dividuals were studied from the localities named above. Since the excellent work of Forbes* nearly forty years ago, very little study appears to have been made of the food of the gizzard shad. According to Forbes the shad is “a mud lover par excellence”; swallows “large quantities of fine mud con- taining about twenty per cent of minutely divided vegetable debris”; and consumes, when young, food that is approxi- mately 90 per cent microscopic animals and the rest microscopic plants. From data at hand it appears that these statements *On the food relations of freshwater fishes: a summary and dicussion. S. A. Forbes. Bulletin, Illinois State Laboratory of Natural History, Vol. II, Art. 8, 1888. 382 American Fisheries Society require considerable modification when applied to young fish within the limits of this study. The food of the young gizzard shad may be roughly grouped into the following kinds, in order of their importance as noted in the examination of stomach and intestinal contents: microscopic unicellular plants (alge), microscopic animals, and filamentous alge. Mud usually forms from ten to thirty per cent of the contents, and a similar quantity is unrecognizable plant debris. Mud is often entirely lacking from the stomach contents and it is my belief that it is merely incidental to the manner of feeding. No consideration is given, therefore, to its varying amount in the digestive tract. The gizzard shad feeds by swimming through the water with its mouth open in an apparently aimless manner. The presence of such masses of microscopic material in the diges- tive tract is accounted for in part when the feeding apparatus of the fish is examined. The very numerous fine gill rakers on the gill arches oppose the escape through the gill slits of very small objects which enter the mouth of the fish with the water of respiration. Thus like a very fine sieve, these allow the water to pass out through the gill slits as the fish swims along, while the minute organisms are retained and introduced into its alimentary canal. The gizzard shad is the most wonderful combination of tow net and centrifuge that one could desire. Wherever this fish was found, it was not necessary to do any towing to get an estimate of the number and kinds of microscopic plants, for the stomach contents represented a concentrated sample of the plankton. The number of different kinds of microscopic alge found in an identifiable condition in the digestive tract of the gizzard shad is markedly large. Ina single fish taken at Buck- eye Lake on July 1, fifty species and varieties of algae were found; from the specimens examined to date from the various localities named above, the number of species exceeds 140 and will doubtless reach considerably higher. The majority of these are unicellular and colonial forms included in the group Tiffany.—The Gizzard Shad 383 known as Protococcales; a number are desmids and diatoms; and a few are filamentous. The number of any particular kind, especially among the Protococcales, seems to depend directly upon the richness of the plankton present. No attempt is made in this paper to give the identification of the microscopic plants and animals—a further study is necessary before such a report can be made.* The following table gives in approximate percentages the food of the gizzard shad in a comparative way for each locality: APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGES OF Kinps oF Foop IN GiIzzARD SHAD Micro- Micro- Filamentous Plant Locality. alge. animals. alge. debris. Percentage. Percentage. Percentage. Percentage. Buckeye, Lake . : .-. : 80-90 0-5 0-2 5-10 MoramieIcake... << 75-90 2-6 ° 5-20 Indian Lake . . . . 75-88 3-5 2-4 10-15 SiaViany s ) Gakeuty us 80-90 6-8 0-1 H 8-12 Chippewa Lake . . . 80-90 I-3 0-1 | 5-10 Portage Lakes ... 70-90 10-15 2-5 10-15 One of the outstanding features of the foregoing table is the constancy in the percentage of microscopic plants found in the fishes examined, regardless of locality or size within the range of this study. The kinds of alge comprising the food were not the same for different localities, and even for the same locality differences were noted in fish collected in June and August. This variation is doubtless due to the geographic dis- tribution of the plants and to the fact that most alge have rather definite seasonal cycles of vegetative development. But the more or less constant percentage seems to indicate that the gizzard shad is able to utilize a rather large variety of micro- scopic plants. The writer hopes to be able to follow out some of the seasonal changes for a given locality in the near future. Another interesting observation is the comparative sameness of diet of the fish throughout the period it is attaining a length of seventy millimeters and even more. Many other fishes, like * A complete list of the alge determined in the food of the Gizzard Shad appeared in the Ohio Journal of Science for February, 1921. 384 American Fisheries Society the small and large-mouth bass, make decided changes in the kind of food taken during the period of their growth to a similar length. An examination of two gizzard shad 200 mil- limeters in length did not materially alter the percentages as given above, with the exception that there was a greater amount of unrecognizable debris. The animal percentages are not so constant, the amount being sometimes zero, but it seems certain that no discrimina- tion is exercised in food selection. The gizzard shad is chiefly a vegetarian, but the percentages of animal food present are too large to be considered otherwise than as the animal part of the plankton. On the other hand it forms no such large a factor as the report of Forbes would indicate, which means merely that in the present case the plant life was proportionately more abundant. Towing records indicate the same proportions of animal and plant life in the plankton. The filamentous algze were always present in small quanti- ties, and there was but a single instance of the presence of any parts of the higher plants. In one gizzard shad the re- mains of some epidermal and palisade cells of a small leaf were found, but it must be considered purely accidental. The filamentous alge were largely young plants, broken up into relatively small pieces. No plant was ever observed longer than three-tenths of a millimeter, and the material was never wadded up, either in the gizzard or in the intestine. Not more than a decade or two ago most ichthyologists were agreed that the gizzard shad was a beautiful but never- theless worthless fish. That it is beautiful no one will dispute. With its silvery white sides and its graceful rapid dashes through the water near the surface, it makes a very attractive fish. But it is decidedly not worthless. While it is not a game fish and at the present time furnishes very little food for man, it holds a very important place in the life cycle of a number of our best game fish, notably the small and large-mouth bass, the crappie, and the white bass. The younger gizzard shad fur- Tiffany.—The Gizzard Shad 385 nishes excellent food for these fishes, which experience no dif- ficulty in disposing of the too numerous bones. As noted above, the shad is almost wholly a vegetarian, and thrives on plants so tiny and minute that sometimes 10,000 of them laid side by side would not reach an inch. These minute plants form a very important part of the flora of most unpol- luted bodies of water and are present by the millions in nearly every lake of the state. None of the other fishes seems to be able to utilize this great source of food to any considerable extent except when quite young. Thus the gizzard shad does not interfere in the least with the food supply of the game fishes, and is itself excellent food for the majority of our game fishes. The gizzard shad offers for the game fishes one of the most direct routes from “manufacturer to consumer’ that is pos- sible among fishes. Of course, plants ultimately form the basic food for all living organisms, but the cycle is oftentimes a long one. The Chinese proverb, “Big fish eat little fish; little fish eat shrimp, and shrimp eat mud,” gives a cycle that comes very nearly standing the test of modern science, if we understand the mud to be microscopic plants and animals. An ordinary food cycle of a fish might be illustrated by a bass feeding on smaller fish; these in turn on tiny animals which may eat the larve of still smaller animal organisms; and the latter living on microscopic algz. But the cycle from the same bass through the gizzard shad to microscopic alge is a much shorter and more direct route. Thus the gizzard shad holds a rather unique position in that it may completely bridge the gap between our game fishes and the ultimate source of their food supply, the microscopic plants. In 1888, Forbes wrote this very important paragraph about the gizzard shad, but it is only recently that any practical ap- plication is being made of such knowledge: Among the soft-finned fishes the most valuable as food for other kinds is the gizzard shad (Dorosoma), this single fish being about twice as common in adults as all the minnow family taken together. It made forty per cent of the food of the wall-eyed pike; a third of that of the 386 American Fisheries Society black bass; nearly half of that of the common “pike,” or pickerel; two- thirds of that of the four specimens of golden shad examined; and a third of the food of the gars. The only other fishes in whose stomachs it was recognized were the yellow cat (Ameiurus natalis) and the young white bass (Roccus). It thus seems to be the especial food of the large game fishes and other particularly predaceous kinds. It seems important that such information should be widely distributed among those interested in the propagation of fishes. As an illustration of benefits to be derived from such knowl- edge, mention may be made of conditions at the newly formed Milton Reservoir near Newton Falls, Ohio. This fine body of water with its plentiful supply of microscopic algz, as ascer- tained from towed material, offers excellent living conditions for the gizzard shad, and its presence means plenty of food for the bass. Dr. Raymond C. Osburn has already advised in one of his reports to the State Bureau, that this reservoir be stocked with the gizzard shad. SUMMARY The observations recorded in the paper may be briefly sum- marized as follows: 1. The distribution of the gizzard shad is general for the inland lakes of Ohio. 2. Its food consists, in the main, of microscopic alge, with a small variable percentage of microscopic animals. 3. It seems that mud, though present to some extent in most of the fishes examined, is incidental. 4. The gizzard shad furnishes excellent food for most of our game fishes, notably the large-mouth and small-mouth bass, the crappie, and the white bass. 5. The gizzard shad holds an almost unique position as a direct connection between the microscopic plants and the game fishes, interfering in no way with the food supply of the latter SOME FEATURES IN THE MIGRATION OF THE SOCKEYE SALMON AND THEIR PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE* By Henry B. Warp University of Illinois, Urbana, Iilinois Problems suggested by the striking life history of the Pa- cific salmon have attracted the attention of naturalists and fish culturists for a long time, and many able men have worked on the subject. Their contributions have given positive infor- mation with reference to many factors in the situation, but the subject is too large and too complex to have yielded en- tirely to their efforts and some questions have been left un- solved. It is also necessary to determine the precise appli- cation of these observations and principles to the practical ques- tions that present themselves at the present day. The importance of the problem can hardly be overesti- mated. Both of the great countries prominently represented in this meeting count as one of their greatest natural resources the salmon fisheries of the Pacific coast. In both of them the feeling has long been cherished by some well-informed men that this important and valuable resource was in danger of serious diminution, if not of total destruction. One of our great political leaders, himself an enthusiastic out-doors man, a lover of nature, and a vigorous supporter of conservation, rec- ognized the impending danger by appointing in 1902 a com- mission to investigate the salmon fisheries of Alaska, and the Alaska Salmon Commission under the leadership of David Starr Jordan laid the foundation for a scientific work which has been continued energetically by many investigators in both Canada and the United States since that time. * This paper is based on investigations made by the writer while in the service of the Bureau of Fisheries, and is published by permission of the Commissioner of Fisheries. Contribution from the Zoological Laboratory of the University of LIllinois, . No. 180. 388 American Fisheries Soctety Perhaps the outstanding fact in connection with all of these studies is the demonstration that the destruction of the salmon is proceeding with tremendous rapidity, and the danger of its extermination or of the reduction of numbers to a point which will threaten a great industry is a consideration, not of some time many years hence, but of the immediate future. There has also come out of these studies a firm conviction that joint action on the part of the two governments and their workers is essential for the solution of the problem and the protection of the industry. I think it must be equally clear to all that to provide for joint action there must be thorough understanding on both sides of the boundary. Certainly the first and most fundamental preliminary to such understanding is the demonstration of the essential facts in the situation and their coordination with the practices that are in vogue in such fashion as to indicate the lines of action calculated to protect the species and continue the industry. It is with a view to contributing a little at least to this basis of facts that I present this paper before the Society at this meeting. For a number of years I have been privileged to conduct studies of the Pacific salmon during the season of its fresh water migration, and to study the factors in the environment and in the organism which, by their mutual interaction, pro- duce the complex conditions that are described in relating the life history of the species. It has seemed to me that part of the confusion and difference of opinion that has been evi- dent in the past might be due to the efforts to solve the entire problem of the migration in a single investigation. The move- ments of the salmon constitute a remarkable story. At some period in life they desert their feeding grounds in salt water, move towards the estuaries, ascend the streams, fulfill their reproductive function, and perish. The migration is a con- tinuous movement. Whatever the factors that control it may be, they are all united in the fulfillment of the reproductive function. They work without interruption and with striking directness to bring about this consummation. However in Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 389 dealing with so complex a problem, it is frequently valuable to analyze it into subordinate stages, even though they be some- what artificial, and to endeavor to solve part of the question in the hope that such solution may indicate a basis for the solution of the entire problem. With this thought in view, I shall confine myself in this paper to that part of the subject which has been primarily in mind in all the investigations which I have carried out in the field. This is the fresh water period in the migration of the Pacific salmon, the life and activities of the fish from the time when, having left the salt water of the estuaries, it is definitely embarked upon the upstream movement. From the time when it begins to ascend the rivers until the time when the eggs or milt have been discharged and the fish dies, it is under the in- fluence of a more definite and restricted environment than that to which it is subject previously. I shall further limit the dis- cussion to a single species of the five that occur on the coast and visit these waters. This is the red or Alaska salmon, Onchorhynchus nerka, also somewhat widely known as the sockeye. This species, being of paramount commercial im- portance because of its numbers and the price it commands in the market, has received considerable attention at the hands of various investigators both in Canada and the United States. It has not however, I think, been intensively studied during this period with reference to the factors that influence its move- ments. Possibly at the outset it is wise for me to confess that I agree fully with those who have commented on the very com- plex and marvellous character of the migration. [ cannot, however, share their view that such complexity is incompre- hensible or beyond the power of observation and experiment to explain when ultimately all the factors in the situation have been analyzed in their bearing on the movements of the fish. It seems to me fairly well established scientifically that fish are primarily responsive to environmental stimuli, that their ac- ‘tions are due to external influences which may be difficult to 390 American Fisheries Society detect and perhaps still more difficult to explain but which nevertheless justify the student in attempting to find an ex- planation of their actions in the environmental factors and in expecting confidently to secure a solution of the problem ulti- mately along these lines. I shall not attempt to enter here into a discussion of the parent stream theory so tenaciously held by fishermen and in the past so vigorously combated by some most distinguished ichthyologists. I do not desire to appear as an attorney for either side in this discussion. It is my object to tell as clearly — as possible of certain facts which I have observed so repeatedly that they seem to me to hold a significant relation to the move- ments of the salmon, and to leave the decision to the judg- ment of others, both here and elsewhere, who may now and in the future test them as facts and in their relations to the problems under discussion, with a view to determining their correctness and the justification of the relations observed and of the conclusions drawn from such relations. MIGRATION ROUTE OF RED SALMON The precise route followed by the migrating fish in any given stream has been discussed by various students of the subject. There is little doubt that in all classes under natural conditions it is uniform and precise. Two somewhat different phases present themselves. These are related to the character of the stream, and may be designated as the route taken by the salmon in streams having a single spawning ground only; and, second, that followed by the salmon in streams which carry fish going to several spawning grounds. In both cases one is struck by the peculiarities of the situation and the diffi- culty of finding any a priori explanation for the facts. In most cases these facts are clear and their invariability is shown by the consistent testimony of the native races which have always depended, as most of them do, upon the salmon for food, at least in those regions where the salmon migration as- sumes considerable proportions. It is evident that the con- Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon Jk sistent practices of the native fishermen are determined by the definite movements of the fish. Moreover, however unusual these movements may be, I presume we are right in assuming that some factor or factors determine them definitely, since they are in all cases invariable under natural conditions. The factors which control existing conditions are difficult to determine. Whether the stream be resorted to by a single run of salmon or visited by several waves, seeking different spawning grounds, the conditions appear on first examination to be equally complex and inexplicable. Many parts of the stream that would afford apparently admirable spawning grounds are never visited. One may even find cases in which the spawning grounds actually visited are apparently inferior in size and fitness to others on the same stream to which no red salmon resort. The study of the mechanical factors that might possibly be determinative has led to no definite results. For such studies the multitude of short, many-branched streams in southeastern Alaska offers a most profitable field for study. The movements of the fish do not depend upon the swiftness of the water, for they pass at times from swift water into quiet, and again from a quiet stream into rapid waters. The waters which they leave are sometimes shallow and some- times deep in comparison with those which they choose. In fact, it is not difficult to find places where the salmon turn from a stream that is readily passable into one that at the moment is so shallow or so obstructed that they make their way up- ward with difficulty and may even be blocked for the time being. So many instances of variability in these particulars can be found that one is justified in concluding that the vol- ume and swiftness of the stream are not determining factors in directing the movements of the salmon or in leading them to select one tributary above another or in preference to the main stream itself. Once embarked upon a stream they strive constantly up- ward, and yet not with equal pace. In the lower tide-influenced sections of the great rivers it was observed many years ago by a2 American Fisheries Society Rutter that the fish alternated in movements, traveling up and then again somewhat downstream as the tide shifted. This may be a uniform response to the current stimulus, for in these regions the current changes with the change of tide, but as the descending stream is stronger and its influence is felt for longer periods of time, so the ascending movements of the fish are superior to its reverse movements, and the salmon ultimately pass into the river above the tidal influence and then mount steadily upwards. The portion of the migration of the red salmon in tidal waters has not yet been followed defi- nitely so far as I know. Once the fish have started to ascend the part of the stream which lies above tidal influences, they press steadily onward. The rate of migration has not been observed for the red salmon with a definiteness to determine, even in general terms, the rate of progress. I have also made many observations with reference to the character of the water, without being able to find any uni- formity in the conditions that conforms to the course of the migrating red salmon. In some places they pass from turbid, silt-laden waters to clear tributaries. In other places they seem to have selected that branch of the stream which carried the larger amount of sediment or was of the milky-white color so characteristic of glacial-fed waters. Furthermore, in south- eastern Alaska, where there are so many short and highly- branched streams, one can find cases where the entire basin of the stream is underlaid by a single rock formation, so that the materials in solution must be identical in chemical char- acter, and no doubt also in the amount of mineral substances in solution; moreover, the plant growth is uniform in char- acter, if not in amount, throughout the entire basin of the stream, and it is difficult to formulate a theory which could in any way account for chemical differences in waters of such a limited and uniform area. The rapid, turbulent character of the salmon streams indi- cates clearly their extreme poverty in minute organisms and the lakes are strikingly plankton poor so that there is only a Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 393 scanty food supply for the salmon fry. Further, that food supply is apparently uniform in all parts of the stream basin so that the return of the adult to a definite point does not seem to be correlated with any peculiarly favorable conditions for the development of the young. It is hardly profitable to recount further the evidence which has led to the rejection of these hypotheses. They are not adequate to account for the movements of the migrating sal- mon since the influences are not in definite fashion coordi- nated with those movements. There is one environmental stimulus, however, which has shown a high degree of cor- relation with the path which the red salmon follows in its migration in fresh water and that is the relative temperature of the different waters. This I propose to discuss more fully but first wish to consider one phase of the generally recognized current stimulus. In fresh water the red salmon moves con- stantly up stream. While it is not influenced by the strength of the current, for it may desert a strong current to follow more quiet waters, yet in the largest streams it seems to modify its behavior, perhaps necessarily but yet in a way to affect conspicuously its distribution and incidentally its relations to commercial fishing, by sticking close to the shore, or having a route which follows one bank of the stream and is distinct from the route along the opposite shore. During my last visit to Alaska I had the opportunity of testing some of the working hypotheses previously formed on a new type of stream. The Copper River is much larger than any other stream I have previously studied in which the red salmon is found, and careful attention was given to the special features of the situation with a view to determining the differences, if any, that characterize the migration of the red salmon here in contrast with its movements in smaller streams in other regions. One of the first factors which at- tracted my attention was the apparent inclination of the fish to migrate upstream near the banks. This was first noticed 394 American Fisheries Society at the Abercrombie Rapids. Here the river makes a rapid and violent descent for a short distance, and it was evident even on the first inspection of the situation that the red salmon must experience great difficulty in ascending the stream at this point. It seemed altogether likely that the fish would have to follow a course near one shore or the other. On the east bank there are several large eddies in which it is well known that the fish congregate in large numbers. The opposite bank does not possess any such conspicuous places of refuge, but there is a multitude of little eddies formed by jutting rocks, irregular in size and shape, but constituting a series of resting places, so that the fish can make the ascent of the rapids by passing through the series without being drawn into the full current of the river at any point and without being compelled to traverse the more violent stretches of water for more than a few feet. The fishermen who are working along this shore are very successful in scooping the salmon out of these minor eddies, and have learned the spots at which the fish rest longest, for these are the places where the scoop net functions most success- fully. As the water in the stream is exceedingly turbid, it is not possible for the fish to see the fisherman, so the net sweeps through without alarming the fish. Having scooped out the contents of the eddy the fisherman pauses a moment to permit other fish to come in, and then makes another sweep to gather in the salmon which have reached it in the interval. When the fish are migrating rapidly, this fishery is very successful and, I think, likely to catch a large percentage of the fish passing while dip netting is being carried on. The employees of the cannery located near this point insist upon the view that the salmon also use the center of the stream, since in the period of migration they have often been able to see the fins cutting the water far out from the shore. It must be borne in mind that the turbidity of the stream here is sO great as to prevent seeing a fish even a short distance Ward.—Mugration of the Sockeye Salmon 395 below the surface. The only time at which any fish could possibly be detected, if even a short distance from the shore, would be when it actually comes to the surface and the back fin rises above the water. I have no desire to question the accuracy of the observations, which is insisted upon. I think that the fishermen have seen the back fins of fish appearing at various points in the open stream, and perhaps at certain times these appearances have been_so numerous as to suggest a large number of fish passing upstream through that portion of the river. But even a brief study of the rapidity of the stream at this point will, I think, suffice to demonstrate to anyone that even a powerful fish like the red salmon would be unable to stem the current for more than a very brief interval of time. For myself, I should be inclined to explain the presence of fish in the open current of the river in an entirely different fashion from that just suggested. One who has observed the salmon ascending rapids in a clear stream is familiar with the general actions of the fish under these conditions. They are enough like those of some other species to demand only a brief explanation in order that the situation may be clearly under- stood. The fish dart from point to point, starting from an eddy or protected position, passing with a rush through a stretch where they are more or less exposed to the force of the current, and aiming to reach promptly another protected place where they hang resting and gathering strength for an- other rush. In this way, step by step, the long stretch of diff- cult water is overcome, but at no time do they, in my experi- ence, attempt to pass a long stretch of violent water at a single effort. They act with such care that it seems as if they were clearly bent upon saving themselves as much as possible and spending the minimum amount of energy in overcoming the difficult water. Furthermore, I am sure that everyone who has watched fish under these conditions has seen not one but many individuals from time to time make a rush, get caught by the full current or by broken water before they have actually 396 American Fisheries Society reached their objective, and be carried downstream, at first fighting powerfully against the force of the current, but later slowing up or again making a rush to reach a protected situa- tion in an eddy or under the lee of some rock. Now if these movements were carried out in a stream which was so dense that it was impossible to see the body of a fish even when near the surface and one could get evidence of position only when the back fin cut the surface, I think it is clear that one might at times note the frequent appearance of fish breaking the surface in the open current. It would, however, be wrong to conclude that these movements were made in con- nection with the regular upstream rush of the fish. They would rather be the appearance of those fish which had been swept off their course and were either stopped by the current and forced to the surface, or were being gradually driven downstream, after having been caught by the current and forced out of the usual line of movement up the rapids. But the tendency of the fish to move along the banks, de- termined by necessity in the region of the rapids, seems to have been followed in other regions also. In travelling up the Copper River and its tributary, the Klutina River, there was not much opportunity for us to make careful study of this point, but we were camped for two days half a mile below the outlet of Lake Klutina, where the stream is broad and rapid, though not broken and tumultuous. While we were at this point the salmon were passing up regularly and we fre- quently saw them and also heard them jumping in the river at night. Just at the time of our visit the most of the jumping was near the opposite bank, where a projecting point and a little bay behind it made an eddy in which the salmon were abundant. We went up and down the stream to the lake for several days, and in no case did I see a salmon jumping in the center of the stream. They were more abundant along the southwest bank opposite our camp, but they were also Ward.—Mugration of the Sockeye Salmon 397 jumping at intervals along the shore on which we were en- camped. In Lake Klutina itself conditions seemed to be equally definite. This body of water is crescentic in form and some 25 miles in length, with a maximum breadth at the center of the crescent of about 4 miles. I watched carefully for the appearance of salmon during all of the time we were either moving along on the beach or following close to the shore in our boat. Fish were seen jumping regularly in the water adjacent to each bank, but in no instance did I find them jump- ing in the open water of the lake. Now this evidence is ob- viously imperfect, but it indicates the same conditions I have found elsewhere and it agrees with the situation in Lake Tazlina which we studied a month later. It looks much as if the fish in their movements followed the general shore outline of the lake and in the rivers also moved along near the banks. Much more evidence will have to be collected before one can accept this as a final demonstration. Mean- while, it may be taken as a working hypothesis. There is every reason to accept it as the only possible condition of movement through difficult channels, such as the Abercrombie Rapids, and it will aid in explaining the conditions of move- ment into subordinate streams. The situation just pointed out has a very direct and im- portant bearing on fixing limitations on the fishing of the stream. The Copper River is one of those few streams in which fishing for red salmon is allowed in fresh water. Miles Lake, just below the rapids, is viewed as a splendid fishing ground, and large numbers of fish have been taken in the rapids also. At present fishing is confined to part of one shore, and is entirely forbidden on the other bank. It is apparent at once that if the streams of migrating salmon which pass up both banks go to different spawning grounds, then this method is directly responsible for the depletion of the run at one place, - and conversely serves for the protection of those fish that 398 American Fisheries Society go to another series of spawning areas. It is, I think, further evident that netting fish from the rocky banks along the rapids is well calculated to advantage the fisherman rather than the fish, and to work serious havoc on certain waves of salmon migration, for whether the fish go to a set of spawning grounds connected with that bank only or are dispersed more regularly over the different spawning grounds of the upper river, the excessive catching will reduce to a minimum the number of fish that escape, and may even be sufficient, by virtue of the concerted fishing of a line of dip-netters along this bank, to eliminate almost entirely the run that is passing up at the time intensive fishing is practiced. In general it seems as if river fishing for commercial pur- poses were inadvisable in Alaska streams. There is another physical factor which I am led to think exerts a controlling influence in some cases, at least, on the movements of the red salmon, and that is temperature. Of this influence I have spoken more fully in another place. But to avoid possible misunderstanding, a brief general statement must be introduced here. At the start one should bear in mind that the influence may be very real without being abso- lute. In other words, it is only one of the factors which determine activity and in a given case may be more or less influential than another factor. Again it is contact with a change in temperature rather than the absolute level of temper- ature which ordinarily at least affects the red salmon. There are two crucial points or types of choice in the fresh-water career of the red salmon. First, when such a salmon, moving upstream, reaches a place where two streams join, it must take one or the other path—and, as already stated, its path is fixed and invariable; it always selects one and not the other. Sec- ond, when the red salmon, having attained the lake in which it is to spawn, comes to choose a spawning ground, it selects one or more areas for that purpose. While the choice of the salmon in this respect has not been so generally recorded, Ward.—M igration of the Sockeye Salmon 399 yet it is confined in fact to a few places, or even to a single stretch of the shore or a single small inlet, even though other points seem to the observer to be equally favorable. In other words, the choice of a spawning ground is precise and definite. In both of these crucial choices, I think the salmon is in- fluenced primarily by temperature conditions, and I propose now to set forth briefly some of the evidence that leads me to support this view; and then to consider the practical bear ing of these views on the problems of salmon culture and conservation. Out of many localities studied, I select two for detailed consideration. Clear Creek, a small tributary of the Copper River, empties into the easternmost.channel of the river, a few miles above its mouth. At the time of our first visit, July 22, the red salmon were schooling in considerable numbers in every pool along the lower course of the creek. There is no lake at any point on the creek. Near the mountains the stream is marshy, sluggish and shallow; but from the moment it leaves this area it is a winding stream with alternating deeper pools and shal- lows, all with a gravel bottom. Not a single red salmon was seen above the point where the stream came from the broader, shallower and more sluggish area and there was no trace of previous spawning above this point. However, from a point a few yards below that area throughout the more swiftly flow- ing section of the stream, salmon were abundant nearly up to its junction with the Copper where the waters were deeper and quieter. We also found the fish spawning here on our return from the trip inland. There was, however, at that date, September 6, no opportunity to examine the stream more in detail. This statement of conditions shows clearly and strikingly how Clear Creek differs from the ordinary spawning ground of the red salmon. Here the fish are spawning not in a lake but in the stream itself. Furthermore, they have not picked out the slower and more quiet portions of the water course but are found only in those parts which have a steady and 400 American Fisheries Society considerable current. Finally, they have not penetrated to the real headwaters of the stream but are all grouped in the lower half of its course. A series of temperature readings taken with some care showed the following situation: The east channel of the Copper above the mouth of Clear Creek had on July 22 a temperature of 48.5° F. At the same hour the temperature of Clear Creek fifty yards above its mouth was only 44° F. At the railroad trestle the tempera- ture of the creek had dropped to a level of 42° to 42.5° F. A mile above this and just below the marshy region it was again 44° F. and the same temperature obtained throughout that region. The stream thus showed in the first place that it was 4° cooler than the water of the Copper River at their junction, and that the temperature after falling 2° at the trestle again became warmer some distance farther up at the marshy region. On running a line of temperatures across the stream above the trestle it appeared that near the right bank the water was 43.5° to 44° F. In the center it was full 44° and near the left bank it varied from 41° to 42.5° F. Furthermore, the lowest temperature found was in only one or two limited areas. The exact examination of these places demonstrated the presence of an inflow of seepage water not sufficient in amount to constitute a visible spring or localized at special points, but flowing in over a small area of the bottom in suff- cient quantity to reduce the temperature very noticeably at that point. It should be mentioned in this connection that the tem- peratures are not constant from day to day, for on the follow- ing day, July 23, the stream was about 2° colder, as the tem- perature at the right bank was 42°, in the center 42.5° and at the left bank 39.5° F. On the same day the temperature of the Copper River where the railroad track crossed the east channel was 49° F. It was evident that the stretch of Clear Creek above the trestle was supplied along the left bank constantly and largely with seepage water so that the temperature was kept distinctly Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 401 below that of the stream above, and it was in this section that the fish were most abundant and most actively engaged in nest building, as well as furthest advanced in coloring and conse- quently nearest the spawning period. Above the point where the stream emerges from the marshy region there was de- tected little or no cold water seepage from the bank, and con- sequently the temperature of the water was distinctly higher. The amount of water added to the stream in the way indi- cated must have been considerable, for the volume of Clear Creek where it flows under the trestle is apparently at least twice as great as where it emerges from the swampy area, a mile or two above the trestle. These facts serve to explain that the situation in the stream accords with the movement of the salmon, which kept themselves in the cooler part of the creek and spawned in the section where a steady inflow of cold water gave the minimum temperatures found in the stream. Although this spring-fed region is the coldest area of the water during the summer season, it will evidently be the most stable and hence the warmest during the winter. According to the testimony of men familiar with the region, this part of the stream remains open until very late in the year and does not freeze over until long after other waters are solidly covered with ice. Evidently also the gravels in the vicinity of springs are least likely to become frozen and hence afford greatest pro- tection to the developing eggs. Jordan and Evermann (1904) state that freezing kills the eggs, and if any areas in this region avoid that condition in the long, severe winter, it must be the gravel beds in which springs emerge. On the west side of the Copper River valley at a distance of 20 or 30 miles from the stream and about 150 miles from the mouth of the Copper River are three large lakes that have been said to be important spawning grounds for the red sal- mon. These three are lakes Tonsina, Klutina, and Tazlina. Lake Tonsina is the farthest south and the smallest. Lake Tazlina lies 50 miles northwest of it and is the largest. Lake 402 American Fisheries Society Klutina, located midway between, is intermediate in size. The lakes are alike in being crescentic in form, surrounded, at least in part, by mountains and fed by the run-off of great glaciers. The two larger lakes are 20 to 30 miles long and 5 to 6 miles in maximum breadth. The upper horn of the crescent points pretty nearly east and gives rise to a stream which is the out- let of the lake. The other horn points nearly straight south into the mountains and is in connection with large glaciers. Each lake has several lateral tributaries. In each case certain of these tributaries carry salmon and afford spawning grounds for them, whereas others are without these fish. A stream known as Saint Anne Creek enters Klutina Lake from the northwest. This stream was visited twice during our stay in that region. Our visits fell fortunately at times that yielded important results for the general problem under discussion. Saint Anne Creek is a small stream which enters from the northwest ap- proximately at the center of the outer curve of the crescent of Lake Klutina. It drains a considerable body of shallow water known as Saint Anne Lake, which is located about six or eight miles from Lake Klutina and is about four miles long by one mile wide. The stream has a gentle fall over a gravelly bottom without rapids or serious obstructions. While the depth does not vary greatly, the creek forms a succession of small curves, in the elbow of which a deeper, more quiet area alternates with the shallower, swifter stretches connecting the quiet pools. We first visited this creek on August 10, passing up through the stream bed a distance of three miles or more. A large number of spawning fish were seen. The shallow stretches along the inside of the curves made by the stream were cov- ered with dead fish. While many of these fish had been par- tially eaten by bears, the majority of them were relatively fresh. This stream has a broad and shallow delta in front of it, so that the water spreads out widely before coming in contact Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 403 with the main body of the lake. At the time of our visit the current in the outlet was gentle, so that the mingling of the waters with the lake waters must have been very gradual, and this could be followed by the eye since the creek carried clear water whereas the lake waters were milky. No evidence was found at this time that any fish were entering the creek from the lake or were waiting around the mouth of the creek. At this time the temperatures taken were as follows: In the lake 100 yards from shore and an equal distance below the mouth of the creek, 49.5° F.; 100 yards above the mouth of the creek, 48.5°; in the creek 250 yards from the mouth, 47° F. On the following day we went to the head of Lake Klutina and did not return until August 19. On that date a trip up Saint Anne Creek a distance of two miles showed that the spawning fish which had been abundant in the bends eight days before had almost entirely disappeared. Only a very few spent fish were still alive. Furthermore, the dead fish which were on hand in large numbers on the shallows had been eaten on the spot or dragged away, so that only scant traces were left of the very considerable numbers conspicuous at the previous visit, and the visible remains were mostly skele- tons picked clean. It would have been difficult for anyone who visited the creek on August 19 to have made any accurate esti- mate of the actual number of fish which were spawning there only a few days before. Fish were still passing up the lake in large numbers, and apparently going by the mouth of this creek. There was no evidence that any had entered the creek recently or were inclined to consider using the stream as a spawning ground. This instance indicates very clearly that a single visit to a stream, unless it occurs at a time that is distinctly favorable, may give a false impression concerning the utilization of the stream for spawning purposes or the size of the run that visits this particular spawning ground. It will be noted that during the time between our visits the volume of the outflow 404 ‘ American Fisheries Society of the stream had also decreased considerably, for we were able to ford the creek at the mouth, where on the previous visit the water had been 12 to 15 inches deeper and fording was impossible. Later we visited Saint Anne Lake and a study of the con- ditions there indicated clearly a marked and constant reduc- tion in volume and a gradual rise in temperature during the period just before our arrival at the lake. For a considerable period the weather had been clear and sunny with very little rain. The general aspect of the country shows that Saint _ Anne Creek gets the major part of its volume from the lake and only a smaller amount from lateral tributaries. The lake lies in the flat land distant from the mountains, and can not be in receipt of a constant supply of cold water from melting snows. When the winter snows have mostly melted and the storms of early summer are at an end, the water level of the lake stands at its maximum height and the outlet creek carries its greatest volume of water. The lower end of the lake near the outlet, a stretch of two or three miles in length, is very shallow and had warmed up considerably in comparison with the other waters we had tested. In consequence, at the time of our visit its temperature stood at 55° F. Colder water was running into the creek at various places along its course, and the volume of this inflow was sufficient to reduce the tem- perature of the stream below that of the lake when the dis- charge from the lake was reduced in volume. During the warm sunny days which characterized this period there was opportunity for the water in the creek to become distinctly warmer than it had been earlier in the year. This evident change in temperature, of which we observed the last stage only, was associated with the cessation of the red salmon run and the termination of the spawning by that species in its waters. The study of the situation at the head of Lake Klutina, which I have discussed in detail in another place, showed that Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 405 at the time when the fish had evidently just stopped turning into Saint Anne Creek they were just beginning to locate on the spawning grounds at the head of Lake Klutina. We were exceedingly fortunate in having made by chance our visits to these places at the time when the shift was taking place. Ac- cording to our observations, then, one may provisionally state the movement of the fish through this section in the following brief form: Those red salmon which, coming up the Klutina River, follow along the left bank of Lake Klutina (the outside of the crescent), turn first into Saint Anne Creek and only later, when the lessened volume of that stream and its rising temperature fail to bring them under the influence of a direc- tive stimulus, do they pass towards the head of the lake, where they meet stimuli attracting them to the spawning grounds in that region. In the selection of spawning grounds temperature also appears to play an important part. A single illustration will suffice here to show the general conditions which I have dis- cussed more fully elsewhere. At the head of Lake Klutina a series of low, irregular projections of the shore create a succession of small inlets or sloughs. These are highly vari- able in form and size. They resemble each other in physical conditions as far as these are discernible by the eye. They are not separated from each other by any considerable dis- tance, and there is no physical barrier which would direct the fish towards one rather than another, unless it be the cur- rent coming from numerous small channels of the rivers emptying into the lake at this end. However, these channels and their currents are related to the sloughs in variable fashion so that it was not easy to detect any constant difference in the influence that they might exert upon the situation. In some of the sloughs red salmon were spawning or build- ing nests. In others there was no trace of fish at the present time and no evidence that they had frequented the spot previ- ously. Along this bluntly rounded end of the lake the tem- 406 American Fisheries Society perature of the surface water was 49° to 50° F. In the sloughs where the fish were spawning the temperature was from 37° to 40° F. It should be noted also that the water in these particular sloughs was brilliantly clear in striking con- trast with the milky water of the lake and more brilliant than the relatively clear water in the other sloughs. A study of bottom conditions showed that the places where spawning was taking place were the seat of small bottom springs or a steady general seepage not sufficient to produce any visible current, but enough in calm weather to extend the influence of the. clear waters well out into the milky waters of the lake proper. Some of these indentations of the shore were branching, and the different branches were distinguished again by tem- perature only. No place was found where the fish entered the branches which conform in general temperature to the lake, and no branch was found in which the temperature of the water was distinctly below that of the lake in general that did not have at the time of our visit some fish spawning or building nests and showing by their color that the period of sexual maturity was at hand. Some of the small channels running into the lake at this point were distinctly cooler than some of the inlets and com- parable in temperature with the others, as they registered levels of 37.5° and 38° F. We ascended one of these channels and encountered one red salmon in the act of climbing a beaver dam. We were not successful in the time at our dis- posal in reaching the actual spawning grounds on any of these tributaries. PHYSICAL CONDITION OF SPAWNING SALMON The condition of fish on arrival at the spawning grounds has been vividly described by different observers. In the main they have emphasized the fact that during the migration the salmon suffers conspicuous injuries, and often arrives at the spawning grounds in a very dilapidated condition. It was interesting to compare with such statements the condition of Ward.—Miugration of the Sockeye Salmon 407 fish as observed both on Lake Klutina and on Lake Tazlina. Nowhere were the fish appreciably mutilated; in fact, I do not recall a single instance in which a living fish showed marks that were the result of a struggle with the stream. Despite the fierce current of the Copper River, the strenuous passage of the Abercrombie Rapids, and the still more violent condi- tions of the Klutina or Tazlina River, the fish that we caught alive in the lakes or saw on the spawning grounds adjacent to them were in perfect condition. It is true, to be sure, that at no point in the course which they have followed was it necessary for these fish to contend with falls. I have dis- cussed elsewhere the jumping of the salmon, and have called attention to the fact that their work is by no means as perfect as sometimes supposed. The facts are that when salmon are striving to surmount a fall not more than a small fraction of the jumps is successful, and many of the efforts result in dashing the fish, against the face of the fall or on rocks stand- ing in the stream bed at the foot of the drop. From such adventures the fish drift away stunned, and require some time to recover their wonted activity. They are also badly battered by the collision and in some cases suffer so that they are un- able to carry out the migration and reach the spawning ground. The extent to which migrating salmon suffer from this has been vividly described by several observers, including Ever- mann* and Rutter. It is not to be wondered that the efforts of the fish in leaping are relatively so little successful, for the base from which they take off is a most inconstant and swiftly changing one as the different currents in the water swing in eddies to and fro at the base of the fall. One has only to watch conditions there to see the difficulties under which the jumping fish labor, and to get a full explanation of the con- dition of the fish as a result of its many attempts to surmount the barrier. Now the effort to ascend a rapid may be unsuc- cessful also and even the maximum expenditure of energy * Evermann (1897) holds the view that these bruises are received after arriyal at the spawning grounds. While this is largely true, it is not universal by any means. 408 American Fisheries Society may result in the failure of the salmon to reach the spawning ground, but this failure is not the result of injury such as comes from the failure to make the falls at a given leap. It is, then, readily inferable that streams in which rapids form the barrier to migration are on the whole more favorable for the salmon than those which are barred by falls. One may even go one step further and suggest that at times a little human labor might greatly improve conditions for the salmon run in a given stream, if the worst natural obstructions were removed or made less difficult by the con- struction of an artificial pathway around the obstacle. The older idea that struggle is essential for adequate production of physical vigor doubtless has its basis in fact, but it is sub- ject to limitations also, and under reasonable conditions our domestic animals, which are protected from dangers and from too great physical effort, yield a much larger return to the human race than ever was secured from range animals. I think it is not unreasonable to look forward to the time in the near future when certain salmon streams, at least those which are peculiarly significant in connection with the spawning of the salmon, shall be so handled as to simplify and expedite the migration of the fish, enabling them to reach the spawning grounds in better condition than they do with the stream as it stands. The investigations of Canadian officials have within recent years shown most conclusively how the additional ob- stacles which were inadvertently introduced into the channel of the Fraser River have worked havoc with the salmon run of that stream and have prevented an unfortunately large per- centage of the salmon entering that stream from reaching their spawning grounds. The readjustment of conditions at this point, which was provided for by the action of the fisheries officials, is precisely in line with what I have suggested for the removal of serious obstacles existing naturally in that or other streams. A comparison of the fish in the spawning grounds of Lake Klutina and Lake Tazlina with those which Ward.—Miugration of the Sockeye Salmon 409 visit some other places, indicates clearly the difference in the expenditure of energy on the trip from the sea. It was not merely with respect to the absence of disfiguring wounds that the salmon of these lakes commanded our special attention. They were plump and full-meated, the flesh firmer and the body less wasted than in the case of salmon at corre- sponding periods of sexual maturity in other regions. It would be unwise to attribute the perfect condition of these fish solely to the favorable character of the highway that had served as the route for their migration. These northern waters are also radically lower in temperature than the waters of more southerly streams, and that factor must certainly have been of some influence. It may also be that the fish at the start of their migration were in better condition, more richly supplied with reserve material, and more vigorous in general than those in other regions. In order to test the char- acter of the flesh, we tried a fully ripe fish on the spawning grounds, and found that the flesh, though not comparable with that of a fish in prime condition, was still possessed of the salmon flavor and in every way thoroughly palatable. One other item is worthy of note with reference to the condition of these fish. Among the dead specimens which were thrown up on shore were found a number of females in which the eggs were not yet fully discharged. Such fish were frequent enough to attract our attention. They seemed on examination to be in good physical condition; the substance ~of the body was not in any apparent way more wasted than that of other fish that were fully spawned out; the eggs them- selves were ripe, apparently not matted, attached, or in any way mechanically prevented from reaching the exterior; so that one was entirely at a loss to suggest why in this case an amount of eggs totaling in the extreme perhaps one-fourth or one-fifth of the entire egg mass should have remained in the body not discharged by the process of spawning. 410 American Fisheries Society DESTRUCTION OF SALMON BY NATURAL ENEMIES Much has been said and written by various persons regard- ing the destructive tendencies of some animals that naturally prey upon the salmon for food. Among the enemies thus charged with responsibility for the decrease in the numbers of red salmon are eagles, gulls and bears. Under the terms of a law placing a bounty on eagles, some 15,000 have been slaughtered in Alaska during the past four years. It is possible that these birds take occasional toll of the living fish during the migration, but it is certainly infrequent and constitutes in total an altogether insignificant factor in proportion to the number of migrating salmon and the number destroyed by other means. The gulls pick out the eyes of salmon thrown on the bank by fishermen or of spawned-out fish floating about or cast upon the shore. They also sometimes dig into the body of dead fish to get the liver or such eggs as may not have been discharged. Of course, it is possible that under peculiar cir- cumstances they may attack living salmon but ordinarily any such action is impossible. In any event they exercise no ap- preciable influence on the situation. The depredations of the bears are more significant. As I have described elsewhere (Ward, 1919) their behavior when feeding on salmon at the spawning grounds, that element in the situation may be summarized briefly here. The bears there catch and eat chiefly if not solely the spawned-out and dead fish which are floating in the stream or are thrown on the shores, and they do not molest appreciably the spawning fish. Perhaps this condition is modified by food scarcity such as would be associated evidently with a very scanty run of fish, but I have no evidence of any kind to support such a view. Where the salmon run up small streams or where the water is shallow and conditions favorable, a bear may indulge in the sport of tossing the active fish out on the bank and have a good many fish distributed over the scenery so that it looks as if the destruction wrought had been considerable. From an individual standpoint it evidently is, and no observer can help Ward.—Miugration of the Sockeye Salmon 411 be astonished and dismayed at the sight if he chance to stumble on such a place and to see a lot of fine fish scattered over the grass or among the bushes alongside of the stream. But a little analysis will serve to show the relation of the occurrence to the salmon run in a fairer light. The places on any stream where this can happen are not numerous, the days on which it is possible are certainly few, stages of water, hours of day- light and periods of salmon migration being duly considered ; and finally the bears are after all few in number. In conse- quence the total loss due to the work of the bears is not large in comparison with the number of fish that visit a given stream. It is unquestionably much less than the losses due to low water, or the accidental obstruction of a stream. It is trivial compared to the toll of fish taken for commercial pur- poses and could be made good several times over if only part of the wastage in the commercial fisheries were eliminated. REGULATION OF SALMON FISHERIES The bearing of these facts on the questions of fish con- servation, the effective regulations that should be adopted, and the degree to which their enforcement is essential, can be set down in brief form. Among the various plans which have been adopted in dif- ferent places to regulate salmon fisheries and to permit the adequate visitation of the spawning grounds, is one to allow intensive fishing up to certain limits and to stop the taking of fish at that time so that the remainder of the run may reach the spawning ground unhindered. The limits set have some- times conformed to the calendar, so that fishing was permitted within certain dates and absolutely prohibited before and after the limit, or the restriction' may have taken the form of limit- ing the pack, so that a fixed catch or definite output was granted to the cannerymen, and when that limit had been reached all fishing was stopped, so that the salmon arriving subsequently passed unhindered up the stream. There are evident difficulties in this procedure, and some 412 American Fisheries Society of them seem to be very serious. It is clear that in the period in which fishing is permitted, the taking of fish will be pursued with maximum intensity and every effort be made to secure the largest possible number of fish during the open season. If all the fish that entered a given stream were bound for the same spawning ground and if conditions for their progress upstream and for the deposit of eggs at the spawning ground were uniform at all periods, then this method would only have the disadvantage that if fishing were practiced too assiduously during the period of maximum movement or if by weather conditions the run of salmon were concentrated more nar- rowly than usual, then the percentage of the total run that would be taken might easily exceed that which was desirable. Many observers have noted the fact that when weather con- ditions hold back the fish, because especially of low water in the streams, and then abundant rains cause the streams to rise suddenly, the fish will go up with a rush. This is a char- acteristic phenomenon in southeastern Alaska on the smaller streams. It means that the fish are schooled longer than usual in the estuaries, and because of their having been brought to- gether can be seined more easily and the complete run be caught with the minimum effort. The case is somewhat different in those large rivers pro- vided with numerous spawning grounds. Here the stage of water plays a very minor part, and significant fluctuations are not noticed in the lower courses of the stream. Furthermore, in such cases the migration continues over a much more ex- tended period of time. The evidence which I have given from our studies on the Copper River substantiates fully the ob- servations of Gilbert and Babcock on the Fraser River. The fish which start first are bound to one spawning ground, and those which follow at subsequent intervals are distributed over other spawning territory. In such an instance as this, to per- mit intensive fishing during the early part of the run would eliminate from reproduction a very large proportion of those going to a particular spawning place, and might indeed sub- Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 413 ject that portion of the run to total extinction. Our experi- ence with reference to the conditions at Lake Klutina and especially with that part of the Klutina run which spawns in Saint Anne Creek is most illuminating. We did not see this run start, but we were on hand to witness its cessation. All of the fish which came after a certain date went to other spawn- ing grounds, and the fish which spawned in Saint Anne Creek were taken from that portion of the run which reached this place before August 19, approximately. If intensive fishing had been permitted during the time when these fish were pass- ing the canyon, it is not difficult to see that the number which escaped and passed up to this spawning ground might have been reduced practically to zero. Intensive fishing within a limited period is evidently equally dangerous if practiced out- side the mouth of a river or on the coastal flats over which the salmon approach a spawning stream. It is evident that where the limit is set upon the number of fish which may be captured or the number of cases of fish which may be put up, much the same conditions will result. It is of course in the interests of any commercial organiza- tion to take its catch in the minimum possible time, and to handle it with the maximum efficiency and _ expedition. Thereby the cost of the work will be reduced to the lowest figure and the profits be correspondingly increased. The method of limiting the catch by quantity protects the run of fish against the possibility that if the run happens to be con- centrated by weather conditions, seining within a limited pe- riod may secure much more than the amount that was planned for removal; and a quantity limitation on the catch, if rightly related to the total run, permits the escape of an adequate num- ber of spawning fish, so that the spawning beds may be prop- erly seeded. Nevertheless, the quantitative limitation is open to the seri- ous objection that it does not take into account any unusual fluctuations of the run. Even if adequate allowance be made for the normal and usual variations in the number of fish 414 American Fisheries Society ascending a given stream, it is evident that the number of fish taken under a permit based upon such a calculation may easily be distinctly excessive in those exceptional years when for some unknown cause the run of fish drops well below the average minimum. The taking of a set number in such a year may reduce the run to dangerously low margins, and seri- ously encroach on the normal yield of those waters. If a quantitative limitation is to be placed upon the fisher- ies, it must be set so low that in the exceptional year enough fish can get by the fishermen to insure the maintenance of the run in the stream, and if there is a series of imperfectly sepa- rated waves of migration in the general run of that stream, then regulations must be so phrased that they will prevent the extermination or even the serious reduction of the run to any single spawning ground. The catch of fish can be distributed equally over the groups of salmon that seek to spawn in dif- ferent places only when the fishing is more or less continuously carried on throughout the period of the migration and is so limited that no single wave of movement can be deprived of an undue proportion of its fish. Intensive fishing during a limited period 1s unwise. THE PERMANENT PRESERVATION OF THE SALMON One other point of fundamental importance enters natur- ally into this discussion and that is the formulation of a per- manent policy with reference to perpetuation of the salmon. Evidently with the development of the country and the larger utilization of its timber and of its surface for agricultural purposes and with the modifications which the streams will thereby necessarily undergo, it will become impossible to pre- serve everywhere and fully the favorable conditions that exist in the wilderness for the spawning of the salmon. The in- crease in population and insistent demands for more land and for the utilization to their fullest extent of all natural re- sources, must and will change conditions rapidly so far as the streams are concerned. When timber is cut off and large areas Ward.—Maigration of the Sockeye Salmon 415 of land are devoted to agricultural purposes, the volume of the streams will diminish. As lakes are dammed to make reservoirs for irrigation or for hydro-electric power, spawn- ing grounds will be necessarily covered and areas that were formerly resorted to regularly will become unsuitable for the spawning of salmon. It will evidently be impossible to pre- serve exclusively for the use of the fish all of the streams and all of the spawning grounds upon which they were de- pendent under natural conditions. Of course, fish culturists and all of those interested in the preservation of the fish fauna and in the utilization of this important type of food will exert every influence to keep con- ditions so that spawning may continue to be possible on the old grounds. It is not my thought at all to suggest that the arbitrary changing of channels or filling of streams should be approved, or that the building of dams without fishways should be countenanced. Unnecessary waste and easily avoid- able losses should be guarded against constantly so that our magnificent natural resources in fish life may not be wan- tonly destroyed. Least of all would any thoughtful person seek to excuse the sins of cities and of manufacturing plants which are pouring immense amounts of city sewage or of in- dustrial wastes into streams and are reducing fertile aquatic feeding grounds to barren and loathsome aquatic deserts. The barbarous practices of commonly passing the expenses of the city or of the industry on to those who have rights on the stream lower down, or would utilize it for rational pleasure and profit, deserve the severest condemnation and should be done away with by legal measures and at the earliest pos- sible date. | However, if all of these unreasonable and avoidable de- structive tendencies have been eliminated, there still remain legitimate and unavoidable limitations set by the changed con- ditions which will modify the water courses frequented by the salmon sufficiently to exert a serious influence upon the supply 416 American Fisheries Society of these fish. So long as rivers flow through a wilderness and so long as the population in the contiguous areas is not large, we may hope to preserve the runs in all their natural wealth and variety. But when the changes come it will be necessary to adopt other plans, and before that time arrives it is wise to consider what policy is to be followed with reference to the new conditions. It is evident that the short streams with exceedingly limited drainage areas and a brief course from the lake, in which the red salmon spawn, to the ocean from whence the adult fish came, will be the most readily preserved. Under this heading come many streams of importance for the red salmon in British Columbia and southeastern Alaska. On the other hand, long rivers with extensive drainage basins and complex systems of tributaries will offer the greatest difficulties. In this class fall particularly the Fraser River in British Co- lumbia and the Copper River in Alaska. The situation is somewhat the same on the Columbia River and possibly also on the Yukon, with which I am not personally familiar. Per- haps there are also other streams that approximate the same conditions. In the Fraser River a careful study extending over a series of years has been made of the spawning grounds, and the character of those areas, as well as the number of fish by which they were visited, has been pretty definitely determined. Full data are given by Babcock (1914) and Gilbert (1914). A recent examination has shown that even now some of the spawning grounds are practically unvisited since the fish which would normally seek those areas have been killed off. Now the causes which are responsible for the destruction of these fish, and thus for the total elimination of part of the run of the river, are unfortunate in the highest degree because an earlier recognition of the situation and a more perfect co- operation between all of the interests involved might have spared us this great loss. However, as outlined above, the Ward.—Miugration of the Sockeye Salmon 417 result is much the same that must be expected with the de- velopment of any such region. Even the Copper River which flows through an area as yet almost unutilized, and drains a region in which the population is exceedingly scanty, has been affected by similar conditions which are already recognizable. This is illustrated by my ex- perience at Chitina. A small creek flows down from two small lakes in the valley a short distance above the town and empties into the Copper River a mile or more below it. The stream is never more than 4 to 8 feet wide and 6 to 10 inches deep. At several points in the town and just above it the course of the creek is nearly blocked so that it was evidently difficult for the fish to work their way up. Indeed, at one point at least it was absolutely barricaded by a mass of brush and rub- bish that had been dumped into the water, and fish no longer spawned in the lake above to which, according to the reports of residents, they had formerly resorted. Drip and waste from a large oil tank on the railroad south of the town had at times, according to reports, spread over that part of the stream and must have done real damage to the aquatic life in the small lake which the creek has formed there. This is a serious menace to the salmon fry that hatch in this stream. The salmon run in Chitina Creek is thus threatened at two points in the life cycle of the fish, viz., the spawning of the adult and the growth of the fry, and unless prompt attention is given to the problem this portion of the Copper River run will soon be only a matter of history. The town is very small and of most recent origin, and the incident serves to show how very early the effects of settlement are observable on salmon streams. A rational policy must recog- nize such situations and decide in advance on the action to be taken; otherwise the total destruction of the salmon will be surely though gradually, and perhaps insensibly, brought about by the elimination successively of individual units in the run of a given stream. 418 American Fisheries Society It is to be recognized then that ultimately the preserva- tion of all the spawning grounds, or even of all the streams, will inevitably become impossible and that the conservationist and fish culturist will be forced to formulate a policy for the handling of the problem. In view of this I think all will agree that it is important to do the fundamental work essential at the earliest feasible date and to outline the policy, as well as analyze and discuss its details, before the situation becomes so serious that action must be taken promptly, and while ade- quate time is still available for careful study of the situation. It seems to me that the very first step in laying the founda- tion for this policy in the future must be to make a thorough survey of all the salmon streams after the manner in which this work has been conducted on the Columbia, the Fraser, and possibly a few other rivers, so that complete and accurate information is at hand concerning the size of the run, the pre- cise course or courses followed by the fish in their migration, the period during which the migration takes place, and the actual spawning grounds to which the fish resort. No less than the information obtained by such a careful survey will show the relative importance of all the factors that enter into the situation or enable the fish expert to determine the relative value of different parts of the stream or of difficult runs in it. Thus if reduced stream flow be the serious factor in the changed conditions with which the fish have to contend, then that part of the run which seeks to make its way to the spawn- ing grounds at the time when the river is sure to be low and decreasing in volume, is much more susceptible to the danger, and consequently much more difficult to preserve than another portion of the run which is so timed in its movements that its migration is completed before the low water should Le feared, or which does not start until after danger from such a condition has passed. Such an example shows very clearly also the need of determining all the conditions for the par- ticular stream in question since some streams derive their water Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 419 supply from territory that is well furnished with ground water during the early part of the summer and scantily supplied later in the season, whereas other streams that have their sources in snow fields or glaciers are dependent for water changes upon the effect of summer temperature in melting these fields and upon the area of the fields themselves, since the period of abundant supply by both factors would be determined. Not only each river basin but even each important tributary would constitute to a considerable degree an independent problem, and the record of all the facts in the case would be essential for the formulation of a permanent policy regarding the preser- vation of the salmon run in that stream, or of any part of it. Very evidently one of the serious dangers which the red salmon have to face is the commercial utilization of the streams which they visit. The erection of immense dams and the transformation of large stretches above them into reservoirs so that the water may be used for irrigation or hydro-electric power, is a most serious menace to the salmon runs in such a stream. In many cases it will be apparently necessary to choose between the destruction of the salmon and the abandonment of the project for utilizing the water in the stream. This is by no means a simple problem from the stand- point of general public welfare. To be sure the practice of engineers seems to have omitted from consideration entirely the question of the fish supply of the stream and the fact that it also is valuable. Water rights have been acquired and in some instances utilized without even a superficial attempt to relieve the situation by constructing a fishway that might be made use of by the migrating salmon.* In many instances, however, even the most perfect pro- vision of this sort would be inadequate and it is difficult to see how an effective fishway could be constructed on any plan yet proposed that would surmount a dam behind which the impounded water varied greatly in level. When the size and * For a conspicuous instance of this and the evidence associated with it, see the article on the Atlantic and Pacific Salmon (Ward, 1920 a). 420 American Fisheries Society quality of the salmon run justifies it, new installations may prove adequate to preserve the fish even under the adverse conditions outlined. The migrating salmon will collect at the foot of the dam and mature there; they can be stripped and the eggs after fertilization cared for in a hatchery located either above or below the dam wherever conditions for its mainte- nance are most favorable. Should conditions below the dam be such that the fish can not be held and ripened, then it is feasible, I believe, though more complex, to solve the problem by lifting them over the dam. JI have rough sketches of a carrier I designed for this purpose which has been pronounced practicable and not ex- pensive to operate at such a point. Some experiments are necessary to determine its success in actual operation but I am sure the situation is not hopeless as some incline to believe. Such a carrier is readily adjustable to differences in water level above the dam. The handling of the young fish from such a hatchery in- volves some complex questions. They could, of course, be planted easily in the new water body created by the dam, and if distributed rationally, would probably find adequate food and protection, though, of course, a careful study should be made of the new environment beforehand and of the salmon fry after planting. The outlet of such an artificial lake must be fully protected, since either irrigation ditches or the turbine of a hydro-electric plant would destroy the young fish. Such protective measures are not difficult to provide, but must evi- dently be kept in perfect condition during the danger period. Furthermore, provision must be made at the proper time to lift the young fish over the dam and release them in the stream below that they may continue their migration seaward. Of course it may be possible to plant the fry in another natural lake where conditions are favorable for their growth and where the outlet stream offers no dangerous obstacles to their natural movement towards salt water when the proper Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 421 time comes. But in my opinion such a lake, if its utilization is to be successful, should not be nearer the sea than the orig- inal home of these red salmon fry, nor less abundantly sup- plied with their proper food, nor unfavorably affected by lack of protected areas, abundance of predatory fish, or tem- perature changes towards which the fry react unfavorably. Otherwise they may be destroyed or be stimulated to migrate too easily, and Gilbert has shown that salmon entering the sea prematurely must perish since they never return to spawn. In case it is not feasible to install a hatchery and care for the eggs of the salmon that have been held up below the dam, then they certainly should be enabled in some way to pass this obstruction since they cannot spawn naturally below it, and to prevent their going up stream farther will inevitably result in the destruction of the run. This was demonstrated on a grand scale with the Atlantic salmon more than a century ago and no further experiments are needed to establish the fact (Jordan and Evermann, 1902:164). It must be confessed that under the changed conditions the results are uncertain in any case. The introduction of a new water body of large area in most cases has modified natural conditions greatly. The fish will not be directed by the same stimuli that controlled them before; the current is greatly reduced or entirely lacking, and the tem- perature certainly highly modified so that the behavior of the salmon cannot be foretold. But when the new lake has not covered the original spawning grounds, one may expect the fish to reach them and to spawn naturally. In this case it will be necessary to protect the outlet of the artificial lake and to lift the young salmon over the dam when on their down- stream migration they reach that point. But, as suggested above, even this type of situation is fraught with uncertainties. The impounding of a huge mass of water and the formation of a great artificial lake has modified biological conditions fun- damentally. The depth of the water, the current, the char- acter of the bottom, type of materials in suspension and pos- sibly also in solution, and the temperatures of the water at dif- 422 American Fisheries Society ferent times and places have undergone striking changes, so that it is impossible to predict their influence on the move- ments of the fish. Still further complications are introduced if the new lake covers up the original spawning grounds of the salmon. No evidence has been adduced to show that the red salmon spawn elsewhere than in shallow areas contiguous to the shores of the lake. I have cited above some of the evidence to show that the spawning grounds selected are not only shallow areas of suitable material, but are also locations at which one finds an influx of colder water, reducing the temperature at the spawning period below that of adjacent waters. It is perhaps unlikely that they can find new areas of precisely similar character, and certainly the range of adaptability in the selec- tion of a spawning ground, while unknown, is not likely to be great. However, if the lake made by the dam has covered up the area on which the fish were wont to spawn it is wise to determine experimentally whether they can find another equally fit place or be able to accommodate themselves at all to the new conditions. Nevertheless, after all these possibili- ties are taken into account, I fear that in some instances one will still be compelled to face the unfortunate dilemma that was suggested above: If the fish are to be preserved the pro- ject for the utilization of the stream water must be abandoned, or, if the stream is to be utilized according to the plans of the engineers, the salmon run will be destroyed. There is, of course, the possibility that in some mechanical fashion the fish could be diverted from the channel which had been their natural route of migration for an unknown period and thus led to ascend some other tributary which would carry them up to a possible spawning ground, and that in the end this new ground might prove suitable, or at least sufficiently so to preserve in part the run of fish. Some experiments have been interpreted as indicating that the red salmon could be forced by circumstances to select new spawning grounds and that these would prove to be adequate for the perpetuation of Ward.—Miugration of the Sockeye Salmon 423 the species, but the data are involved and scanty and it would be venturesome at the present to maintain that the experimen- tal evidence is really sufficient to establish the possibility of thus modifying the habits of fish. It has occurred to me as a very interesting possibility that the physical conditions, especially as regards the temperature of water, might be so radically modified by the erection of a great dam, and impounding of a vast area of water, that as a result the fish would find at some junction point in the stream different relative temperature conditions from those that had existed previous to the erection of the dam and the creation of the reservoir. If conditions should be thus changed and the views which I have advanced concerning the directive influence of temperature be correct, then the migration path would be changed, naturally as it were, and the fish would follow to parts of the stream which they had never visited before. I have devoted considerable time and space to the analysis of the problems presented by the erection of dams since I be- lieve it to be the most serious and immediate danger which faces the salmon in fresh water in some regions. Overfishing can be regulated by law and the run of salmon brought back to a normal level, or at least very greatly increased so that in my opinion the fished-out streams on the Pacific Coast can be restored by appropriate measures. In making this predic- tion, I am not unmindful of the fact that in the United States and particularly in Alaska the laws governing the fisheries are “obsolete and jinadequate,’ and their enforcement is quite difficult. But some day and most unexpectedly the tide will turn and under sane control the salmon run in those depleted streams will be nursed back to life. Stream pollution, also, which now seems to be at its maximum, will be corrected and aquatic habitats will slowly return to a normal condition. But the wave of development which is just beginning to affect broadly the water power possibilities of the country will bring rapidly changes that are permanent and so radical that unless 424 American Fisheries Society plans are promptly worked out to meet the situation the sal- mon will be exterminated in the streams affected and the fate of the Atlantic salmon in the Connecticut River be repeated on the Pacific Coast.* The value of any particular run of red salmon depends not only on possibility of maintaining the stream as a fish pre- serve, or of protecting the fish against the changes involved in the utilization of the water for one purpose or another, but also on the condition of the fish on their arrival at the spawn- ing grounds. This may be due in some degree to the length of the trip from the sea to the spawning grounds but it is more largely determined by the character of the stream. If the salmon have to surmount difficult falls and tumultuous rapids, if they must at points fight against a current that is almost insurmountable and are held up by narrows that can be traversed only at certain stages of water, then they are likely to reach the spawning grounds battered and torn, and with energy largely spent. In fact as stated above, in extreme cases a certain percentage of the run does not succeed in sur- mounting these natural obstacles and so never reaches the spawning grounds or discharges its reproductive function. Evidently then an important factor in determining the proper policy is the character of the stream in so far as it determines the condition of the fish and their ability to reach the spawn- ing grounds. It is, of course, feasible to improve a given stream by blasting away rocks or buildng artificial pools as rest- ing places for fish at difficult falls and rapids. Such improve- ments have been made and have proved very valuable in a few cases but in general it is not possible to meet the expense of making over a difficult stream. In determining the relative value of salmon streams one * Since this paper was prepared I have received a work by James Ritchie on “The Influence of Man on Animal Life in Scotland’? in which these questions are discussed and evidence presented in a remarkably vivid fashion to show the in- fluence of river obstructions on Scottish salmon fisheries and of the river pollution also on the same species. The discussion is illustrated by two striking maps. No one interested in these problems should fail to consult Dr. Ritchie’s volume. Ward.—Migration of the Sockeye Salmon 425 must consider also in addition to the foregoing certain other factors such as the magnitude of the run, the average size of the individuals which compose it, the color and richness of the flesh, and similar well-recognized differences between red sal- mon in different streams. These are too well known to need special consideration here. The program, then, for the permanent handling of the problem of the Pacific salmon will involve a survey of the territory concerned, the assignment of a definite value to each stream and each spawning ground, and the adjustment of con- flicting interests so that the conservation of the important natural fishery resource is not overlooked or neglected in the development of commercial enterprises or in the subjugation of the wilderness to the purposes of settlers. It is of equal importance also to guard the fish against exploitation by fishery interests which are over-anxious for the profits of the present and forgetful of the general public concern for the continuance of the suply on which indeed the perpetuation of the industry is no less clearly dependent. PAPERS CITED BABcock, JOHN P. 1914. The spawning beds of the Fraser. Report, Commissioner of Fisheries, Province of British Columbia, for 1913, pp. 17-38. (Also later papers in same publication.) EveRMANN, Barton W. 1897. A report upon salmon investigations in the headwaters of the Columbia River, in the State of Idaho, in 1895, together with notes upon the fishes observed in that State in 1894 and 1895. Bulletin, U. S. Fish Commission, Vol. XVI, pp. 151-202. GILBERT, CHARLES H. 1914, Contributions to the life history of the sockeye salmon. (No. 1.) Appendix, Report, Commissioner of Fisheries, Province of British Columbia, for 1913, pp. 53-77. (Also later papers in same publication.) Jorpan, Davip Starr, and BaRrToNn W. EveRMANN. 1902. Common: Atlantic salmon. Jn American Food and Game Fishes, pp. 163-168. 1904. Preliminary report of the Alaska Salmon Commission. Fifty- eighth Congress, 2d Session, Doc. No. 477, pp. 3-37. 426 American Fisheries Society RUTTER, CLOUDSLEY. 1903. Natural history of the quinnat salmon. Bulletin, U. S. Fish Commission, Vol. XXII, for 1902, pp. 65-141. Warp, Henry B. 1920. Special investigation of Copper River salmon fishery. In Alaska Fisheries and Fur Industries, for 1919. Appendix IX, Report, U. S. Commissioner of Fisheries, 1919. 1920a. Atlantic and Pacific salmon. Science, n. s., 52:264-266. LIST OF MEMBERS, 1920-1921 (Showing year of election to membership) Honorary Members The President of the United States............... Warren G. HarpING The Governors of the several States: HAN UineATID phe sats) c;-2 apslclsssicvele ste sahs; onsiaterararaiahai sare Ch apars onatearsuarae Tuomas F. Krispy INSEE AOE lam GO OOCC ORME Oe DUD COORD DROOL COUR OOr THomas E, CAMPBELL PN EICATISAG Hee cs clatosa rare le & alee operore ec sinister aisles sisiavclelsitonsterels Cuas. H. BroucH Saray, dere fos rca sNaha: Gauci ales stb oy a Stale ued PS alah, of a tavans b WittiaM D. STEPHENS Golo rec Oe tetera hc cre erat rare e Saks atte rey aerate ara oor arate faransuiade Outrver H. SHouP Commecticutire. Fame can cahh-cthaak mobos umaalne kin oon eae Marcus H. Hotcoms Dela waree gst ciowsstsckee ne tes aoa ee aN nin: ...JOHN G. TOWNSEND, Jr. OE hed eto ch do daha Au ait ee Aa The Ore oem hve idle aid Safar a Harpee A. Cary COORG i. fad hc ad daweds satunewol ee der tilggaatouh diem HucH M. Dorsey aii ais fe Gated am na as Hada ek hha. < a ees Beaks did ep kets D. W. Davis Memes) I (hi-5 dares a ha ntatea demesne Seah daewoo ex Asteleiedhe Frank QO. LownEN ULisnich teU rachis erase ay syayshes teva Mista Ravana aie archoe ena er skate om lareierctaerdte Jas. P. GoopricH OMe atic iara Aevctuls Sue Warne eI Rare LE eae bownalds oe Bah Wma. L. Harpine PAN SGae ie ute chaya thee «occu eee ARMM tet ole od ely ay ht ik Se Henry J. ALLEN Brae BeR oat. Ur otra etary ie ada Oe mak ve eo wae Epw1n P. Morrow PL tSiatitts | faced peee Ase iota) armneaNbanchet star sane ar arop capa arms aye hacer JoHN M. PARKER ARETE Te Olah cdl clan aldde ds Geo natecls tl ities Shoské acai a es Cart E. MILLIKEN Ree LARC eine Ue i Waa unre antennae 5 a Apert C. RITCHIE NA SES ACHAGERES S500 c/o alraiasn Sore ow asae erty ae Sahota doe satent’s CHANNING Cox BAneHigaa frei iis JERS esacrdatade a Varavatavatabaisls) svateles Sictaere areas ALBERT E. SLEEPER Minnesota ..... faaysasch soe a, Media| dcotere, a atte ba hd MUNG wre ew 8 Soke J. A. A. Burnguist PS GESS PLE Vode eas tale Sais Sardi ee Rg PL in thie dk « 5 Lee M. RUSSELL OPE CTETT git aa Rai ee oa ae EE EO ee Deidara es FREDERICK D. GARDNER UR feeaml erg eee, eee aie Ms ing ORR ee AS Ee .»» SAMUEL V. STEWART Be EAS ATi itera cc chraisaaaccnieiuained he bauclas's hs SAMUEL R. McKELVIE Mevaday eu Bas: y Reis faves anerararerthetat arenes a adler )ay diate EmMMET D. BoyLe INSU EM LUREIS MERGE A ole ots sis Sates one, See la tics. y vidi Wale « O2'< Joun H. BArtLettT IVS WUR ors r pete aia sys als eM eRt hoy cibiclalalely Epwarp I. Epwarps Nem Memico he aus Peseta io Ocraviano A. LARRAZOLO New: Yorke o7s.cesceue. PIS BSL ABI IOD 2 SEDI Eee NatHAN L. MILLER North Carolina) acne dh ic cis:s BL Co COA an ICR ca Oren THomas W. BICKETT erties Pakarar acacia st kit is sc az ksccd eee chal OS's be Lynn J. FRAZIER ORIG. eee Se ‘GOES DCEO OTE cae CICLO eR Ee Pea ee gies oa James M. Cox Okighomatrisdapae renee ee Los ssa ok ..+-J. 'B. A. ROBERTSON OPER Dies ie cya eT etic eens coos ous lee diew dees B. W. Otcott Pets il Vamictte ener eee Se te ek os wees exinseubelweae ‘WM. C. Sprout Rhode: Islander mare aire ey iiaviood vis dee wdbis R. Livincston BEECKMAN 428 American Fisheries Society Sicily, Dita rper ae dae he ae oe ili! el PeTER NorBECK Tennessee ree ir ay ane sec eceecincan ee oe Ris a eben ALFRED TAYLOR ORAS ue ReRe Nee ere S21 aig Ea REM SOREN a airtel mie Pat M. NEFF Utah sSeauoes EASA REIS PE eae e TRA et YY 2410 4 RE SIMON BAMBERGER WV GRR CA Ie ea eee ee gos ee ceive side ERR OS PercivAL W. CLEMENT ILS Talent Od bee i cao he Coe ee eee WESTMORELAND DaAvIs (WY Ea a RUPEES ORG oe ile Toke rte ka A a Louis F, Hart West Virginia ....... iy te Gideon Coe eos Aenea Hel ehh fie JoHn J. CoRNWELL RESCUES IS il iain idle BR eiotre wie tete sib ee te OTC On: eee arene E. L. PHILiip MRE RA EINES to, '5- c's 2 aos arceeetoth eRe wate oe RTO OR LIE BECO Ropert D, CAREY 708 AwntTipA, Pror. GREGOIRE, Inspector-General of Fisheries, Bucharest, Roumania. 706 Brsana, ‘(Gruseppe, Lombardy Fisheries Society, Via Rugabello 19, Milan, Italy. 709 Briure Rince Rop anp Gun Crup, Harper’s Ferry, W. Va. 793. Boropin, Nicotas, Petrograd, Russia. 712. CaALpERwoop, W. L., Inspector of Salmon Fisheries for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland. 704. DensicH, Lorp, London, England. ’°89 Fisu ProrecTive ASSOCIATION OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA, 1020 Arch St., Philadelphia, Pa. 406 Grimm, Dr. Oscar, Petrograd, Russia. 704 KisHinouyvE, Dr. K., Imperial University, Tokyo, Japan. 708. KiraHara, Dr. TASAKU, Imperial Fisheries Bureau, Tokyo, Japan. 88 ~Laxe St. CLair SHOOTING AND FisHING CLus, Detroit, Mich. 717. Mercier, Honore, Minister of Colonization, Mines and Fisheries, Quebec, Canada. 709 NaceL, Hon. Cuas., St. Louis, Mo. 795 New York ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF FIsH AND GAME, New York City. 708 Norpgvist, Dr. Oscar FRrirjor, Superintendent of Fisheries, Lund, Sweden. 706 Perrier, Pror. EpMonp, Director Museum of Natural History, Paris, France. 792. VINcCIGUERRA, Pror. Dr. Decio, Director Royal Fish Cultural Station, Rome, Italy. Corresponding Members ’°84. AposToLipes, Pror. Nicoty Cur., Athens, Greece. 87. ARMISTEAD, J. J., Dumfries, Scotland. 04 Ayson, L. F., Commissioner of Fisheries, Wellington, New Zealand. 709 FiecEeL, CHAs., Canea, Crete. 708 HuiccInson, Epuarpo, Consul for Peru, New York City. 784. LanpMaRK, A., Inspector of Norwegian Fresh-Water Fisheries, Christiania, Norway. 84. Marston, R. B., Editor of the Fishing Gazette, London, England. 708 Porreau, CHARNLEY, Lommel, Belgium. 215 mils List of Members 429 RAVERET-WaATTEL, C., Director of Aquicultural Station at Nid-de- Verdier, 20 Rue des Acacias, Paris. Sars, Pror. G. O., Christiania, Norway. Sorsky, Baron N. pz, Director of the Imperial Agricultural Museum, Petrograd, Russia. SteAp, Davin G., Fisheries Department, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Patrons ALASKA PACKERS ASSOCIATION, San Francisco, Calif. ALLEN, Henry F, (Agent, Crown Mills), 210 California St., San Fran- cisco, Calif. American Biscuit Co., 815 Battery St., San Francisco, Calif. AMERICAN CAN Co., Mills Building, San Francisco, Calif. Armour & Co., Battery and Union Sts., San Francisco, Calif, Armssy, J. K., Company, San Francisco, Calif. Attas GAs ENGINE Co., INc., Foot of 22d Avenue, Oakland, Calif. Ba.rour, GUTHRIE & Co., 350 California St., San Francisco, Calif. BANK oF ‘CaAirorniA, N. A., California and Sansome Sts., San Fran- cisco, Calif. BLOEDEL-DoNovAN LumgeER Mitts, Bellingham, Wash. Bonp AND Goopwin, 485 California St., San Francisco, Calif. BurrPEE AND LeEtson, Ltp., South Bellingham, Wash. CALIFORNIA BARREL Co., 22d and Illinois Sts., San Francisco, Calif. CALIFORNIA Door Co., 43 Main St., San Francisco, Calif. (CALIFORNIA STEVEDORE AND BaLLast Co., INc., 210 California St., San Francisco, Calif. CALIFORNIA Wire CLotH Company, San Francisco, Calif. Caswe.t, Geo. W., Co., Inc., 503-4 Folsom St., San Francisco, Calif. Curncy, C. G. & Co., Inc., 144 Davis St., San Francisco, Calif. CorFIN-REDINGTON Co., 35-45 Second St., San Francisco, Calif. CotumBiA River PAcKers AssocraTIon Astoria, Ore. Crane Co. (C. W. Weld, Mgr.), 301 Brannan St., San Francisco, Calif. Donce, SWEENEY & Co., 36-48 Spear St., San Francisco, Calif. First NATIONAL BANK OF BELLINGHAM, Bellingham, Wash. Futter, W. P., & Co., 301 Mission St., San Francisco, Calif. Grays Harzsor CoMMERCIAL Co., Foot of 3d St., San Francisco, Calif. Hennpry, C. J., Co., 46 Clay St., San Francisco, Calif. Jones-THIERBACH \Co., THE, Battery and Merchant Sts., San Fran- cisco, Calif. Knapp, THe Frep H., Co., Arcade-Maryland Casualty Building, Bal- timore, Md. Linen Tureap Co., THE (W. A. Barbour, Mgr.), 443 Mission St., San Francisco, Calif. Martiace, Cuas. F., Company, 335 Greenwich St., New York City. Nauman, C. & Co., 501-3 Sansome St., San Francisco, Calif. 430 American Fisheries Society 5 gh) 15 ‘ld 15 "15 ts) "19 “15 "lp phy Als 15 “1g git) “15 “aS “15 "45 15 ps) 415 16 aS 98 14 08 "tg "92 ec 78 "14 10 Oxiver SAtt Co., Mt. Eden, Calif. Morrison Mitt Co., INnc., Bellingham, Wash. Morse Harpware Co., Inc., 1025 Elk St., Bellingham, Wash. PaciFIc HARDWARE AND STEEL Co., 7th and Townsend Sts., San Fran- cisco, Calif. Paciric States Exectric Co., 575 Mission St., San Francisco, Calif. PHILLIPS SHEET AND TIN PiatE Co., Weirton, W. Va. Pore AND TALBOT, Foot of 3d St., San Francisco, Calif. Pucet Sounp Navication Co., Seattle, Wash. Ray, W. S., Mrc. Co., INc., 216 Market St., San Francisco, Calif. ScHmipt LirHoGRAPH a 2d and Bryants Sts., San Francisco, Calif. SCH WABACHER-FREY we Co., 609-11 Market St., San Fran- cisco, Calif. Suip Owners’ AND MErcHANTS’ Tuc Boat Co., Foot of Green St., San Francisco, Calif. SHERWIN-WILLIAMS Co., THE, 454 Second St., San Francisco, Calif. SmirH CANNERY MAcHINE Co., 2423 South First Avenue, Seattle, Wash. STANDARD GAs ENGINE Co., Dennison and King Sts., Oakland, Calif. STANDARD O1L Co, or CatirorniA, Standard Oil Building, San Fran- cisco, Calif. U. S. Rupper Co. or Catirornia (W. D. Rigdon, Mgr.), 50-60 Fremont St., San Francisco, Calif. U. S. Steet Propucts Co., Rialto Building, San Francisco, Calif. WELLs Farco NaTioNAL BANK oF SAN Francisco, Montgomery and Market Sts., San Francisco, Calif. WESTERN FueEt Co., 430 California St., San Francisco, Calif. WESTERN Meat Co., 6th and Townsend Sts., San Francisco, Calif. Wuirte Bros., 5th and Brannan Sts., San Fancisco, Calif. Active Members Life Members Indicated by Asterisk (*) ApAMs, Pror. CHas. C., State College of Forestry, Syracuse, N. Y. Apams, Wo. C., Director, Division of Fisheries and Game, Boston, Mass. ALEXANDER, GEORGE L., Grayling, Mich. ALEXANDER, M. L., President, Louisiana Conservation Commission, New Orleans, La. Anpverson, Aucust J., Box 704, Marquette, Mich. ANDERSON, Dr. F. E., Red Wing, Minn. Anperson, J. F., 3136 Front St., San Diego, Calif. Anpverson, T, T., Liggett and Myers Tobacco Co., St. Louis, Mo. ANNIN, JAMES, Caledonia, N. Y. ANNIN, HowaArp, Caledonia, N. Y. Aspury Park FIsHinc Cus, John F. Seger, 703 Cookman Ave., As- bury Park, N. J. 19 03 "15 710 06 01 "12 18 gis) Ol 98 "10 16 ’20 05 ai! iS) 15 ir "10 19 12 "20 04 00 13 13 18 80 13 13 06 719 718 07 "13 "16 "14 "02 List of Members 431 AsutTon, GEo., 1217 Pierce Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. Atwoop, ANTHONY, 73 Waterest St., Plymouth, Mass. Atwoop, Irvinc M., 31 Boston Fish Pier, Boston, Mass. Aucur, W. A., 33 Fulton St., (New York City. Avery, CaArLos, State Game and Fish Commissioner, St. Paul, Minn. Bascock, JOHN P., Provincial Fisheries Department, Victoria, British Columbia. Bascock, Witit1AmM H., 520 The Rookery, Chicago, Ill. BaiLey, ArtHur T., Nashua, N. H. BatcH, Howarp K., 158 W. Austin Ave., Chicago, III. Batpwin, O. N., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Saratoga, Wyo. Batt, E. M., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. BatiArD, S. THRUSTON, Louisville, Ky. BarserR, Wm. E., LaCrosse, Wis. Barsour, F. K., 96 Franklin St., New York, N. Y. Barsour, THomas, Museum of Comparative Zoolcgy, Cambridge, Mass. *BARNES, EARNEST W., Supt., R. I. Fisheries Experiment Station, Wickford, R. I. Barnes, F. C., Front St., Portland, Ore. Barney, Raymonp L., U. S. Fisheries Laboratory, Fairport, Iowa. Barron, JAMES T., 1210 Yeon Bldg., Portland, Ore. BartLett, Motr L., Commissioner of Fisheries and Game, Concord, NH. Bauer, A., 25th and Dearborn Sts., Chicago, Ill. Baxter, A. C., Chief, Ohio Fish and Game Division, Columbus, Ohio. Bean, Barton A., U. S. National Museum, Washington, D. C. BEEMAN, Henry W., New Preston, Conn. *BELpING, Davin L., Biologist, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game, Boston, Mass. BELL, J. C., Alaska Packers Association, San Francisco, Calif. BELLISLE, J. A., Inspector General of Fisheries and Game, Quebec, Canada. BEeLMont, Perry, 1618 ‘New Hampshire Ave., Washington, D. C. *Benson, JoHN T., Director Zoological Garden, Boston, Mass. Berc, GreorcE, Indiana Fish Commission, Indianapolis, Ind. BerkHous, Jerry R., Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Torresdale, Pa. BERNARD, Gus., Atchafalaya, La. Butsoty, E. Nasu, Commissioner of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Va. *Birce, Dr. E. A., University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. BiackFrorp, CHas. Minor, M. D., Staunton, Va. Buiystap, CHeEster N., Fisheries Laboratory, Fairport, Iowa. Botton, C. C., 404 Hickox Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. BootH, Dewrrt C., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Spearfish, S. D. 432 American Fisheries Society 18 BoRDENKECHER, WILLIAM, R. R. 19, Haughville Station, Indianapolis, Ind. Bower, SEYMourR, Superintendent, Michigan Fish Commission, Lans- ing, Mich. Bower, Warp T., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Bowers, Georce M., Martinsburg, W. Va. Braprorp, RarpH P., Dept. of Agriculture, Springfield, Ill. Briccs, A. B., Ashaway, R. I. Brown, Detr, Bureau of Fisheries, White Sulphur Springs, W. Va. Brown, Ernest C., 52 Vanderbilt Ave., New York City. Brown, ErNEst CLive, Box 107, Station G, New York, N. Y. Brown, G. W. N., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Orangeburg, S. C. Bryan, Pror. WM. Atanson, P. O. Box 38, Honolulu, H. T. Bucxstarr, Geo. A., 1101-1501 S. Main St., Oshkosh, Wis. 704 *Butier, A. G., Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Corry, Pa. 712 Buyer, G. W., Pleasant Mount, Pa. 12 *Buier, ‘NATHAN R., Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Harrisburg, Pa, “19 gf 07 18 ty 02 16 Buttocu, CuHas. A., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Bullockville, Ga. BuRKHART, Jor, Star Prairie, Wis. BurNHAM, CuHAs, W., U. S. Fisheries Station, Louisville, Ky. BuRNHAM, JoHN B., Pres. Am. Game Protective Assn., 233 Broadway, New York, N. Y. CALDWELL, F. M., 341 St. Peter St., St. Paul, Minn. Carter, E. N., Vinta Co. Farm Bureau, Fort Bridger, Wyo. Caster, Wm. A., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Hartsville, Mass. 703 *CASSELMAN, E. S., Dorset, Vt. 07 "18 "18 a7 19 19 18 gh "11 Catte, Eucense, Langdon, Kan. Cayuca County SPorTSMEN’s ASSOCIATION (JoHN L. ALNUuTT, Pres.), Auburn, N. Y. CHAMBERLAIN, THOMAS KnicuHT, Drumlin Trout Hatchery, Barneveld, Nay. Cuampbers, E. T. D., Deputy Commissioner, Colonization, Mines and Fisheries, Quebec, Canada. CuapMAN, OswiLt, De Bruce, Sullivan Co., N. Y. Cuipister, Pror. F. E., West Va. University, Morgantown, W. Va. CuristorFers, H. J., 1217 L. C. Smith Bldg., Seattle, Wash. CHURCHILL, Winston, Cornish, N. H. Crark, H. Watton, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Fairport, lowa. 711 *CLEVELAND, W. B., Burton, Ohio. Coss, Esen W., Superintendent of Fisheries, State Game and Fish Department, St. Paul, Minn. Cogs, Joun N., Director, School of Fisheries, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Wash. Coxer, Dr. Ropert E., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Cotes, RussELL J., Danville, Va. CoLLEGE OF FisHERIES, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Wash. "19 ly List of Members 433 CoMMERFORD, WM., Booneville, N .Y. Cook, Warp A., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Duluth, Minn. 700 *Cortiss, C. G., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Gloucester, Mass. ng "18 "14 "13 741 20 19 719 08 “ly "12 he) "17 06 Corwin, Roy S., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Homer, Minn. (COYKENDALL, Epwarp, 22 Ferry St., Kingston, N. Y. CRAMPTON, JOHN M., State Superintendent, Board of Fisheries and Game, New Haven, Conn. CRANDALL, A. J., Ashaway, R. I. Crasser, Huco, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, La Crosse, Wis. Crig, H. D., Director, Sea and Shore Fisheries Commission, Rock- land, Me. CrossLtey, H. C., Put-in Bay, Ohio. CRUIKSHANK, J. A., The American Angler, 220 W. 42nd St., New York City. Cutter, C. F., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Homer, Minn. CurrAN, JoHN L., Commissioner of Inland Fisheries, 602 Grosvenor Bldg., Providence, R. I. DANGLADE, ERNEST, Vevay, Ind. Daspit, A. P., New Court Bldg., New Orleans, La. Davipson, Henry, Fish Hatchery, Bath, N. Y. Davies, Davin, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Tupelo, Miss. 91 and ’10. Drawn, Pror. BAsHForp, Columbia University, New York City. 01 "19 Dean, Herzert D., Fisheries Station, Bozeman, Mont. DENMEAD, TaALBot, 508 Munsey Bldg., Baltimore, Md. 701 *DENysz, WaAsHincTon I., New York Aquarium, Battery Park, New 13 05 08 14 99 20 York City. DeRocuer, Jas. D., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, East Orland, Me. DePuy, Henry F., 32 W. 40th St., New York City. DETWILER, JoHN Y., Honorary President, Florida Fish Commission, New Smyrna, Fla. Drimick, F. F., Boston Fish Bureau, Fish Pier, Boston, Mass. Dinsmore, A. H., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, St. Johnsbury, Vt. Dotan, GeorceE A., Fish Commissioner, Westerly, R. I. 07 *DomiINy, JEREMIAH M., South Haven, N. Y. 99 °09 Downinec, S. W., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Put-in Bay, Ohio. DoyLe, Henry, Winch Bldg., Vancouver, B. C. Dryroos, Leon, 508 State St., Erie, Pa. DuckreEE, BeNyJ., Wild Rose, Wis. Dun ap, I. H., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. DuRant, Dr. G. W., Board of Fisheries of S. C., Georgetown, S. C. Eaton, Howarp, Sheridan Library Association, Sheridan, Wyo. Empopy, Pror. Geo. C., 141 Ithaca Road, Ithaca, N. Y. Erickson, C. J., 328 Washington St., Boston, Mass. Evans, Ligur.-Cot. Ketty, Metropolitan Club, New York City. EverMANN, Dr, Barton W., Director of the Museum, California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, Calif. _ jp stsigiein ncn 434 American Fisheries Society 04 712 18 709 "16 07 "10 gis "99 20 "17 04 ay: "13 a5 04 719 "10 14 A 710 12 "10 718 18 10 18 02 "13 "17 "16 EveRMANN, J. W., First Vice-Pres., St. Louis Southwestern Railway of Texas, Dallas, Texas. *FEARING, Mrs. D. B., Newport, R. I. Fearnow, E. '‘C., Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Feick, Joun A., Sandusky, Ohio. Fercuson, JAMES A., Duluth, Minn. FieLp, Dr. Georce W., 2807 18th St., N.W., Washington, D. C. Frietp, Pror, Irvine A., Clark College, Worcester, Mass. Frie.pinc, J. B., 82 Wellington St., Halifax, Nova Scotia. Firxins, B. G., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Northville, Mich. ; FINLAyson, ALEX. C., Dominion Inspector of Hatcheries, Ottawa, Canada. FisHer, A. K., U. S. Biol. Surv., Washington, D. C. FisHER, JOHN F., Chapinville, Conn. FITZGERALD, E. J., Fish and Game Commission, St. Paul, Minn. FLYFISHERS’ CLus, 36 Piccadilly, W. 1, London, England. *Foicer, J. A., Pres., J. A. Folger Co., Howard and Spencer Sts., San Francisco, Cal. Fottetr, RicHarp E., Detroit Club, Detroit, Mich. Forses, R. D., New Orleans, La. Forses, Dr. S. A., University of Illinois, Urbana, III. ForsytH, Ropert, 1157 Rookery, Chicago, Ill. *ForTMANN, Henry F., 1007 Gough St., San Francisco, Calif. Foster, FREDERICK J., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Neosho, Mo. Founp, Wo. A., Asst. Deputy Minister of Fisheries, Ottawa, Canada. FowLer, KENNETH, Woolworth Bldg., New York City. FrencH, ALsert, International Agric. Corporation, 61 Broadway, New York, N. Y. FRIDENBERG, Ropert, 22 W. 56th St., New York, N. Y. *GARDNER, Mrs. CHaArLeEs C., The Cliffs, Newport, R. I. GarnseEy, LeicH, 451 Summit Ave., Redlands, Calif. Gavitt, W. S., Lyons, N. Y. Gerry, Rosert L., 258 Broadway, New York City. Grips, C. D., Game Warden, Wilder, Minn. Gres, H. A., Detroit, Minn. Gipss, CuHartes E., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, East Orland, Me. Gover, Wm. L., Edison National Bank, Orangeburg, S. C. Goopwin, O. C., Peace Dale, R. I. GorHAM, W. B., Fisheries Station, Anaconda, Mont. GouLp, Epwin W., State Sea Food Protective Commission, Portland, Me. GraHaM, E. A., Berkeley, Taunton, R. F. D., Mass. GraHAM, GeorcE H., 423 Main St., Springfield, Mass. GrAaMMEs, H. A., care L. F. Grammes and Sons, Allentown, Pa. GRATER, CHARLES B., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Leadville, Colo. Gray, Georce M., Woods Hole, Mass. 10 15 List of Members 435 Gray, STEDMAN H., 2511 W. Second Ave., Seattle, Wash. GREEN, J. C., 4730 London Road, Duluth, Minn. GrEENE, Dr. CuAs. W., University of Missouri, 814 Virginia Ave., Columbia, Mo. GREENE, JOHN V., Assistant, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D.C, GUERIN, THEOPHILE, Treasurer, Rhode Island Commission of Fisher- ies, Woonsocket, R. I. GUNCKEL, Witt H., M. and C. Savings Bank, Toledo, Ohio. *Haas, WILLIAM, Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Spruce Creek, Pa. Haun, E. E., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Boothbay Harbor, Me. Hatey, Cates, 14 Fulton Market, New York City. Hancock, W. K., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Baird, Calif. Hanp, E. R., Fairmont, Minn. Hankinson, Pror. T. L., State College of Forestry, Syracuse, N. Y. HANSEN, FERDINAND, Russian Caviar Co., 170 Chambers St., New York City. Hansen, G., Osceola, Wis. Hare, Frank E., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Manchester, Iowa. HARPELL, JAMES JOHN, Garden City Press, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Province of Quebec, Canada. HARRIMAN, AVERILL, Arden, N. Y. Harron, L. G., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Hart, W. O., 134 Carondelet St., New Orleans, La. ‘ HARTMANN, PHIL, Erie, Pa. Hawks, S. B., Supt. Hatchery, Bennington, Vt. Hay, Pror. W. P., Kensington, Md. Hayrorp, CHARLES O., Supt., State Fish Hatchery, Hackettstown, Ni;'J. Heprick, H. S., Pierre, S. D. Heiman, A. J., Barberton, Ohio. Hemineway, E. D., 123 Rochelle Ave., Wissahickon, Philadelphia, Pa. HENSHALL, Dr. JAMeEs A., 811 Dayton St., Cincinnati, Ohio. Heroin, R., 235 Montgomery St., San Francisco, Calif. Herrick, Pror. FraNcis Hopart, Western Reserve University, Cleve- land, Ohio. Hewett, Frep, Route 6, Madison, Wis. Hickman, J. R., 1426 Chemical Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. Hiccins, Arr. S., 142 Atlantic Ave., Boston, Mass. Hivpeprand, SAMUEL F., Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Hinricus, Henry Jr., Keystone Fish Co., Erie, Pa. Hosart, T. D., Pampa, Texas. Horrses, G. RAyMonp, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Hotianp, R. P., Am. Game Protective Association, 233 Broadway, New York City. Hooven, K., Monterey, Calif. 710 *Hopprer, Grorce L., Havre de Grace, Md. 436 American Fisheries Society Howarp, Dr. ArtHuR D., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Fairport, Ia. HowE11, G. C. L., care of H. S. King & Co., 9 Pall Mall, London, S. W., England. Howser, W. D., Nashville, Tenn. Hupparp, WAtpo F., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Nashua, N. H. Hunsaker, W. J., Board of State Fish Commissioners, Saginaw, Mich. Huntsman, A. G., Ph. D., Asst. Prof. of Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. *Hursut, H. F., 13 Iveson Ave., East Lynn, Mass. HussAxkor, Dr. Louis, American Museum of Natural History, New York City. Hustep, JAMES D., Denver, Colo. IRONDEQUOIT FisH AND GAME Protective AssocIATION, (J. W. Jounston, Cor. Sec.), Rochester, N. Y. Jackson, R. C., 34 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Mass. Jennincs, G. E., Fishing Gazette, 465 Central Park West, New York City. JENSEN, Harotp, Spooner, Wis. Jounson, A. S., 300 Exchange Bldg., Duluth, Minn. Jounson, JAMEs G., R. I. Commission of Inland Fisheries, Riverside, | Peon Jounston, J. W., Box 578, Rochester, N. Y. Jones, Cot, E. Lester, U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Washington, Das, Joneses, J. H., Fergus Falls, Minn. Jones, Tuos. S., Louisville, Ky. Jorpan, R. D., 12 Stebbins St., Springfield, Mass. Jostyn, C. D., 200 Fifth Ave. (Suite 840), New York City. KaurMANN, R. M., The Star, Washington, D. C. KavanaucH, W. P., ‘Bay City, Mich. Keesecker, A. G., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Erwin, Tenn. Keit, W. M., Tuxedo Park, N. Y. KEMMERICH, JosePpH, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Concrete, Wash. KENDALL, F. P., Farling Bldg., Portland, Ore. KENDALL, NEAL, Farling Bldg., Portland, Ore. KENDALL, Dr, Witt1AM C., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, LD a Os Kent, Epwin C., Tuxedo Club, Tuxedo Park, N. Y. Keyes, H. W., Ranier, Minn. Kitiran, Wo. H., 572 Munsey Bldg., Baltimore, Md. Kinney, M. J., 1005 Yeon Bldg., Portland, Ore. KIPLINGER, WALTER C., 2234 Park Ave., Indianapolis, Ind. KISTERBOCK, JOSIAH, JR., 3824 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa. KiTTREDGE, BENJAMIN R., Carmel, N. Y. KLEvENHUSEN, F., Altoona, Wash. 13 19 18 "03 16 "17 08 16 "08 ae 1g 710 02 715 710 "16 1 06 16 "16 719 98 710 20 718 "17 14 03 ’20 “12 03 “15 710 7 16 “a 799 "16 15 List of Members 437 Kwnicut, H. J., Alaska Packers Association, San Francisco, Calif. Kortz, Dr. WaAttER, Dept. Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. KRIPPENDORF, CARL H., Sagamore and New Sts., Cincinnati, Ohio. Lamgsson, G. H., Calif. Fish Commission, Sisson, Calif. Lanpry, D. J., Lake Charles, La. Lawyer, Geo, A., U. S. Biol. Surv., Washington, D. C. Lay, CuHaArtEs, Sandusky, Ohio. Lea, CHartes M., West Thorpe Farm, Devon, Pa. Leacyu, G. C., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. Leavins, Linus, Fish and Game Commission, Cambridge, Vermont. Le Compte, E. Leg, 512 Munsey Bldg., Baltimore, Md. Lee, W. McDona_p, Irvington, Va. Lewis, CuHar.es E., Chamber of Commerce, Minneapolis, Minn. LINDAHL, SetH H., 7732 Chauncey Ave., Chicago, III. Linton, Dr. Epwin, University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. Liprnsky, M. N., Winona, Minn. Lioyp, Joun TuHomas, College of Agriculture, Ithaca, N .Y. LocHer, WiLttAM, Kalamazoo, Mich. Lowrance, W. J., Berwick, La. Lupwic, JoHn, Grand Isle, La. LypELL, CLaup, Michigan Fish Commission, Hastings, Mich. LypeLtt, Dwicut, Michigan Fish Commission, Comstock Park, Mich. Maptie, CHARLES H., Maywood, N. J. MacKay, D. A., Collegiate Institute, Ottawa, Canada. Mackenziz, Wm. H., The Linen Thread Co., 96 Franklin St., New York, N. Y. MacLacuian, Dr. Cuas., Pres. Game and Fish Board, New Rock- ford, N. D. McDona_p, E. B., Liggett and Myers Tobacco Co., St. Louis, Mo. McDoueat, J. M., Gunnison, Colo. McKinney, Rosert E., 505 Huntington St., Boston, Mass. McReynotps, B. B., Water Superintendent, Colorado Springs, Colo. Manong, A. H., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Edenton, N. C. Maturarp, JosepH, 1815 Vallejo St., San Francisco, Cal. MannFetp, Geo. N., 223 N. Penn. St., Indianapolis, Ind. Manton, Dr. W. P., 32 Adams Ave. West, Detroit, Mich. Marpven, Cuas. S., Moorehead, Minn. Marine, Dr. Davin, Montifiore Home and Hospital, New York City. MarsH, M. C., Springville, N. Y. MarscHALK, PAuL, Warroad, Minn. MarttancE, Henry, 335 Greenwich St., New York City. 04 *MreHAN, W. E., 422 Dorset St., Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa. “3 99 "13 "11 Merritt, ArtHuR, Wilkinsonville, Mass. Merritt, M, E., Pittsford, Vt. MersuHon, W. B., Saginaw, Mich. Meyer, Gustav J. T., 829-831 South Delaware St., Indianapolis, Ind. ————— 438 American Fisheries Society 20 Mites, Lez, Probate Judge, Little Rock, Ark. "17 Miter, Avsert P., Linlithgo, N. Y. 10 Miert, Artur L., Division of Fisheries and Game, State House, Boston, Mass. 710 Miner, Roy W., American Museum of Natural History, New York City. 719 Miscuter, C. F., Sandusky, Ohio. 713 *Mixter, Samuet J., M. D., 180 Marlboro St., Boston, Mass. 18 Mo.an, Wo. K., Board of Fisheries and Game, Bridgeport, Conn. 713. Mownroz, Otis D., Supt. State Fish Hatchery, Palmer, Mass. 713. Moore, ALFrep, 618 American Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa. 718 Moore, Dr. EMMELINE, Conservation Commission, Albany, N. Y. 704 Moore, Dr. H. F., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. 18 Morey, E. C., Sodus Point, N. Y. 704 Morris, Dr. Ropert T., 616 Madison Ave., New York City. 99. Morton, W. P., 105 Sterling Ave., Providence, R. I. "10 Moser, CAPTAIN JEFFERSON F., 2040 Santa Clara Ave., Alameda, Calif. 710 Mun ty, M. G., 1012 Yeon Bldg., Portland, Ore. 714. Myers, I. S., 604 Norwood St., Akron, Ohio. 718 NEEDHAM, Pror, JAs. G., Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 716 Netson, CuHAs. A. A., Lutsen, Minn. 17. NeEtson, J. O., State Fish Hatchery, Hawick, Minn. °86 NEVIN, JAMES, Conservation Commission, Madison, Wis. 07 *NEwMAN, Epwin A., President, Aquarium Fisheries Co., 4305 8th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. "19 Newark Bait Anp FLy CastiInc Cuup, Split Rock Lake, Boonton, N. J. 718 New York Pustic Lrsrary, 476 Fifth Ave., New York, N. Y. 718 New York State Liprary, Albany, N. Y. 710 NicHors, JoHN TREADWELL, American Museum of Natural History, New York City. 713. Oaxes, Wm. H., 24 Union Park St., Boston, Mass. 716 O’Brien, Martin, Crookston, Minn. 707. O’BriEN, W. J., Supt. of Hatcheries, Nebraska Game and Fish Com- mission, Gretna, Neb. 795 O’Hace, Dr. Justus, St. Paul, Minn. 700 O’Mattey, Henry, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, 1217 L. C. Smith Bldg., Seattle, Wash. 715 OPppENWEYER, JOHN W., Sorrento, La. 719 Orr, ArtHuR, House Appropriations Committee, Capitol, Wash- ington, D. C. 18 Orsincer, Frep G., 123 S. Oakley Boulevard, Chicago, Ill. 10 *Ospurn, Pror. RAymMonp C., Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 17. Oris, Mito F., State Fish Hatchery, Upper Saranac, N. Y. 712 Orts, SPENCER, Railway Exchange, Chicago, II. 17. Packer, ARTHUR, 423 Plymouth Bldg., Minneapolis, Minn. "19 a "19 08 03 10 "18 95 18 13 93 eile 20 98 18 “15 16 tie, pes 18 20 ng 10 "16 "14 "13 List of Members 439 PALMER, Dr. THEODORE S., United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. Parkuurst, Hon. C. Frank, 54 Barnes St., Providence, R. I. Parry, W. J. Croose, Laurentian Club, Lac la Peche, P. Q., Canada. PATCHING, Frep, Loring, Alaska. Pearse, Pror. A. S., University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. Pett, Geo. W., 520 Sixteenth St., Denver, Colo. PFiLeuGeER, J. E., Akron, Ohio. ‘PINKERTON, J. A., Glenwood, Minn. Poor, GARDINER, Fish Pier, Boston, Mass. POHOQUALINE FisH AssocIATION, care of C. Wetherill, 17th and Le- high Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. Pomeroy, Geo. E., Toledo, Ohio. Porr, T. E. B., Curator, Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wis. Porter, RicHARD, Board of State Fish Commissioners, Paris, Mo. Post FisH Co., Sandusky, Ohio. Pratt, Georce D., Telephone Bldg., Albany, N. Y. PRENSKER, Dr. G. A., 1348 Wellington Ave., Chicago, III. *PrINCE, Pror. E. E., Dominion Commissioner of Fisheries, Ottawa, Canada. Race, E. E., Boothbay Harbor, Me. *RapcLirFE, Lewis, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. RANKIN, Epwarp P., care Miss O’Connor, San Lorenzo, Cal. RAVENEL, W. vE C., U. S. National Museum, Washington, D. C. Reip, Geo. C., 1007 N. George St., Rome, N. Y. ReEIpEL, F K., Pleasant Mount, Pa. REIGHARD, Pror. JAcoz E., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. RENAND, J. K., 207 New Court Bldg., New Orleans, La. Ricu, WAtTER H., Bureau of Fisheries, 11 Exchange St., Portland, Me. Ricuarps, G. H., Sears Building, Boston, Mass. RicHarpson, A. P., Supt. Hatchery, Canaan, Vt. RicHARDSON, Rogert E., Box 155, University Station, Urbana, Ill. Ritey, Marx, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, San Marcos, Texas. Ritey, Pror. Wm. A., University Farm, St. Paul, Minn. Ristey, A. F., Old Forge, Herkimer Co., N. Y. Ropertson, ALEXANDER, Dominion Hatchery, Harrison Hot Springs, BiG 3 Ganadaz *Ropertson, Hon. Jas. A., Skerryvore, Holmefield Ave., Cleveley’s, Blackpool, England. — Ropp, J. A., Dept. Naval Service, Ottawa, Canada. Rowe, Henry C., Daytona Beach, Fla. Rowe, Wm. H., West Buxton, Me. Russet, Geo. S., Bank of Commerce of N. A., Cleveland, Ohio. Ryan, Carvin D., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Ketchikan, Alaska. 05 *Sarrorp, W. H., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Gloucester, Mass. 440 American Fisheries Society 14 13 ScurapiEck, H, E., 211 South Eighth St., Olean, N. L. ScHRANK, J. J., Booth Fisheries Co., Sandusky, Ohio. Scortetp, N. B., 430 Kingsley Ave., Palo Alto, Calif. SEAGLE, Geo. A., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Wytheville, Va. SEAGRAVE, ARNOLD, Woonsocket, R. I. SEAMAN, FRANK, Napanoch, N. Y. Setters, M. G., 1518 Sansom St., Philadelphia, Pa. SHELLFoRD, Victor E., Dept. Zool., University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. SHERwoop, E. E., State Game and Fish Commission, Seattle, Wash. SuHr1ra, Austin F., Mason City, Iowa. SHiras, GEo., 3p, Stoneleigh Court, Washington, D. C. Snot, C. E., Box 62, Burlington, N. J. t SINGLETON, J. ERNEst, Woonsocket, R. I. *SLapE, GEorGE P., 309 Broadway, P. O. Box 283, New York City. SmitH, G. A., Oklahoma City, Okla. Smitu, Dr. HucH M., U. S. Commissioner of Fisheries, Washington, Dis SmitH, Lewis H., Algona, Iowa. Snyper, J. P., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Cape Vincent, N. Y. SPENSLEY, CALVERT, Mineral Point, Wis. SPoRTSMEN’s REVIEW PUBLISHING Co., 15 W. Sixth St., Cincinnati, Ohio. Spracte, L. H., Henryville, Pa. St. Joun, Larry, Chicago Tribune, Chicago, III. Stack, F. Greorce, North Creek, Warren Co., N. Y. Starr, W. J., State Board of Fish Commissioners, Eau Claire, Wis. STEELE, G. F., Sun Life Bldg., Montreal, Canada. Stevens, ArTHUR F., Lodentown, R. F. D. 44-A, Suffern, N. Y. Stivers, D. Gay, Butte Anglers’ Association, Butte, Mont. Story, Joun A., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Green Lake, Me. StruvEN, CHas. M., 114 S. Frederick St., Baltimore, Md. Sruper, JAMES W., Bureau of Fish and Game, Columbus, Ohio, Sun, Dr. F. T., President, School of Fisheries, Tientsin, China. Sworn, C. B., New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada. Taytor, H. F., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. TERRELL, Ciype B., Oshkosh, Wis. TuHayer, W. W., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Northville, Mich. THomas, AprIAN, 190 E. Grand Boulevard, Detroit, Mich. Tuompson, CuHAs. H., Colonial Trust Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa. Tuomeson, W. F., 930 E. Ocean Ave., Long Beach, Calif. Tuompson, W. P., 123 N. Fifth St., Philadelphia, Pa. Tuompson, W. T., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Bozeman, Mont. Tuompeson, G. H., Estes Park, Colo. TicHENor, A. K., Secretary, Alaska Packers Assn., San Francisco, Galit: TittMAN, Ropert L., Beacon Paper Co., St. Louis, Mo. *Timson, Wmo., Vice-President, Alaska Packers Assn., San Francisco, Calif. 02 01 20 "13 13 List of Members 441 Titcoms, JoHN W., Conservation Commission, Albany, N. Y. and 712 *TownseNnpD, Dr. CHartes H., Director New York Aquarium, New York, N. Y. TRAVERS, JOHN T., Bureau of Fish and Game, Columbus, Ohio. TREXLER, Cot. Harry C., Allentown, Pa. Triccs, CHas. W., Booth Fisheries Co., 22 W. Monroe St., Chicago, III, Troyer, M., Astoria Iron Works, Seattle, Wash. TRULL, Harry S., American Museum of Natural History, New York City. Tusgs, Frank A., Michigan Fish Commission, Comstock Park, Mich. TUuLIAN, Eucene A., Box 1304, New Orleans, La. Turner, Pror. C. L., Beloit College, Beloit, Wis. *VALLETTE, LuctANO H., Chief of Section of Fish Culture, 827 Riva- davia, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Van Atta, Ciyve H., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Yes Bay Hatchery, Ketchikan, Alaska. ‘Van Creave, Pror. H. J., University of Illinois, Urbana, III. *VANDERGRIFT, S. H., 1728 New Hampshire Ave., Washington, D. C. Vickers, Harrison W., Chairman, Conservation Commission, 512 Munsey Building, Baltimore, Md. Viosca, Percy, Jr., Natural History Bldg., New Orleans, La. Vincent, W. S., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Mammoth Springs, Ark. Voct, JAMes H., Nevada Fish Commission, Verdi, Nevada. Von LenceERKE, J., 200 Fifth Ave., New York City. WaAbDDELL, JoHN, Grand Rapids, Mich. Wacner, JoHN, School House Lane, Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. WAKEFIELD, L. H., 1310 Smith Bldg., Seattle, Wash. Watker, Bryant, Detroit, Mich. Wa ker, Dr. H. T., 210 Main St., Denison, Texas. Wa tker, S. J., District Inspector of Hatcheries, Ottawa, Canada. WALLACE, FREDERICK WILLIAM, 600 Read Bldg., 45 St. Alexander St., Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Watters, C. H., Cold Spring Harbor, N. Y. Warp, Pror. H. B., University of Illinois, Urbana, II. Warp, J. Quincy, Executive Agent, Kentucky Game and Fish Com- mission, Frankfort, Ky. Warp, Rozertson S., 172 Harrison St., East Orange, N. J. Wess, W. SEwaArp, 44th St. and Vanderbilt Ave., New York City. WEEks, ANDREW Gray, 8 Congress St., Boston ,Mass. WELts, Wo. F., Conservation Commission, Albany, N. Y. WetscuH, H. N., Box 4, Salt Lake City, Utah. Wenrrick, FRANK J., Bigrock Creek Trout Club, St. Croix Falls, Wis. WESTERFELD, Cart, 702 Postal Bldg., San Francisco, Calif. WESTERMAN, J. H., Harrietta, Mich. WHeEeEterR, CuHas, E., Stratford, Conn. WHEELER, Frep M., 546 Fulton St., Chicago, Ill. Waite, JAs., Conservation Commission, Ottawa, Canada. 442 American Fisheries Society 710 Wuitman, Epwarp C., Canso, Nova Scotia, Canada. 715 Wuiresing, R. B., 204 Sellwood Bldg., Duluth, Minn. 20 Wuiteway, SoLtomon P., St. Johns, Newfoundland. 19 Wicxkuirr, Epwarp L., 1309 Atchinson St., Columbus, Ohio. 20 Wiuzsur, Harry C., Commissioner, Sea and Shore Fisheries, Portland, Me. 17. Wittams, J. A., Shell-Fish Commissioner, Tallahassee, Fla. 701 Whitson, C. H., Glen Falls, N. Y. 710 WiuncHEsTER, GRANT E., Forest, Fish and Game Commission, Bemus . A Point, N.Y. 700 Winn, Dennis, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, 1217 L. C. Smith Bldg., Seattle, Wash. 799 “Wires, S. P., U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, Duluth, Minn. 713 *WisNeER, J. NELson, Director, Institute de Pesca del Uruguay, Punta del Esto, Uruguay. 05 *Woxters, CuHas. A., Oxford and Marvine Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 797. Woop, C. C., Plymouth, Mass. 713. Woops, Joun P., President, Missouri State Fish Commission, First and Wright Sts., St. Louis, Mo. 714. Work, GERALD, Perkins Hill, Akron, Ohio. 719 WricHt, Pror, ALBERT Hazen, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 716 Youncer, R. J., Houma, La. 799. ZALSMAN, P. G., Grayling, Mich. Recapitulation TROROEATY, 5 case's Ae Shs alt op Raete ome aps > Asm 8 oh wR Soe on aay 66 GOTPESPORGIAR 65.5 oisi6 bb's oin.eiBia sis miata eta a we bpecatie bi ia a eee tea 12 PatTOns Woe. dS ee so bisla POSS Oe atts Ras Peas pape RR es niece 53 VANGEL VIE: nets dos tated Slovslars Ghats & AGUS hie ween uwlene tae Sh wise sictehal oie whelerats us 467 CONSTITUTION (As amended to date) ARTICLE I NAME AND OBJECT The name of this Society shall be American Fisheries Society. Its object shall be to promote the cause of fish cul- ture; to gather and diffuse information bearing upon its prac- tical success, and upon all matters relating to the fisheries; the uniting and encouraging of all interests of fish culture and the fisheries, and the treatment of all questions regarding fish, of a scientific and economic character. ARTICLE: II MEMBERSHIP Active Members.—Any person may, upon a two-thirds vote and the payment of two dollars, become a member of this Society. In case members do not pay their fees, which shall be two dollars per year after first year, and are delin- quent for two years, they shall be notified by the treasurer, and if the amount due is not paid within a month thereafter, they shall be, without further notice, dropped from the roll of membership. Any sporting or fishing club, society, firm, or corporation, upon two-thirds vote and the payment of an annual fee of five dollars, may become a member of this Society and be en- titled to all its publications. Libraries shall be admitted to membership at two dollars a year. Any state board or commission may, upon the payment of an annual fee of ten dollars, become a member of this Society and be entitled to all of its publications. Life Members.—Any person shall, upon a two-thirds vote and the payment of twenty-five dollars, become a life mem- _ ber of this Society, and shall thereafter be exempt from all annual dues. 444 American Fisheries Society Patrons.—Any person, society, club, firm or corporation, on approval by the Executive Committee and on payment of $50.00, may become a Patron of this Society with all the privileges of a life member, and then shall be listed as such in all published lists of the Society. The money thus received shall become part of the permanent funds of the Society and the interest alone be used as the Society shall designate. Honorary and Corresponding Members.—Any person can be made an honorary or a corresponding member upon a two- thirds vote of the members present at any regular meeting. The President (by name) of the United States and the Governors (by name) of the several states shall be honorary members of the Society. Election of Members Between Annual Meetings.—The President, Recording Secretary, and Treasurer of the Society are hereby authorized, during the time intervening between annual meetings, to act on all individual applications for mem- bership in the Society, a majority vote of the Committee to elect or reject such applications as may be duly made. ART IGILA Lid SECTIONS On presentation of a formal written petition signed by one hundred or more members, the Executive Committee of the American Fisheries Society may approve the formation in any region of a Section of the American Fisheries Society to be known as the ———— Section. Such a Section may organize by electing its own officers, and by adopting such rules as are not in conflict with the Constitution and By-Laws of the American Fisheries Society. It may hold meetings and otherwise advance the general interests of the Society, except that the time and place of its annual meeting must receive the approval of the Executive Committee of the American Fisheries Society, and that with- out specific vote of the American Fisheries Society, the Section Constitution 445 shall not commit itself to any expression of public policy on fishing matters. It may further incur indebtedness to an amount necessary for the conduct of its work not to exceed one-half of the sum received in annual dues from members of said section. Such bills duly approved by the Chairman and Recorder of the Section shall be paid on presentation to the Treasurer of the American Fisheries Society. ARTICLE IV OFFICERS The officers of this Society shall be a president and a vice-president, who shall be ineligible for election to the same office until a year after the expiration of their term; an exe- cutive secretary, a recording secretary, a treasurer, and an executive committee of seven, which, with the officers before named, shall form a council and transact such business as may be necessary when the Society is not in session—four to constitute a quorum. In addition to the officers above named there shall be elected annually five vice-presidents who shall be in charge of the following five divisions or sections: 1. Fish culture. 2. Commercial fishing. 3. Aquatic biology and physics. 4. Angling. 5. Protection and legislation. Vice-presidents of sections may be called upon by the President to present reports of the work of their sections, or they may voluntarily present such reports when material of particular value can be offered by a given division. ARTICLE. V MEETINGS The regular meeting of the Society shall be held once a year, the time and place being decided upon at the previous 446 American Fisheries Society meeting, or, in default of such action, by the executive committee. ARTICLEANI ORDER OF BUSINESS Call to order by president. Roll call of members. Applications for membership. Reports of officers. a. President: b. Secretary. c. Treasurer. d e ramen ele Vice-presidents of Divisions. Standing Committees. 5. Committees appointed by the president. a. Committee of five on nomination of officers for ensuing year. b. Committee of three on time and place of next meeting. Auditing committee of three. Committee of three on program. Committee of three on publication. f. Committee of three on publicity. 6. Reading of papers and discussion of same. (Note—In the reading of papers preference shall be given to the members present. ) 7. Miscellaneous business. 8. Adjournment. oan ARTICLE (Vit CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION The constitution of the Society may be amended, altered or repealed by a two-thirds vote of the members present at any regular meeting, provided at least fifteen members are present at said regular meeting. ae he be Pyke Mita : WLAN