Sioloyical & M c «f ical American Fisheries Society Transactions v.20 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY [ steiemmmmanieaeenemsimnmame sansa TRANSACTIONS Volume 20 1891 R i) “TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY. TWENTIETH ANNUAL MEETING. HELD IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM, WASHINGTON, D. C. WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY, MAY 27TH AND 28TH, 1891. NEW YORK 1891. Reprinted with the permission of the American Fisheries Society JOHNSON REPRINT CORPORATION Jounson REPRINT CoMPANY LIMITED 111 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10003 Berkeley Square House, London, W. 1 OFFICERS FOR 1891-92. PRESIDENT, Dr., JAMES A. HENSHALE. o>: ee Cincinnati, O. VICE-PRESIDENT, Dr. J.C. PARKER ........ .Grand Rapids, Mich. TREASURER; HENRY CO. PGR”. Soi. ee eee Philadelphia, Pa. RECORDING SECRETARY, EDWARD P. DOYLE..... . New York City. Cor. SECRETARY, Dk. TARLETON H. BEAN..... Washington, D. C. w 4 2 1966 L456 72 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. S. Hi, SMI N's osu, eee eee ee Washington, D. C. Dr. H. H. CARY...... Die ess Eee em Atlanta, Ga. De: W. iM. EW DSON 5025. Scns teal ee Hartford, Conn. Wie A. BU TEER ee. fect oe ieee PE ons eet Detrozt, Mich. LD. HUNTINGTON? oo 6 ne eee eee ee New Rochelle, N. Y. BA BYPORTER, 72500 t0eb hee 3 See eee San Francisco, Cal. 1 Ge BOR 0 AER ae Sn SE I AN FEU LF ree la laa al senate Fremont, Neb. LocAaL COMMITTEE. EUGENE G. BLACKFORD, CHAIRMAN, .........--- .... Lew York. BRED; MATHER; #2 esciclc5 eae erecta aie us EDWARD BP: DOV LE...) 40.3347 Reprinted from a copy in the collections of The New York Public Library First reprinting, 1965, Johnson Reprint Corporation Printed in the United States of America LV EU Me dd ANNUAL MEBTING —— Or AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY. PART FIRST. | MINUTES OF MEETINGS. FIRST DAY’S MEETING. Meeting was called to order, Wednesday May 27th, at 2 p.M., President Eugene G. Blackford in the chair. The minutes of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting were read by the Secretary, and, on motion, approved as read. Letters of regret at their inability to attend the meeting were read from Colonel Marshall McDonald, Dr. T. H. Bean, and Judge J. W. Wilson. The letter from Colonel McDonald was as follows: DEAR MR. BLACKFORD: I am confined to my bed as the result of a surgical operation, and will not be able to attend the meeting, but everything will be done by the Commis- sion to make the meeting pleasant and successful. Mr. Kaufmann, of the ‘‘Star,’’? is chairman of the local com- mittee, and will do everything practicable in arranging for the meeting. The Woodmont Club will entertain the 4 Society on Wednesday evening with a dinner at Harvey’s. We are in a lull as regards fish cultural work here, but the aquaria will probably interest members, and I would like you to look into our pond culture with the shad. We have about 2,000,000 in the West Pond near the monument, and probably half will survive and be turned out in the Potomac as fish three inches long. When we make this system general in our rivers, and pursue on a sufficiently large scale, I hardly see any limit to the abundance we can create. Similar methods will doubtless be applied in time to the salmon, whitefish, and pike-perch. I think it will be of interest to call the attention of members to this work. I shall urge the broadening of our organization so as to invite and include in its membership individuals and repre- sentatives of all associations, societies, or clubs interested in the fisheries, whether from a practical, economic, scien- tific, or sentimental standpoint. It would be a great thing to accomplish under your administration. It would lift us at once from a society of fish culturists to a plane of the Deutsche Fischerei Verein. Such an organization, popu- larized and exploited as it may be, would attract to its membership men of influence and character in all profes- sions and business pursuits, and would become a power in directing, influencing, and controlling public opinion. It is a matter of profound regret to me that I cannot be with you, as I have many things to talk about. Yours faithfully, MARSHALL McDONALD. Mr. Kauffmann, from the Woodmont Rod and Gun Club, addressed the Society, reciting what had been done towards arranging for the entertainment of the members, and ex- tended the invitation from the Club to dine at Harvey’s on Wednesday evening. On motion of Dr. Cary, of Georgia, the invitation to dine was accepted with thanks. 5 The following persons were then proposed for member- ship: Professor Bashford Dean, L. D. Huntington, Peter W. Lynch, and Frank J. Amsden, seconded by Mr. Black- ford. H. A. Sherwin, seconded by Mr. Ford. Hugh M. Smith, seconded by Mr. Seal. W. R. Huntington, seconded by Dr. Henshall. B. B. Porter, seconded by Fred. Mather. On motion of Mr. May, of Nebraska, and by unaninrous consent, the persons named above were elected members of the Society. The following persons were then proposed for member- ship, and seconded by Mr. Amsden: William. Barnum, Charles H. Babcock, and William S. Kimball. They were on motion reed eilgy elected. The Treasurer of the Society, Mr. Ford, presented his report as Treasurer, for the year. TREASURER’S REPORT. CREDITS. 1890. May 12, By balance from last account.... $ 76 85 1891. May 25, By annual dues received. ...... 204 00 S280 8D DEBITS. 1890. June 16, To cash paid bills, C. V. Osborn, for expenses May meeting, 1890.. ... $ 8 88 Aug. 25, To cash paid Spangler & Davis for printing notices annual dues...... 1. 00 To cash paid envelopes and postage for annual dues notices and receipts...... 6 48 Sept. 8, To cash paid bill to Photo-engrav- ing Co. for plates (fish) in report...... 13 62 1891. Jan’y 2, To cash paid John M. Davis, print- ine ANRUNAL TODO ose ae ceeeaeE 152 00 May 26, To balance cash on hand i aes 98 87 $280 85 6 On motion of Mr. Clark, of Michigan, the report was received and ordered referred to an auditing committee of three. The Chairappointed Mr. Cary, Mr. Mather,and Mr. Rath- burn as such committee. The Chair addressed the meeting in relation to the an- nual dues: “The low sum of three dollars paid annually by the mem- bers of this Society is fixed solely for the purpose of cover- ing the cost of the publication and the expenses incidental to our annual meeting. These reports of the papers read, and the discussions arising from them, are distributed only to the members of our Society. If you examine the report, you will find that we have between two hundred and three hundred members, and that at our annual meeting we hardly ever have over twenty per cent. of that member- ship present, but the interest of the absentees in our Society is not to be gauged by their want of attendance at our meetings. I know, personally, that a large proportion of them keep up an active interest in fish culture and fishery matters,and in justice to them, we decline to furnish our reports to any person not a member of our Society. I speak of this because we have a great many applications for the report of the Association, and so that our members may indicate to their friends that the only way in which they can receive a report of our meeting is by joining the Society. Three dollars annual dues should not deter any one from joining. Colonel McDonald suggested in conversation this morning, that in connection with the idea of broadening the scope of our Association, it might be well if the Society concurred with his views in the matter to appoint a com- mittee to take into consideration the proper means to pursue for increasing the interest and membership of our Society. He thought that all the clubs and _ societies organized for the protection of game and fish, including Natural History Clubs, that pay particular attention to 7 ichthyology, should all be brought into active sympathy with this Society. The idea, of course, is a good one, and the only question is how shall we get at it? It is not to be expected that we can hold large meetings of the National Society either at Washington, Put-in-Bay, Ohio, or New York City, because a large proportion of the people inter- ested in our objects and aims are not in a position to sacrifice the time and to spend the money required in travelling to distant points to attend the meeting ; but, as I said, we cannot gauge their interest by their attendance at our meetings, but by their active co-operation in keeping up their membership and maintaining good financial rela- tions with the Treasurer. Is it your pleasure to take any action of this kind on the suggestion of Colonel Mc- Donald? I would like to hear from Dr. Henshall on the subject.”’ Dr. Henshall said: ‘‘Mr. President, Iam very much in favor of what you said. There are a great many organiza- tions in the different parts of the country for the protection of tish and game, and Iam confident that a majority of them would become members of this Society if they were approached in a proper manner. A great many do not know that the doors of the Society are open to anglers and - persons who are in favor of fish and game protection. If they did, Iam sure that the membership of this Society would be greatly increased.” On motion, the following resolution was then unani- mously adopted : Resolved, That the question as to the best method to be adopted to increase the membership and extend the influ- ence of the Society be referred to a committee of three, to be appointed by the Chair. The Chair appointed J. A. Henshall, A. N. Cheney, and F. J. Amsden as such committee. On motion of W. L. May, a committee of three on nomi- nations for officers for the ensuing year was ordered. 8 The President appointed as such committee W. L. May, A. N. Cheney, and Richard Rathburn. Mr. Amsden extended an invitation to the Society to hold its next meeting in Rochester. No action was taken. Dr. J. A. Henshall then read a paper entitled ‘‘ The teeth of tishes as a guide to their food habits.”’ After the reading, the Chair said: ‘‘I would state that it has been our custom always, after the reading of a paper, to invite discussion of the topic that is presented. Is it the pleasure of any gentleman to ask any question or to discuss the paper that has just been read ?”’ Mr. Ford said: ‘tI merely wish to corroborate the state- ment made by Dr. Henshall as to the black bass; that it is not so destructive a fish as is generally supposed. I pre- sume I have examined the stomachs of at least a thousand black bass. The Delaware is a great shad river; it is full of shad; but of the great number of black bass that I have examined, I never found but two shad in their stomachs. I attribute this partly to the fact that the shad swims in the deep water of the river, while the black bass seeks its food along the shore. The bass are not so destructive to the shad as a great many people tell us.”’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘Dr. Henshall mentions what is, I believe, a fact, that the black bass is not as destructive as the brook trout; that it does not eat fish as freely. I will state that while tishing with Mr. Huntington one day this Spring, I took a trout, with a fly, about ten inches long, and in its throat it had a sun-fish an inch and a half long.” Mr. Cheney said: ‘“‘ In Lake George, where the lake trout have had any quantity of food for years and years, a sun- fish was taken there two years ago from the stomach of a lake trout, thus corroborating what Dr. Henshall has stated.”’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘In the aquaria of the Fish Commission at the Central Station, the Atlantic salmon, the land-locked 9 salmon, and I think I can say the same of the Pacific sal- mon, and all of the trout, will take the small sun-fish as food. They prefer, however, the common minnows or shiners.”’ Mr. Kauffman said: ‘‘I would like to ask Mr. Cheney if he does not think that locality has something to do with the spawning of black bass? The spawning season, we understand, is about over in the Potomac. They spawn a great deal earlier in the lower grounds than they do in the mountain regions.” Mr. Cheney answered: ‘‘ Yes;’’ and then said, ‘‘I would like to have some gentleman inform us what size trout at- tain before spawning ?”’ Mr. Clark answered: ‘‘There is one point that Mr. Cheney would like to know. He asked what is the size of a spawning trout. I have taken eggs from a brook trout less than four inches long. We havea law in our State that trout less than six inches should not be caught; but as I said, I have taken eggs from a trout that was four inches long.”’ Mr. Seal said in regard to temperature: ‘‘I think the temperature has much to do with the time of spawning. We have had yellow perch to spawn in December and again in March, and we have had gold-fish to spawn this year in February. The temperature then was 62°. If the temperature is constant and high enough, the fish will spawn at any time. The character of water in this respect varies greatly, and in some waters they will spawn much earlier. Again, older fishes spawn much earlier than young ones. It is the case with the gold-fish and perhaps with all fishes.” Mr. Clark said: “Is it not a fact that nearly all fishes, the spring spawners and the fall spawners, depend alto- gether upon temperature, the spring spawners needing a a warmer temperature, and the fall spawners a colder tem- perature? That has been my experience.’’ 10 Dr. Henshall answered: ‘‘In regard to the black bass I would say with Mr. Seal that it is a question entirely of temperature. I have watched the spawning of black bass all the way from Canada to Florida, and it is entirely a question of temperature. Beginning with Florida as early as March or April, and getting a little later as you go North. I lived in Wisconsin, where within a radius of ten miles there were forty lakes. Some of these lakes were deeper than others, and in the spawning of those bass, even in that circumscribed limit, there was a difference of between two and three weeks; those in the deeper lakes not spawning until later in the season. In Evergreen Lake the fish did not get through spawning until the later part of August, and the fishing began in September.”’ Mr. Frank Clark then read a paper entitled ‘‘ Rearing and distributing trout at the Northville Station of the United States Fish Commission.”’ After the paper was read, the Chair called for discus- sion. Dr. Parker asked : ‘‘T would like to inquire of Mr. Clark what has been the expense of rearing, say 10,000, of those trout until they are one year old ?’’ Mr. Clark answered: ‘‘It is rather difficult to tell what it would cost to rear 10,000. Of course, with such a small number as that, you would need the same help that you would to rear a much larger number. I cannot tell the exact proportionate cost, but I think that our total liver bill last season was something like $800; that included the feeding of fish that gave us about 120,000 eggs, in addition to feeding 150,000 fry to be held until one year old.”’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘ While Mr. Clark was reading his pa- per, he looked at me, because he knew that I did not agree with him. The losses would amount to something, and the expense will be large, and I do not believe that it is econo- my to-day for the Fish Commission to raise trout to be a id year old. I believe, with Mr. Clark, that one yearling trout planted in a stream is as good as thirty-five or possibly fifty-five, but the expense attending it, I think, is greater than will warrant.’ Mr. Clark said: ‘‘I do not agree with Mr. Mather at all on the point of expense. There are a great many things in regard to this expense that most people do not take into account. If you have an establishment where you are keeping fish and furnishing eggs, either shipping the eggs to other States or getting the fish eggs from the fish as we are doing, you have got to have about the same force. I venture the idea here that the Michigan Commission or the New York Commission can raise 100,000 yearlings with the same force they have to-day. In regard to the loss, I would say that the trout that we held last spring for spawning gave us nearly 1,250,000 eggs ; of these, I think my report will show the loss to be about 300,000, certainly not to exceed 350,000. Another point: when we put a certain number of fish in the stream, we know that there are that many there, but that is not the case with the fry. The planting of fry is all very well, but when planting fish, we know that a certain number is there, because the car- men count them before they are planted.”’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘In the hatchery that I have charge of we do not actually count the eggs, but we measure them in troughs; the men keep an exact account of the dead eggs, and my books will show the loss every day from the time the eggs are laid down until they are distributed. If Iask the foreman how many trout are in any particular trough, he will tell me, and I will send one man 10,000 and another man 10,000 and another man 5,000, and with a trough holding 25,000, we know that this takes them all ; one man may get more fish than another, but we know that 25,000 fish have gone somewhere, so that I think our sys- tem is about as accurate as it can be. Ido not think we make any mistake in that respect. It is only a question 12 of feeding young fish, and as to whether it is profitable to feed them until they are a year old or not, and Ido not think it is.”’ Dr. Parker said: ‘This is an economic question. It seems to me that we really do not know the absolute ex- pense of keeping them until they area year old. It becomes more apparent to me that we really do not know much about it now, and cannot tell whether it is profitable or not to rear them until they are a year old.”’ Mr. Clark said: ‘I will make it a point at our next meeting, with the advice of Colonel McDonald, to bring a short paper here, showing as near as I can possibly come to it, the exact cost of rearing trout to a year old.” The Chair: ‘‘This question is now being discussed by different Fish Commissions as to whether we shall continue distributing fry, or whether we shall adopt a system of rearing the tish in ponds to a certain age, and then turning them out; but the true test will be rather in the results we shall obtain hereafter, than in the question of expense. I can see no great difficulty on the score of expense. The New York Fish Commission is pursuing both plans. We distribute millions of fry every year and a few thousand yearlings. We do not encourage applications for year- lings, but we are making a judicious distribution of them in certain localities where we can keep track of them ; but, as I said before, I think this whole question will settle down finally as to which method will give us the best re- sults in the stocking of streams. We do not doubt that the distribution of fry has repaired the waste of open fish- ing in New York streams. We know-that streams from which the fish had almost entirely disappeared have been made prolific of trout by stocking them with fry. So far as that goes it is a success, but whether we could have achieved greater results by rearing them to a greater age is a question we have not yet determined. An applicant will ask our Commission for a million fry with which to 13 stock a stream; when we meet to consider applications we give that man what we think is sufficient to stock his stream. If it were known that we were going to distribute vearlings the Commission would be overwhelmed with ap- plications, and all sorts of influence would be brought to bear upon us for an allotment of yearling fish, for appli- cants in two years could reap the results of such planting.’’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘I believe it is possible to rear trout wholly on natural food, but to produce the fish in enormous numbers immense quantities of the food would be neces- sary. This is the principle that has been adopted in cer- tain parts of Europe, in France and Spain, where they enter largely into the production of fresh-water shrimp and other crustaceans for that purpose. I believe that the time will come when the area used in producing the food will be much greater than that in which the trout are raised. I know that the crustaceans can be raised in enormous num- bers.”’ The Chair said: ‘‘ The question of fish food brings up a matter that many of you, doubtless, have noticed in the newspapers. It was from a report by one of our consuls in France or Spain, communicating to the Government _here the results of his visit to a trout-breeding establish- lishment, which had a method of producing fish food ina small box, at a slight outlay; the amount of food pro- duced, and the cost, as shown in the report, was simply wonderful. It was as though the man had solved the question of perpetual motion. I bring this to your notice for the purpose of ascertaining whether any of the gentle- men connected with the United States Fish Commission have any knowledge as to the subject.”’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘ You will find that paper in the Fish Commission Bulletin for 1887. From my experience, I have not the slightest doubt that those crustaceans can be produced in prodigious numbers; I have never had any difficulty in propagating gold-fish and rearing the crusta- 14 ceans in tubs in any desired quantity, by extending the area devoted to it. It is simply a question of providing a greater space devoted to plants which provide the food for these little animals, but what their natural food is I do not know. I think it is known, however, what they feed on. I suppose it is still more minute life, animal or vegetable, or the plants themselves.”’ The Chair said: ‘‘ Has this plan been pursued to any extent in this country ?”’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘I do not know that it has. My experi- ence has been with other fishes than the trout, but in an amateur way. Iam convinced, however, that it is possible to do it on a large scale.”’ Dr. Parker said: ‘‘It seems to me the question of weight would come in somewhere. It would take a great many of these little objects to make a.pound of trout.’’ Mr. Seal said: “It takes some time to raise a pound of trout, and I have no doubt but that in the necessary time, enough of these little objects could be raised in a compara- tively small quantity of water to afford the necessary food. It is my belief that, given the proper conditions, enough of them to rear a yearling trout may be produced in a cubic foot of water.’ Mr. Ford said: ‘‘ The Pennsylvania Commission has had a practical illustration of the subject of yearling trout by putting, some four years ago, 150 yearling trout in a small spring-water stream, and about 2,000 fry in another stream not far removed from it. The result has been that in the stream where the fry were deposited a much larger pro- portion of trout has been realized than in the other. Ido not know what is the practice in New York State, but with us we very seldom send out any trout before the last week in March, when they have obtained quite a growth. Six or seven years ago we hardly knew what to do with our trout; the applications were few and far between. During the past year we hatched two and a half millions of trout, 15 and we had applications for 4,000,000. We limit the ap- plication to 2,500 for each applicant, and this year the applications so much exceeded our supply that we had to cut them down considerably.”’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘In relation to this subject of natural food, it would be very desirable to accomplish the results spoken of. I saw the report referred to about the man who grew his fish food in a little box. There was also another method mentioned by which a man could rear fish by mov- ing them from one pond to another, just as you would drive cattle from one pasture to another. I wrote to the director of the fish-culture establishment at Heiningen on the subject, and he wrote back saying that the man had only a few hundred trout. Mr. Peter Cooper Hewitt of New York City, came to see me about the subject, and asked me if I knew anything about it. I told him that I did not. He wrote himself to the man, however, and this spring, when I asked him if he ever heard anything from him, he shook his head, and said, ‘ No.’ ”’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘I believe it is much easier to produce this food in large areas of water than to drive the fish from one pond to another. I can produce in tubs just as much _ of this food as I want, but, of course, it is limited by the area. By doing the same thing in ponds, enormous quan- tities can be raised. These other crustaceans that I speak of are, of course, a more valuable food for the trout.”’ Mr. Clark said: ‘‘We have a pond that has not been used for some time and is grown over with moss or water- grass. In this the fresh water-shrimp will accumulate in great numbers ; take a pailful of water from this pond, and after shaking it up, you will find the bottom of the pail covered with these shrimps.’ The Chair said: ‘‘ The question that concerns us as Fish Commissioners is the question of economy in raising fish for distribution. Up to the present time, as I said before, it has been simply a question of expense.”’ 16 Mr. Amsden then addressed the meeting as to the objects of the Society of which he is Secretary. When he con- cluded Mr. Seal said : “As I understand it, one of the fundamental ideas in fish propagation, particularly in the case of the whitefish and shad, is to make them so abundant by artificial means that there need be no restriction whatever in the fishing. I believe that will be found to be a part of the late Profess- or Baird’s theory and intention in regard to the work.”’ The Chair said: ‘‘I know that was Professor Baird’s idea, and that was what he hoped for, that by the co-opera- tion of the States, the artificial propagation of fish could be carried on on such a scale as to make it unnecessary to have any protective laws. If such a thing is possible or practicable, that would be the easiest and simplest way of disposing of the question, for I think all the gentlemen here who have had anything to do with legislation for the protection of fish and game will bear me out in saying that there is no more difficult problem to handle than that. Mr. Cheney has given you a little of his experience; others have spoken of it, and concerning my own experience in the last State Legislature, when I was summoned to give my advice on the Game Laws, I can say but little to the credit of Game Law legislation. The entire question seems to be one of influence and of locality ; no one had ideas general and broad ; one senator would want one thing, and another senator another, and when their amendments would go to the Assembly the assemblyman from the same locality would want them changed. It is extremely difficult to obtain proper fish and game legislation. I hope this matter of the propagation of fish could be shown to be a remedy for excessive fishing and render unnecessary fish and game laws. This would clear the way for us very much. A former President of this Society, Mr. Robert B. Roosevelt recently remarked that he had about reached the 7 point of despairing of ever accomplishing anything in the way:of fish and game protection by law.” Mr. Seal said: “I think the increase in shad-hatching on the Atlantic coast is a case that points to possibility. It isa matter that is familiar to all the members of the United States Fish Commission, but perhaps to a number of others there is nothing known about it. In 1885 the catch was in the neighborhood of 5,000,000. Last year it was estimated at 10,000,000, and appears to be increasing at the rate of a million a year. The output of shad fry by the United States Fish Commission alone is now so great, that if seven or eight out of each one hundred survive they will equal the entire shad catch of the Atlantic coast. On the Pacific coast the catch is becoming as abundant as on the Atlantic.”’ ; Mr. Cheney said: ‘‘I understand what has been done in the way of increasing the shad and whitefish, but I would like to know if the gentleman ever expects to stock a stream with brook trout in one night.”’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘ Certainly, not.”’ Captain Collins here presented his paper entitled ‘‘ The Fisheries at the World’s Fair.’’ Before reading, he said, _‘*JT had expected from Henry Ives Cobb, the architect of the Fisheries Building, the plans of the buildings, which I desired this Society to see, so that a good idea could be be formed of them. I have been disappointed in this, though I understand the plans are now being printed on a reduced scale, and it will be possible for me in a few days to send them to all members of the Society, and to others who are interested in making an exhibit in Chicago in 1893.”’ After the reading of the paper the Chair called for dis- cussion. Dr. Parker said: ‘‘ Regarding the matter of influence of fish in settling the country, I think the most direct illustration of that is in the effect that the brook trout has 18 on the people of northern Michigan. It has done more to settle up that section of that country than any one fact that has occured in the history of the country.”’ The Chair said: ‘‘ It is understood that we are to assem- ble here to-morrow morning, at 10 o’ clock, and I would like to urge upon members the importance of their being here at that time, as I would like to have transacted certain busi- ness before taking up the reading of the papers.” On motion of Mr. Mather, the Society then adjourned to meet Thursday, May 28th, at 10 o’clock, a.m. Minutes of an adjourned meeting of the American Fish- eries Society, held Thursday, May 28th, 1891. At 10 o’ clock the Chair called the members of the Society to order, and asked for reports of Committees. Dr. Cary presented the report of the Auditing Committee approving the Treasurer’s account. The report was, on mo- tion, adopted. Mr. Cheney, of New York, presented the following report from the Committee appointed to make nominations for officers for the ensuing year: Mr. President and Gentlemen: Your Committee present the following nominations for officers for the American Fisheries Society for the year en- suing: President, Dr, H., Ax; HENSHAII. : .ecgte. ae Ohio. Vice President, Ji CN PARKER. fy. cetyl Michigan. Preaswurer, HENRY; C: FORD: ite. se See Pennsylvania. Recording Secretary, EDWARD P. DOYLE. New York. Corresponding Secretary, Dr. TARLETON H. BEAN, [Washington, D. C. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. S.A KA Ui MGA ct: os anpoepianate ee Washington, D. C. Wid BODLER DR iy2sd .. pce ho eee cane Michigan. LD. HUNTON G TOW) 65 i sithay: apie eyeb oh taieae New York 19 RTE AREY OA IRIS AE POON SES. VON ane ia. BeEOPORPE Rs . 2!:s. Baden? 4400 70 2164 (0. At California. Wer AoW ng bas. foolumer osm Wuetteoa. utd oo Nebraska. Wat ALL DSO ates tiueleodhyleuh. ose Connecticut. On motion, the report was ordered received, and on fur- ther motion, the Secretary was directed to cast one ballot for the ticket for officers presented by the Committee. By unanimous consent the Secretary cast the ballot, and the officers were declared elected. Dr. Henshall reported as follows from the Committee appointed to consider means for the increase of the Socie- ty’s membership and the widening of its influence. ‘‘Gentlemen: Your Committee, to whom was referred the matter of devising some plan to enlarge the member- ship of the American Fisheries Society, have had the same under consideration, and would respectfully offer the fol- lowing report: ‘““That in order to increase the interest in the American Fisheries Society to extend its influence and to augment its usefulness, it is of the utmost importance that its mem- bership should be largely increased; and whereas there seems to be an impression that only those directly inter- ‘ested in the culture or scientific investigation of fishes are eligible to membership, therefore, be it “* Resolved, That all anglers and members of fish and game protective organizations, and all persons who feel an interest in the fish and fisheries of the United States, be and are hereby cordially invited to become members of the American Fisheries Society, and to lend their aid and co- operation in carrying out the objects of said Society ; and be it further ** Resolved, That the above resolution be published in all papers and periodicals devoted to the interests of fish and fishermen ; also that a circular letter embodying the said resolution be printed and sent to members of the Society for distribution ; also, 20 ‘* Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to carry out the provisions of this report.”’ On motion, the report was received and adopted, and the President appeinted the following Committee: J. A. Hen- shall, Edward P. Doyle, and Dr. Tarleton H. Bean. The question came up as to the place for the next meeting. Dr. Parker, of Michigan, named Rochester. Mr. Cheney, of New York, named the City of New York. The President announced that the members would decide by ballot, and appointed Mr. Porter, of California, and Mr. Mather, of New York, as tellers. The vote was as follows: New York, 12; Rochester, 6. The President declared that New York was the choice of thé meeting. Dr. Cary moved that the Woodmont Rod and Gun Club, of Washington, be made an honorary member of the So- ciety. The motion was unanimously adopted. On motion of Dr. Parker, of Michigan, the thanks of the Society were tendered the officers of the Woodmont Club for the dinner given the members of the Society the even- ing previous. On motion, the time for the next annual meeting was made the last Wednesday and Thursday of May, 1892. Mr. Amsden offered the following resolution,which, upon motion, was unanimously adopted : WHEREAS the object of the American Fisheries Society is not only to foster the game fish of the country, but to do everything in its power to cheapen the cost of fish food; AND WHEREAS the Great Lakes, a vast body of water on our northern border is an international water, lying between us and a foreign country; AND WHEREAS the work of protection and propagation of fish in these waters is being conducted by the several States and Canada, each independent of the other, with 21 slight probability of ever arriving at a harmony of action; AND WHEREAS the Federal Government with its great scientific, mechanical, and financial resources, its power to make agreements with Canada, and its ability to enact and enforce regulations, can undertake this work with far greater results, therefore, be it Resolved, That we respectfully petition and urge on Con- gress the importance and duty of its assuming this work ; that speedy action be taken to secure uniform laws with Canada, regulating the fishing on the Great Lakes, and when done, that ample appropriations be made for their enforcement and also for the propagation of food fish in such waters. On motion, a vote of thanks was given Mr. Mather, of New York, for the very valuable index of the proceedings of the Society published in the last annual report. On motion of Mr. Cheney, the following persons were appointed a Committee on Local Arrangements for the next annual meeting: Eugene G. Blackford, Fred. Mather, and Edward P. Doyle. An interesting discussion then occurred as to rainbow trout. A member asked: ‘I would like to know why the rain- bow trout will sometimes abandon the streams in which they have been placed ?”’ Mr. Cheney said: ‘‘ The rainbow trout which are brought into our streams do not remain there. Undoubtedly the brown trout will live in warmer water than the brook trout, but if going to cold water has any effect on them, why should the rainbow trout stay in streams there? If the waters of England are too warm for the brook trout and they stay there, why do not the rainbow trout stay there also?” Mr. Seal said: “The rainbow trout will stand a much higher temperature than any of the others. We are able to keep them comfortably at as high a temperature as 75° 22 at Central Station. Last summer the last trout died at 82°. The other species died sooner.”’ The Chair said: ‘‘ New York State has practically dis- continued the breeding of the California trout.”’ Mr. Clark said: ‘‘ In our streams the best work has not been done with California trout on account of tempera- ture.”’ Mr. Ford said: ‘‘ There are two streams in Pennsylvania that I now have in mind in which trout were planted. The trout left one of those streams, which is a comparatively cold stream in the spring, and ran into the other, which is still colder.’’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘ What Mr. Ford said is just what occurred to me; that if the water of the stream is not warm, the trout will not run down to another where the water is warmer, but-will naturally run to where the wa- ter iscold. I think perhaps there are other conditions that we do not understand why our brook trout run down stream and go away as our rainbow trout do here, but certainly I should think the temperature would drive them out.’’ Mr. Seal said: ‘‘I find that in Mexico they appear to accomplish more with the rainbow trout than we can here, but they cannot do much with any of the other species of trout.”’ Mr. Mather then read a paper on the breeding habits of the yellow perch. After the reading of the paper, the Chair called for discussion. Mr. Seal said: ‘‘I would like to add the following in- formation on the subject. We have numbers of yellow perch spawn in our aquaria at Central Station; they spawn from November to April. This is due to the high temperature. One of our watchmen, Mr. William May- nard, observed their manner of spawning, which is very much like that of the gold-fish in the extrusion of the eggs and fertilization, except that it takes place on the bottom. The spawn is deposited in two parts. We measured the 23 spawn of asingle fish, and found it to be seven or eight feet long. It is really a tube extruded in folds arranged like the bellows of an accordeon, and when closed is only a few inches long. We found one of them with half of the spawn extruded, and that side was flat, while the other was full and round. By squeezing out the other half, we were able to see how the spawn was deposited.”’ A paper was then read by Mr. William T. Seal on the transportation of living fishes. In response to the request of the Chair, Dr. Cary said: ‘‘Some years ago I remember reading in the Fish Commission Bulletin that a number of carp, I think about fifty, were shipped to various parts of the country by express in a small tin pail holding about six quarts of water. I myself carried in a small fish bucket, about the same size, fish from Washington to New York, and from New York back to Washington and then to At- lanta, Ga., without losing a single fish. The question I want to ask is, if a given number of fish can be better car- ried in a small quantiiy of water than ina large quantity ?”’ Mr: Seal said: ‘‘It is not the quantity of water at all, but the fact that where the water is shallow there is greater agitation and consequently better aeration. The shallow bucket referred to by Dr. Cary is the one that has been _ adopted by the United States Fish Commission. Where there is much depth of water the surface is much agitated, and the bottom may be wholly unaerated and foul.”’ Mr. Mather said: ‘‘ The case that Dr. Cary cites was with carp, but that will not work with the trout. In the trans- portation of trout and salmon we have for the past three years at the hatchery which I superintend abandoned the use of the siphon and strainer tube, and have used a gar- den syringe about twelve or fifteen inches long, which we like much better than anything else.’’ Mr. Clark said: ‘‘The line that I was working on was not in transporting fish, but in seeing what I could do ina hatchery in keeping them there. In my experience I found 24 I could keep a given number in closed jars, where they were perfectly still, from six to ten hours longer than in an open jar” Mr. Seal said: ‘‘ How do you account for this? It is con- trary to all we know concerning the diffusion of gases.” Mr. Clark said: ‘It isa good deal like going back to the old gravel methods. We can get better results with gravel than on trays. After the eggs are advanced to a cer- tain stage, they do as well on the trays as they do on the gravel, but up to that time we get from five to twenty-five per cent. better results on the gravel. What causes the difference in the air-tight vessel and the open one I cannot say.’ After the discussion the Chair announced that several papers had been received from members who were unable to attend the meeting. He asked that unanimous consent be given to the Secretary to print them. This was given. On motion of Dr. Henshall, a vote of thanks was given the Directors of the National Museum for their kindness in allowing the Society the use of their lecture-room. The meeting then, on motion, adjourned sine die. EDWARD P. DOYLE, Recording Secretary. Pan Seo nnn ON THE TEETH OF FISHES AS A GUIDE TO THEIR FOOD HABITS. By Dr. James A. HENSHALL. The food of fishes is either vegetable or animal, as in the case of all other vertebrates. When vegetable, it, of course, consists of aquatic plants and Alga, while the ani- 25 mal food may be batrachians, fishes, crustaceans, mollusks, insects and their larve, etc. A fish’s diet may be restricted to but one of these vari- ous classes, or it may go through the entire bill of fare like a Christian ; but the general character of the food of a fish may usually be determined by the structure and position of its teeth, so that an examination of the teeth of a fish will indicate whether it is herbivorous, carnivo- rous, or omnivorous. The teeth of most fishes, when they exist in the mouth, may be in patches or bands of equal teeth, and may be either villiform or brush-like, setiform or bristle-like, cardiform or card-like, or rasp-like, or they may be of un- equal size and sharp and conical, compressed or lancet- shaped, or blunt, broad, or truncated, molar-like, canine, incisors, etc. The teeth may be situated on the jaws, vomer, palatines, pterygoids, tongue and gill arches, or the mouth may be entirely toothless, and the teeth con- fined to the pharyngeal bones of the throat, or they may exist in the cesophagus, or gullet. Fishes with unegual, sharp, conical, or canine teeth are piscivorous, and feed upon small fishes, which they swal- _ low whole; and those with lancet-shaped teeth, while also piscivorous, cut or lacerate their prey before swallowing it. Fishes with pavements of molar-like teeth feed upon crustaceans and mollusks, while those with toothless jaws are herbivorous, or if carnivorous, feed upon minute ani- mal organisms, and are in no sense piscivorous. Beginning with toothless fishes, that is, with no teeth in the mouth, are the minnows (Cyprinid@), and suckers (Catostomida); they are both herbivorous and carnivorous. All of the minnows, with intestines several times longer than their bodies, feed principally upon vegetable matter, and the others upon insects and their larve and minute crustaceans (Hntomostraca). Minnows have a few very small pharyngeal teeth, with or without grinding surfaces. 26 Those having teeth with grinding surfaces are herbivorous, and those without these masticatory surfaces are carniv- orous. The pharyngeal teeth of the suckers are larger and more numerous than in the minnows, and may be sharp, or more or less truncated. They feed upon vege- table matter and micro-organisms extracted from the mud, and some of them on thin-shelled, minute mollusks. The larger toothless fishes, as the sturgeons, whitefish, mullets, etc., feed upon minute animal organisms, mostly crustaceans. Some of the large toothless fishes, as the shovel-nosed sturgeon, paddle-fish, and saw-fish, have the snout prolonged into organs for stirring up the mud or sand of the bottom in order to obtain the small animal forms upon which they feed. The paddle-fish has the gill- rakers developed into a beautiful straining apparatus for securing these minute creatures. The saw of the saw-fish is not used, as has been frequently asserted, as a weapon for disabling its prey for food, though it is used as a weap- on of defense. Its use in procuring food is by stirring up the mud or sand of the bottom, and the food, as in the case of the paddle-fish and shovel-nosed sturgeon, is com- posed of small forms. I have frequently observed schools of half-grown saw-fishes feeding in shallow water by rak- ing the bottom with their saws, which are well-fitted for this purpose. Their food seemed to be principally small crustaceans and mollusks. Fishes with small, feeble, sub-equal teeth, as the herrings (Clupeide), anchovies (Hngraulide), silversides (Ather- inide), etc., as we might imagine, feed upon minute or microscopic invertebrate forms, mostly crustaceans, which exist in countless myriads in both fresh and salt water. Fishes with bands or patches of villiform or brush-like teeth, as the sunfishes (Centrarchida), cattishes (Szdu- ride), striped basses (Labracine), etc., feed principally on crawfish, crabs, shrimp, etc., insects, and occasionally small fishes. The black bass is not, as popularly supposed, 27 a piscivorous fish—indeed, not so much so as the brook trout, which has stronger, sharper, and more unequal teeth. The principal food of the black bass is crawfish, as the shrimp, squid, and crab, is of the striped bass, though neither fish will object to a minnow, if it can catch it, when hungry. The minnow is a good bait for the black bass, as the menhaden is for the striped bass, but it must not be surmised from this fact that they are piscivorous in their habits. A minnow on a hook is in a disabled condition and can- not escape, and most fishes will take it under these con- ditions, whereas if it was free it would easily get away. Fishes have been found in the stomach of sturgeons, but that is no indication that it is piscivorous, which it could not be with its toothless jaws and sucker-like mouth en- tirely below the projecting snout; but finding a disabled or dead fish on the bottom, it swallows it. So, whenever the black bass, striped bass, white perch, or the cat- fishes, or any fish with brush-like teeth, finds a disabled fish of suitable size, on a hook or otherwise, it is taken in. I have demonstrated this fact time and again by dropping a hook baited with a minnow in the midst of a school of similar fishes, when it would be singled out and seized by a larger fish which had failed to notice those that were free. I cannot refrain from saying, in this connection, that the black bass has been greatly misrepresented and unjustly maligned and grossly abused as a piscivorous fish, and oft- en by those who ought to have known better. It has been accused of depopulating rivers of young shad that have been planted in them, while the striped bass of the same waters have escaped such imputation. It has been charged with the destruction of brook trout in certain waters, while the cat-fishes have not had a word raised against them. But happily the charges have been proven false, and the black bass has been acknowledged to be not so black as it has 28 been painted. I lately saw a statement in public print from the superintendent of a fish-hatchery that the pike-perch (Stizostedion vitreum) was not so voracious or destructive to other fish as the black bass or mascalonge! Comment is unnecessary. I found this prejudice existing in England, and the op- position to the introduction of the black bass into British waters was very pronounced. Mr. Marston, of the London ‘‘Fishing Gazette,’’ informed me that the prejudice had been imbibed from American writers and anglers, who, in order to convince British anglers of the fine game qualities of the black bass, had unwittingly overdone the matter, and conveyed the impression that it was a more voracious and piscivorous fish than their pike! I wish to say right here that the reason of the failure to stock certain waters in England successfully with black bass is that said waters were not suitable for the small-mouthed bass—the kind experimented with. If the large-mouthed species had been introduced I have no doubt but it would have done well. It is eminently fitted for the sluggish, grassy broads of England, and’would not be so destructive to other tishes as their perch, not to mention their pike. We have in America thousands of small lakes, many of them without inlet or outlet, where the black bass has existed from time immemorial with the pike, pickerel, perch, sunfishes, suck- ers, ciscoes, and even brook trout, without detriment to either of these species; indeed, if any species suffers, it is always the black bass. The piscivorous fishes which swallow their prey whole are those with cardiform teeth, as the pickerel, or with sharp and conical teeth as the dogtish (Ama calva) of fresh waters, or with canine teeth, as the mascalonge, barracuda, pike-perch, snappers, weak-fish, etc. All fishes with unequal, sharp, conical or canine teeth may with cer- tainty be pronounced entirely piscivorous in their habits, feeding principally or entirely upon small or young fishes, 29 or which are small enough to be swallowed whole. Some- times, however, their eyes prove to be larger than their stomachs, and they perish in the attempt to swallow a fish many sizes too large for their capacity. Fishes with lancet-shaped teeth, as the kingfish and Spanish mackerel, or with strong, compressed teeth, as the bluetish, are entirely piscivorous, but bite, cut, or lacerate their prey before swallowing it. The teeth of such fishes are miniature shark-teeth, and they are equally as destruc- tive to their smaller congeners. Fishes with prolonged or produced jaws, armed with strong, sharp, unequal teeth, as the marine and fresh-water gar-fishes, morays, etc., are also wholly piscivorous. Fishes with incisor teeth, as the sheeps head, pin-fish (L. rhomboides), scup, ete., have also molar-like teeth, and feed on crabs, shrimps, or mollusks, and are not at all piscivorous. By the aid of its human-like incisors the sheeps head can readily remove barnacles and other mol- lusks from rocks, timbers, etc., and crush them with its powerful molars. The drum-fish (P. chromis), and the fresh-water drum- (A. grunniens), have villiform teeth on the jaws, but a ‘strong pavement of rounded teeth in the throat for crush- ing the shells of mollusks, which is their principal food, though, as might be judged from their villiform teeth, they occasionally swallow small fishes and crustaceans. Thus, by observing the character and position of the teeth of fishes we have a sure and certain indication of the character of their food, that is, of their principal and natu- ral food. Of course, there will be exceptions, but they only prove the rule. A herbiverous fish will occasionally swallow animal food, while a carnivorous fish will some- times swallow vegetable matter. A fish that lives mostly on crustaceans, may consume twenty-five per cent. of fishes, and vice versa. They should be judged, however, by what they feed on mostly and habitually, when situated so that 30 they can exercise their choice in the matter, for change of environment may involve a change of diet. The horse and dog may take kindly to sweetmeats occasionally, but the one returns to his oats and the other to its vomit, notwith- standing, and it would be foolish to magnify their vaga- ries into confirmed habits. REARING AND DISTRIBUTING TROUT AT THE NORTHVILLE STATION, U. S. FISH COMMISSION. By FRANK N. CLarRK. Some six years since the question was brought up as to the practicability of rearing trout for distribution instead of planting the fry. This subject was suggested by Colonel McDonald. As such splendid results had been achieved with plant- ing carp partially grown, it was suggested that better results might be obtained with planting partially-grown trout. The work was inaugurated by the U. S. Fish Com- mission at the Northville station in the winter of 1886-87, and for that season we succeeded in distributing in the following December, January, February and March, some 11,000 fish. From this beginning the work has been quite successful, until the season of 1890-91 we have distributed to Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan, something over 150,000 yearlings and finger- lings; and I confidently believe, in the near future, that from the Northville station alone we shall reach the 1,000,000 mark in our work of rearing and distributing yearlings. 31 Much has been said and written upon this subject detri- mental to the work of feeding fish that are to go into wild streams. It has been suggested by many that the trout, after their introduction into the stream, would naturally be in search of the food they had been accustomed to, while in the feeding-tanks or ponds, and before they acclimated themselves to other food, would starve. I would ask our fish culturist friend if it is not a fact, beyond satisfactory contradiction, that in nine cases out of ten that the stream adjacent to any fish-culture estab- lishment where trout are bred, and where trout partially grown are invariably escaping, does not become, in a few years, better stocked than streams where perhaps 100,000 have been planted. I call to mind a stream in Michigan that was planted with 500 yearling brook trout in 1887, and again in 1888 we visited the stream and planted 500 more of the same variety, and from my own observation at that time I saw and counted twelve large trout near where we made the plant. These fish were also seen by our own car-men as well as train-men. I have no doubt that many of the State Commission think it necessary to plant fry in order to satisfy their con- stituency, as applicants with whom I have corresponded, when we notify them that their application has been passed upon and an allotment of 100 or 500 trout have been assigned to their stream, seem to feel insulted, and expect from 3,000 to 25,000. This we have no difficulty in over- coming, after they have received the fish and have noticed the size as they are planted. In this connection it would, perhaps, be well to give a slight description of our plan of rearing trout at the North- ville establishment. Not that we think it any better plan than others, or any different than many, but that it may bring out discussions at this meeting that may be valuable to all. 32 Our eggs, after impregnation, are placed on gravel, in troughs with slight partitions, perhaps two inches in height and fourteen inches in width by eighteen in length. In this space we place from 10,000 to 15,000 eggs; they are allowed to remain on the gravel until the eye-spots show, when they are removed to trays where they are hatched and held until about one week before the sack is entirely absorbed, when they are removed to the feeding-tanks. These tanks are constructed of 14 inch plank, and made from four to six feet in length by two feet in width and one foot deep, with a fall from one to the other of nine inches. In these tanks we. first place 10,000 trout, and as they grow they are gradually thinned out until distributed or placed in rearing-ponds. In feeding, beef’s liver is used, which is prepared at the slanghter-house in Detroit and shipped daily by express, arriving at Northville in the evening for the night watch- man to strain for the next day’s use—the quantity de- pending upon the size and quantity of fish to be fed. At the present time we are feeding about seventy-five pounds per day to about 350,000 trout. It is intended that the same person shall do the feeding at all times; by so doing he will be the best judge as to quantity to be given. For the first two months the trout are fed eight times per day, all feeding being done between daylight and dark, and always at the same hour. After two months this is reduced to six feedings per day, for one month, and then reduced to three feedings per day until distributed. Salt is introduced into the feeding-tanks twice a week, giving to each tank about six quarts, making it quite brackish. We also introduce muck twice each week, aiming to make the water very muddy. The introduction of muck and salt is done when a full head of water is running, so it will pass off quickly. Ex- perience has taught that the introduction of salt and Transactions American Fisheries Society, 1891. Plate I, , = pe : ve me ae pease ae PETTY EEE 73 Dm wi A Si > Fy | r Lm Pooh i | =m 7 BREE Se ur (18 = ee Hh 3 ne “