1 10 DUBLIN NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETT. 



in this way, I hare seen the male fish, who all the time closely attended (and 

 seemed intent on driving off the number of trout who were on the watch to snap 

 up the pea), come and take the place of the female, and remain on the pit for 

 five or six minutes, and I have not the slightest douljt but that he, during that 

 time, ejected a portion of his milt on the ova already deposited. As for the 

 males leaving the rivers together, I know they do not, any more than the fe- 

 males ; and both drop down the rivers slowly, and at intervals — a flood greatly 

 hurries their journey back to the sea. Mr. Ffennell remarks that the clean fish 

 which occur in the Caragh.in the month of January, spawned the following No- 

 vember. Now, I would like to know when they spawned, previous to the time 

 of their appearance as clean or spring fish in the month of January? If Novem- 

 ber was the time, then they had but two months to spawn, go to the sea, and 

 return as spring fish. I think it would not be very easy to pass for a clean run 

 fish one that was full of ova two months before. It would also seem by Mr. 

 Ffennell's theory that the fish which remained all the summer in the lake and 

 river must have been all females, as, according to his idea, the males do not ar- 

 rive until after the summer had passed and the spawning time had come. Now 

 it is notorious that during the summer, fish (both peale and salmon) of both 

 sexes are continually ascending the rivers ; and can it be possible that after the 

 close season commences, all the males turn back and remain in the sea or estu- 

 aries until the time for continuing their species arrives ? I perfectly agree with 

 Mr. Andrews that fish remaining all the summer in the fresh water are not in a 

 healthy state for spawning; every angler knows that even the spring fish, after 

 being in the river for any length of time, become discoloured, and the longer 

 they remain in the fresh water, the more they deteriorate both in appearance 

 and quality. But as for the male fish leaving the river en masse, I do not credit 

 it at all ; I know they do not in the Bandon River, as I every year take them 

 quite as late in the spring as the spent pea-fisli, both having the appearance re- 

 sulting from a lengthened stay in the fresh water. Mr. Andrews was quite cor- 

 rect in styling the Bandon a late river, and in stating that fish were in good 

 condition late in the season. It would, I think, vastly contribute to the increase 

 of salmon in that river, if the close season continued for at least fifteen days 

 longer ; and at the same time I think the open season might with the greatest 

 safety be continued until the middle of October. I killed two salmon on the 29th 

 September last, and I never saw or ate better fish — one was a male and the 

 other a female ; the pea in the latter was not larger than snipe-shot. I am, 

 therefore, of opinion that it is not fair to close the Bandon and other late rivers, 

 nor open them at the same time as rivers in which the fish spawn earlier ; in 

 fact, the principal spawning time in the Bandon is from the 12th of January to 

 the end of February," 



Mr. Andrews said that he was fully prepared to make a few comments on the 

 valuable statement that Mr. Williams had just submitted, as well as upon any 

 discussion that might arise ; but he agreed with the Chairman that the time of 

 the evening did not admit of discussion, notwithstanding the vast importance of 

 the subject. He regretted the absence of Mr. Ffennell, who, he was sure, would 

 clear up any of the points in discussion. Mr. Andrews did not consider that the 

 Society had anything to do with the legal question of the periods of the close or 

 open seasons ; it was the natural history and habits of the salmon it had to deal 

 with. Mr. Andrews always placed great importance on the knowledge of prac- 

 tical men, and, where science could be combined with such knowledge, there 

 were no difficulties of the subject that could not be unravelled. There was, 

 however, one class Mr. Andrews did not consider useful — non-practical philo- 

 sophers ; their names gave weight to their opinions, but he had seen some writ- 

 ings upon subjects, where, through the want of that practical knowledge, scien- 

 tific errors had been culled and perpetrated, to the injustice of the subject. 



