158 



SALMONID^ OF BRITAIN. 



Fig. 31. Head natural size of female scurf. 



The Scurf ot the Tees has, from the time of Willoughby until now, been almost 

 universally considered to be identical with the salmon-trout, Salmo tnitta. In 

 the following- there were, D. 13 (i), P. 13, V. 9, A. 11 (|), C. 21, Vert. 58 + cc. A 

 female received from Mr. Grissell, in August, 1885, was IG'6 inches long,* and the 

 tail fin slightly concave, length of head 5f in the total length, form of preopercle 

 as in the figure, while it possessed 56 ctecal appendages, and its tail fin was 

 equally concave with no. 5 in figure no. 30 (p. 156 ante). Another specimen, 

 also termed Scurf or Gochivies, was sent in April the same year, from Turcebridge- 

 on-the-Tees : it also was a female, 16 inches long, and had recently spawned, 

 twenty-three full-sized eggs still remaining in the abdominal cavity. Length of 

 head h\ in the total length (see figure 31) : it had 52 CEecal appendages. A third 

 example from the same locality was a male, 18 inches long, with a small hook at 

 the end of its lower jaw : the tail fin was slightly concave : cascal appendages 52, 

 and the milt well forward. All were of the general colours of salmon- trout, and the 

 black sjiots extended in from one to three irregular rows below the lateral-line. 



bluish bands, with an orange-coloured spot placed between each" (p. 295). Mr. Shaw (1843) 

 gave figures in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh of young Salmo salar, S. trutta, 

 and S. fario, showing fourteen in the salmon, twelve in the sea trout, and thirteen or fourteen, 

 some of which were broken up in the middle, in the fresh-water trout. He also remarked, with 

 reference to the young salmon-trout, that " on comparing them with the common trout, the 

 resemblance is very striking, the general outline of the fish being less elegant than that of the 

 young salmon or par, the external markings being also more peculiarly those of the trout species, 

 so that, in the absence of the parent skins, it would be a matter of difficulty to determine to which 

 kind of trout they actually belong." Dr. Giinther remarked as follows : Catalogue of the Fishes in 

 the British Museum, vol. vi, 18G6, ]). 25, Salmo trutta, " young with nine or ten dusky cross-bars." 

 In his Introduction to the Study of Fislies, 1880, he observed, " the number of bars is not quite 

 constant, but the migratory trout have two (and even three) more than river trout " (p. 631). I 

 may here just allude to the fact that the Lochleven trout Dr. Giinther asserted to be " a 

 non-migratory species inhabiting Lochleven and other lakes," etc. (Catal. vol. vi, p. 101) ; con- 

 sequently it ought to have two or three bars less than his S. trutta (stated to possess nine or ten), 

 but instead of this, it may have from fifteen to sixteen, as observed in a very large number of 

 young examples at Howietoun. In a brook at Cowley, where neither sea trout nor salmon can 

 ascend, the trout pars had from nine to ten lateral bands, similar to the number present in the 

 salmon pars. 



* In it were numerous eggs up to 0-125 of an inch each in diameter : numbers are said to 

 ascend this river at this jjeriod of the year, weighing from 1 lb. to 14 lb. each. Unless in the kelt 

 stage it is said not to rise to the fly. In a correspondence between Mr. Surtees and Frank 

 Buckland, in September, 18G9, we are told that at Dinsdale-on-Tees they fetch nearly the same 

 price as salmon, for, by the employment of a pair of scissors, the round-tail of the bull-trout 

 becomes the more forked-tailed salmon. However, Buckland, having eaten one, observed that it 

 had a very had taste. 



