Fishes of the Western North Atlantic 311 



small catches have been recorded a couple of times in the statistical reports of the former 

 U. S. Fish Commission: for 1889, 6,955 pounds from the Ohio River in Indiana and 

 Kentucky (1902: 667); and for 1902, 150 pounds from Alabama (1905: 416). No 

 later catches seem to have been reported. By correspondence with Herman O. Hessen, 

 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Louisville, Kentucky, it was learned that no one now 

 (1946) fishes for the "Ohio Shad" at that place, though a few are taken incidentally 

 each spring. That these Shad were, and perhaps still are, numerous enough in some 

 places to be taken in considerable quantities is evident, but no special effort is apparently 

 made to catch them. In fact, the fish seem to be regarded in some localities as too bony 

 for human use. At least one fisherman Interviewed by Mr. Hessen at Louisville, Ken- 

 tucky, stated that the fish were so bony that fishermen threw them on the bank and made 

 no efi-brt to sell them. Nevertheless, the food qualities of this Shad, tested by those 

 who are familiar with the delicious American shad, have been found not at all inferior 

 (jj: 275; 27: 169). 



It seems probable that Alabama Shad constitute at least a small unutilized food 

 supply, but their actual abundance remains unknown. Evermann indicated that if proper 

 equipment were used, considerable catches might be taken (jj: 279); for example, a 

 great Increase in the catch resulted at Louisville, Kentucky, when surface-fishing seines 

 were substituted for bottom-fishing seines. However, until people living on the shad 

 streams of the Gulf drainage recognize its delicious food qualities, there will be little 

 demand; hence no special effort to catch them will be made. Because of the many dams 

 constructed across rivers, barring them from the spawning grounds, a decrease In 

 abundance Is no doubt taking place. 



Despite an unutilized supply of Alabama Shad in streams tributary to the Gulf 

 of Mexico, large shipments of American shad fry, A. sapidissima, were liberated in those 

 streams (2). However, no American shad are Included among the rather numerous 

 specimens examined, nor has any authentic record of their occurrence in those streams 

 been found. Indeed, Alabama Shad seem to be referred to as "Potomac shad" by fisher- 

 men who believe they are the progeny of American shad planted by the former U. S. 

 Fish Commission. 29 But it seems quite certain that the Introduction failed. 



Range. The Alabama Shad is represented by specimens in the National Museum 

 and has been recorded for all the principal streams tributary to the Gulf of Mexico 

 (exclusive of the Pearl River), from the Mississippi eastward to the Choctawhatchee 

 River, about 50 miles east of Pensacola, Florida. A 105-mm specimen from Grand 

 Isle, Louisiana, is also at hand. In the Mississippi Valley it is known from as far west 

 as Hot Springs, Arkansas, and northward to Fairport, Iowa, and Montgomery, West 

 Virginia. 



Synonyms and References: 



Clufea sapidissima Jordan and Gilbert (not of Wilson), Proc. U. S. nat. Mus., 5, 1882: 247 (meas., counts 



29. Fishermen generally do not seem to distinguish Alabama Shad from skipjack herring, Pomolobus chrysockloris; ac- 

 cording to Coker (27:165) they are referred to as "Government shad" by the fishermen at Keokuk, Iowa, apparently 

 in the belief that they are the result of these plantings. 



