466 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 19 60 



Few attempts were made to regulate the taking of clams until the 

 begmning of the present century. The supply appeared to be in- 

 finite and the demand was so moderate that no one worried about a 

 possible shortage. Tliere was one interesting exception in which one 

 of the States bordermg the Chesapeake Bay enacted a regulation, 

 sometime before the Civil War, limiting the number of days a week 

 that a slaveholder could feed clams to his slaves. It is unlikely that 

 this was a humanitarian move, but probably a measure to maintain 

 a continuing supply of food to sustain the large slave population. 



NOT LIMITLESS 



Toward the end of the last century it became apparent that the soft- 

 clam resources were not limitless, particularly in the New England 

 States. The commercial hook-and-line fishery was at its height, using 

 bait in greater quantities, and "clambakes" became increasingly popu- 

 lar at every occasion from a political rally to a fireman's picnic. Im- 

 proved methods of transportation provided a means of shipping clams 

 to large centers of population where clam chowder became a required 

 item on the menu of fashionable restaurants featuring shore dinners. 

 As a result the demand began to outstrip the supply and such famous 

 clam-producmg localities as Ipswich and Essex had the unpleasant 

 experience of finding their clams disappearing faster than Nature 

 could provide new ones. 



At the begimiing of the present century, the U.S. Fish Commission 

 and the appropriate State conservation departments of Rhode Island 

 and Massachusetts each employed biologists to investigate the biology 

 of the soft clam with the aim of establishing methods of restoring 

 the supply to what was supposed to be the former abundant level. 

 These scientists investigated the life history, determined the rate of 

 growth, and unanimously agreed that the only solution to tlie prob- 

 lem was the establishing of privately owned or leased clam farms. 

 Legislation was enacted in Massachusetts which permitted tlie select- 

 men or aldermen of coastal towns and cities to grant tracts of inter- 

 tidal land to individuals for the purpose of clam culture, but the idea 

 was so contrary to the long-established free-fishing tradition that it 

 immediately met with strong opposition. Of the few grants that 

 were made, some failed, and those which turned out to be profitable 

 were soon revoked at the insistence of the independent clam diggers. 

 Discouraged shellfish biologists directed their etfoits into other fields, 

 and interest in the soft-clam resources went into a decline. Little 

 was done about the situation mitil after World War II, although the 

 clam kept increasing in popularity and prices soared to record 

 heights. 



Interest was revived with the return of servicemen after the war. 

 Enterprising young men living along the coast, noting the skyrocket- 



