BUREAU OP FIrillEKIKS 89 



w'oik laid for further cooperation in effectuating the conservation 

 and sustained production of our fishery resources. 



A local meeting similar to the above was held in Baltimore early 

 in 19o5 which was attended by commercial fishermen and anglers 

 from the Chesapeake Bay section. Here various measures were dis- 

 cussed which were directly connected with the activities of these 

 groups, and the discussion resulted in the meeting sponsoring fisliery 

 legislation of benefit to all concerned. Other such meetings have 

 been held in various other sections of the country. 



COOPERATION WITH STATES AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS 



For many j^ears the Bureau has had valuable informal coopera- 

 tion in fishery investigations with manj' institutions, both public and 

 private, but the acceptance of formal cooperation was not authorized 

 until the passage of the act of Congress approved May 21, 1930. 



In connection with fish-cultural operations the closer cooperative 

 relations with the States as initiated and developed by the National 

 Planning Council of Conmiercial and Game Fish Commissioners 

 has been unusually effective. During the past year developments of 

 this nature have been largely a consolidation of cooperative pro- 

 cedure and a refinement in the working details of the various cooper- 

 ative arrangements existing with a majority of the States. Arrange- 

 ments have been made for several additional States, particularly 

 Iowa, to review Federal applications for fish. The State of Vermont 

 has afforded generous help in a financial way in meeting the costs of 

 operation at the extensive brook-trout egg-producing plant main- 

 tained by the Bureau in the White Mountain National Forest, N. H. 

 Tennessee and West Virginia have furnished food for fish held at 

 the Bureau's hatcheries and have handled the distribution of these 

 fish when they were ready for release. A number of the Western 

 States have continued to supply helpful cooperation in the collection 

 of trout eggs and are compensated therefor by receiving a proportion 

 of the eggs taken. There has been a joint operation of trout and 

 shad hatcheries in the State of South Carolina. 



Many of the cooperative fish-cultural arrangements are largely 

 a matter of administrative detail and are too voluminous for a full 

 recital, but their effects have been plainly evident in a greater effi- 

 ciency. In fact, it may be said that in several instances State and 

 Federal fish-cultural facilities are practically interchangeable as 

 far as stocking is concerned, and real distinction lies only in their 

 being administered by different agencies. 



California has continued its cooperative scientific investigations 

 with the Bureau concerned with the trout supply, looking toward 

 the more adequate supply of streams and the more rational regu- 

 lation of fishing within its borders. New York State has continued 

 its cooperation in the conduct of studies of the nutritional require- 

 ments of trout to improve hatchery practices in feeding and rearing. 

 Oregon has cooperated with a Bureau investigator in a study of fish 

 diseases and hatchery practices. North Carolina, Connecticut, and 

 Washington have assisted in investigations for the restoration of 

 oyster beds in their coastal waters; and Georgia, Louisiana, and 

 Texas have taken an active part in the study of the important shell 

 fisheries of the South Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Despite the fact 



