PROPAGATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD FISHES, 1931 639 



In studying the tables certain modifying factors must be taken into 

 consideration. In the first place, each State report covers the opera- 

 tions for its latest complete fiscal year, but as there has been no uni- 

 form selection of such a period the tables do not supply data for any 

 complete year. However, as the general scope of State fish-cultural 

 activities does not vary materially from year to year, the figures 

 cited may be considered an approximate index of activities in 1930 

 and may serve as a standard of comparison in determining the amount 

 of work accomplished in earher or later years. Secondly, mth regard 

 to fishing licenses, State policies are such that in many cases licenses 

 for fishing combined with hunting licenses are issued. Because of 

 this practice it will be seen that the number of licensed fishermen must 

 be smaller than is indicated by the tables. In analyzing the Ucense 

 figures, however, it must be borne in mind that thousands of un- 

 licensed fishermen catch game fish. In addition to unlicensed fresh- 

 water fishermen, most of the States do not require licenses for 

 noncommercial salt-water fishing, a sport which claims the interest 

 of innumerable fishermen. The figures embodied in the report do 

 not include numbers and values of commercial fishing licenses. 



The third item for consideration concerns the value of distribution 

 figures. It is not possible to compare fairly the output of one State, 

 as shown in these tables, with that of another because there exists a 

 wide variation in the production policies pursued. A large number 

 of trout fry may be raised and Hberated at a cost and effort much less 

 than would be required in rearing a like number of fingerlings. In 

 many States, especially in the East, production is limited by the 

 rearing of fish to legal size for stocking. States doing such work may 

 be foremost in the value of propagation work and still not compare 

 favorably with others when the numerical output is considered. The 

 value of the distribution figures is made apparent, however, in a 

 comparison of the total output or of that of the individual States from 

 year to year. Lastly, the relative completeness of the information 

 must be considered. Figures published in this report are from all 

 States covered last year with the exception of Virginia. 



Bearing the above consideration in mind, a comparison of the States' 

 activities as described in this report and those for the previous year 

 may be made. For the sake of accuracy, statistics submitted last 

 year for Virginia are ehminated in making the following comparison. 

 The total output is smaller than that of the previous year due to 

 decreases in the output of trout, other game fish, and commercial 

 species. The output of black bass increased almost 30 per cent. 

 The total expenditure for fish propagation exceeded that of the pre- 

 vious year by about 1 per cent. While the importance of wild-life 

 propagation has undoubtedly been increased, and interest in it has 

 not diminished, the appropriations for propagation have not shown 

 the usual increase as a result of the prevaifing business depression. 



The increased production of black bass signifies the interest that 

 has attended the propagation of these fish in recent years. Approxi- 

 mately 30 per cent more black bass were distributed by the States in 

 the past fiscal year than in the preceding year. The success in propa- 

 gating black bass and other pond fishes is largely affected by weather 

 conditions. Nevertheless, these fish can be raised very economically. 

 In general black bass are valued second to trout as a game fish, but 

 as some sections do not have trout waters, and as many persons prefer 



