64 U. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 



lives the probabilities of the ova being healthy and fertile are less than in 

 somewhat older examples. At first the number of males appears to be in ex- 

 cess of the females, but the mortality among them is greater than those of the 

 other sex, until at 3 or 4 years of age the proportion may be expected to be 

 about the same, and subsequently the females predominate. The number of 

 eggs produced by each female trout has been roughly estimated at 800 for 

 every pound's weight of fish, which computation has been observed at the 

 Howietoun breeding ponds to be fairly accurate. * * *. The period at 

 which these fish breed varies in different rivers and districts, extending from 

 October until February, and even, although rarely, to March. * * *. Although 

 trout generally migrate into the smaller contiguous brooks to breed, large 

 ones are more frequently found forming redds in the broader streams than 

 are smaller fish; but it is by no means rare to find large examples having 

 taken possession of pools in burns. The trout's redd or nest is a mound of 

 gravel which would fill one or even two wheelbarrows, and when by probably 

 causing a shallow may assist in aerating the water. The eggf^ themselves lie 

 loose among the gravel at from 1 to 2 feet below the surface. 



From the foregoing account of the brown trout it would not seem 

 to be a very desirable acquisition in waters where the indigenous 

 fish fauna is wholly satisfactory. 



In connection with the foregoing comment on the probable un- 

 desirability of the brown trout in American waters the following 

 extracts from opinions expressed by fish-culturists concerning the 

 predacious habits of the fish are of int-erest : ^' 



The largest trout caught in 1894 were (1) a German brown weighing Si 

 pounds, (2) a rainbow weighing 3^ pounds, (3) a fontinalis weighing 2 

 pounds 9 ounces. 



Some years ago the club planted as an experiment some German brown 

 trout {Salmo fario) and a few of the rainbow variety (Salmo irideus). The 

 former have proven to be very undesirable tenants of the stream. They grow 

 to an enormous size, are very coarse, and are very destructive to the other 

 fish. For the past two years a continuous effort has been made to rid the 

 streams of these Germans. The rainbow trout are more beautiful and more 

 desirable in every way, but they do not compare favorably with the fontinalis. 

 In the future foreigners will not be encouraged in these waters. 



Speaking before the American Fisheries Society at Grand Rapids, 

 Mich., in 1906, Dr. Tarleton H. Bean, at that time fish-culturist for 

 the State of New York, said : ^^ 



The State propagates the brown trout to a much less extent than formerly, 

 and its present policy is that it should never be planted in any waters con- 

 taining brook trout. An expert angler friend of mine told me he got 10 

 brown trout to 1 brook trout in the Beaverkill River. The cause of that is 

 unquestionably (at least in the minds of the anglers, and it seems reasonable) 

 that the brown trout destroy the brook trout. If they do not they at any 

 rate destroy the food of the brook trout, which amounts to the same thing. 

 There is now a continual desire on the part of the New York commissioner 

 to refuse applications for brown trout, and he does refuse them for waters 

 already containing brook trout. They are suitable for some waters, undoubt- 

 edly waters which contain no other trout, and they have done very well there. 



The following is extracted from a letter written November 2, 1905, 

 by State Fish Commissioner W. E. Meehan, of Pennsylvania. 



We have had a great deal of trouble, and much disaster has followed the 

 planting of brown trout in some of our brook-trout streams. 



1' From a book of the Castalia Trout Club, Castalia, Ohio. By Frank C. Hubbard. 

 Published in 1005. 



1* Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 1906. 



