MARINE FISHERIES OF TEXAS 177 



Obviously it is impossible, because of the paucity of data, to explain 

 the difference in yield in the various localities, even if it be taken for 

 granted that the available statistics truthfully represent the catches 

 of fish. Various explanations have been offered, but none of these 

 were based upon reliable observations. For instance, it has been 

 suggested that the decline of the fisheries of Galveston is attributable 

 to oil pollution, the building of rock jetties at the harbor entrance, 

 and the general development of commercial traffic. Likewise, the. 

 development of the fisheries at Point Isabel has been attributed to 

 the isolated situation and the relatively unspoiled natural conditions 

 on the fishing grounds. These, of course, are plausible explanations, 

 but their truth or falsity should be determined. 



INFLUENCE OF LEGAL RESTRICTIONS ON THE CATCH 



There may be other explanations for the rise and fall of the catch 

 along the coast. For example, it has been argued that the enforce- 

 ment of the various State fishery regulations has greatly influenced 

 the amount of fish caught. While it is recognized that the size of 

 the annual catch is affected by diverse conflicting influences, the 

 following is offered as a possible influencing factor: 



1901-1904- — The catch in these years increased annually or held 

 fairly constant in each locality. This represents the normal progress 

 of fisheries unaffected by any serious legal restrictions. 



1905-1913. — The catch in these years dropped suddenly in 1906 

 at all localities except Point Isabel. From 1900 until 1913 the catches 

 at all points except Corpus Christi and Point Isabel maintained a 

 level trend or else showed a downward tendency. Only the two ports 

 named showed a general increase. 



The sudden drop in 1906 might very well have been due to the 

 passage of laws that suddenly closed as spawning grounds a great 

 deal of water. No net fishing was allowed in certain bays, coves, and 

 bayous. At Point Isabel alone no waters were set aside as spawning 

 grounds, and this was the only port that showed an increased catch 

 in 1906. Corpus Christi was affected only temporarily, as the water 

 closed there never produced any appreciable part of the total catch. 

 On the whole, however, it is significant that closing the waters as a 

 breeding grounds suddenly stopped the yearly increase in every 

 fishing center but one, and in most cases kept production below what 

 would have been normal if the fisheries had been allowed to operate 

 unrestricted. 



1914 and 1915. — In 1914 another sudden drop in the catch of all 

 the fishing centers took place. Point Isabel also was affected. In 

 1915 none but this southernmost fishery succeeded in equaling the 

 record of 1912. 



This second drop, which affected all fisheries alike, no doubt was- 

 attributable to a new law that prohibited seining of any kind during 

 the summer months. (It is said, however, that gill and set nets were 

 dragged whenever the fishermen had an opportunity to do so un- 

 observed. Also, the fishermen worked in closed waters whenever 

 possible.) 



1916-1918. — During the period of the war all State restrictions 

 were abated by Federal advice and all waters were thrown open to 



