192 Our Food Mollusks 



have not had the experience, from a history of the prog- 

 ress that has been made in oyster legislation. 



Previous to the year 1880, a system of local control 

 over Connecticut waters was in operation. The state 

 relegated to the towns the disposal, under certain limita- 

 tions, of shore privileges on their boundaries. The select- 

 men, or an oyster committee in each town, were given the 

 power to " designate " suitable places in the waters of 

 the town for the planting or cultivation of oysters, clams, 

 or mussels. But the holding of each person was not to 

 exceed two acres. 



The plan was an utter failure from many causes. In 

 the first place, no protection was afforded the culturist. 

 Without it oyster culture is impossible. Planted oysters 

 were stolen with perfect impunity because there were no 

 laws punishing the act, which was everywhere regarded 

 as a joke. The towns appointed no officers to protect 

 leased bottoms. 



In the majority of cases the holdings were not even 

 mapped, and titles to the land were very insecure. 

 There were no hydrographic surveys. When boundary 

 stakes were lost in storms or removed by ice, contentions 

 among adjacent owners were inevitable, and no legal de- 

 cisions of such quarrels were to be had. Non-residents 

 were not permitted to lease bottoms. Quarrels over 

 town boundaries arose, and the rulings of one town com- 

 mittee were different from those of another. If, in spite 

 of all these difficulties, one were willing to risk capital in 

 an attempt at oyster culture, he was able to do nothing on 

 two acres of bottom. The result was open and wholesale 

 fraud in gaining control of other holdings than his own. 

 Concerted action by culturists, necessary to establish and 

 maintain a large market, or to protect the oyster terri- 





