SALMON “CANNERIES” IN AMERICA. 25 
if the same obstacles are placed in their way. The 
Atlantic salmon is naturally no less prolific than the Pacific 
salmon. If the breeding stock perishes in the one case 
after one act of reproduction, and still the rivers swarm 
with fish, how is it that in the other case, with the careful 
protection of the parent fish, which are known to be 
capable of breeding over and over again, the supply still 
falls short of what it was in former days? The natural 
enemies of the salmon are as active and as abundant in 
America as in England: indeed far more so, for, with a 
dense population, otters and wild birds in the fresh waters 
and seals and grampuses in the sea are far less numerous 
than formerly ; while, as regards mere fishing operations, 
the legitimate fisherman has, for some ten or twelve years 
at any rate, been quite as energetic in his attempts to 
capture the fish in British Columbia and California as 
in this country. In 1876 it is estimated that the “can- 
neries” at the mouth of the Columbia river sent away 
40,000,000 pounds of salmon, besides which probably a 
fifth of that quantity was salted, and large numbers 
were taken by the Indians. But the forty million 
pounds of tinned salmon probably represent nearly 
double that quantity of salmon actually captured, since 
only the best parts of the fish are preserved, and large 
quantities often spoil, after an unusually good catch, 
before the canning establishments can keep pace with the 
supply. And yet, with this enormous take, the upper 
portions of the river are found, after the nets are off, to be 
swarming with breeding fish. The expression “legitimate 
fisherman” may probably give rise to controversy, though 
it is capable of fairly accurate definition. The essence, so to 
speak, of the salmon question lies in the fact that the fishery 
is not conducted in the opensea. Very little fishing for 
