WHITLING 125 



diffidence give my reasons for making it, and to elucidate these reasons 

 I would make the further suggestion that not only do sea-trout return 

 to their parent river hut that the shoals which have been reared in Loch 

 Lomond and its spawning streams, and in similar waters in Scotland, 

 actually return to their special haunts where they were reared and fed 

 as fry and parr. 



In Loch Lomond, then, one can trace the shoal of travelling whitling 

 by seeing individuals of the shoal leaping. They appear to head 

 directly for some particular spot on the shores of an island or the 

 mainland, and one's inference is always later confirmed by finding that 

 spot, which had hitherto yielded no sport to the rod, now alive with fish. 

 Further, in comparing notes of an evening when the whitling are 

 entering the loch, the boatmen may find that banks widely separated 

 are thronged while intermediate and equally good ground is barren. 

 The local shoals have reached the first, but have not yet arrived at the 

 other ground. Yet in a day or two the intermediate ground has received 

 its local stock. It seems improbable that the fish, entering so vast a 

 sheet of water as Loch Lomond is, would make directly for a particular 

 quarter of it unless they had that quarter particularly in view. This is 

 more or less surmise in the case of the whitling, but I shall submit at 

 this stage instances of mature marked fish having returned to the same 

 trifling spawning burn. I discuss these instances later in another 

 connection, but meantime I may tabulate the returns of marked sea- 

 trout, to show their homing propensities, thus : — 



340 B. Marked, Luss Water Oct 1904 



Recaptured, Lu.ss Water Oct. 1906 



928 B. Marked, Arn Burn Nov. igo6 



Recaptured, A rn Burn Nov. 1907 



8352 B. Marked. Finlas Water Nov. 1913 



Recaptured, Finlas Water (ist time) Oct. 1914 



Recaptured, Finlas Water (2nd time) Oct. 1915 



