10 
Bear Island to the mainland. These grow in a similar manner to those in Smith 
Cove and Joggins Cove. It has been used very little, however, owing to the 
fact that they are slightly further away from the home of the mussel fisherman. 
The ‘“‘blue’’ mussels grow along the rough rocky shore of the point bounding 
Smith Cove on the side nearer Digby. Only a narrow strip of them survive in 
this unfavourable location and these are exposed only at the fullest tides so that 
although of good size (Table 2) they are of little importance commercially. 
Another patch of eroded mussels occurs on Bear Island on the side of the point 
nearest Digby. . 
. The “black’’ mussels grow all around Bear Island and also at about the 
upper limits of the bed in Smith Cove. They resemble the St. Andrews mussels 
in shape and are too small for marketing (Table 2). They would probably 
fatten if removed to the better locations and could thus be used as a source of 
supply for seed mussels. 
~ A large bed of mussels was reported as probably existing up Bear River, but 
was not visited. It was known to exist in 1916. Another bed was reported at 
Goat Island. Above Goat Island it is said no beds exist. 
Mussels at Gulliver Hole. 
A bed of large mussels was reported at Gulliver Hole, down the coast outside 
of the Annapolis Basin. This proved to be only a patch of mussels growing on 
the rocks, the mussels resembling those in Passamaquoddy Bay. 
Size of the Mussels. 
From a consideration of Table II it will be seen that the larger-sized mussels 
in the beds near Digby are between 6 cm. and 7 cm. in length, some being found 
even larger, viz., 8 cm. in length, in the sample of “‘blue’’ mussels. It will be 
seen also that the mussels from Gulliver Hole are of a fairly good size, the majority 
of the larger ones being between 5.5 cm. and 6 cm. in length. 
It is of interest to compare the size of these mussels with those of St. Andrews 
region. The majority of the larger mussels there in 1917 (from beds of similar 
location also, 7.e., on the gently sloping shores) were between 2 cm. and 3.5 cm. 
in length. Even those similarly situated to those at Gulliver Hole were appreci- 
ably smaller, being for the most part between 4.5 cm. and 5 cm. 
The difference in size between the mussels of the St. Andrews region and 
those from the beds producing the large mussels at Digby (e.g., Smith Cove) 
is not alone due to the difference in length; there is a distinct difference in the 
relative proportions of length, depth and thickness of the mussels. Those from 
Digby are relatively deeper and thicker in proportion to their length than those 
from St. Andrews. Mussels of this shape I refer to as the Digby type, having 
first observed this difference in proportion in mussels from Digby, while the 
relatively shallower mussels which I observed first in St. Andrews region I refer 
to as of the St. Andrews’ type. In Plate-I. are shown four mussels which 
illustrate this difference in shape; Nos. 1 and 2 are mussels from Passama- 
quoddy Bay and illustrate well the St. Andrews type, while Nos. 3 and 4 are 
mussels collected at Loggieville, N.S., and are of the Digby type. 
24 
