Report of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners. 51 



these reports have not been greatly overdrawn. The findings indi- 

 cate, however, that the grounds do not all suffer to the same extent, 

 but that the location of the grounds with reference to the mid-bay 

 channel has much to do with the damage done. The oyster bars 

 located in or near channels were found to be in better condition in 

 every way than those located near shore in shallow water. This is 

 probably due to the fact that the fresh water remains on the beds in 

 the deeper channels for shorter periods than on the grounds distant 

 from channels, the effect of the swift currents of rising tides being 

 such as to replace the fresh water with brackish or salt water for a 

 time, thus affording short breathing times for the oysters. The rap- 

 idly moving water in the channels also prevents the deposition of 

 sediment and carries away any sediment which may have been de- 

 posited during periods of slack water, while the shallow sluggish 

 water near shore presents conditions favorable to the deposition of 

 sediment. 



For a detailed account of the actual findings at the examination 

 stations on the oyster grounds under consideration, reference may 

 be made to the text of the reports of the survey of Baltimore and 

 Kent Counties and to the statistical tables immediately preceding 

 this chapter. These findings indicate that the loss of oysters, as a 

 result of the Spring freshets of 1909, on Millers island bar was 

 57%; Tea Tables bar, 55%, and Man O'War Shoal bar, 61%. 



DISCUSSION. 



It may be seen, by reference to the last column of figures of the 

 table on page — ,that the available product on the Lumps during the 

 periods when the survey was made was not large, and it is probable 

 that these grounds were not below their average in productiveness 

 at these times. Even if they had been found to be more productive of 

 small oysters than the bars in other sections of the State, would this 

 fact furnish any convincing argument in favor of a lax enforcement 

 of the Cull Law in order that the oysters on the Lumps might be 

 marketed, when, by such failure to enforce the provisions of the 

 law for the Lumps, the welfare of the whole public oyster fishery 

 is thereby jeopardized? Who can knozv and decide zvhich of the 

 cargoes of unculled oysters presented for sale in Baltimore have 

 come from the Lumps and which have come from the natural oyster 

 bars in other parts of the State waters? 



