EFFECTS OF THE MENHADEN AND MACKEREL FISHERIES. 285 
but where they go has not been determined. Like all species whose winter 
quarters are unknown, the menhaden has been consigned by theory to the 
mysterious depths or contiguities of the Gulf Stream, a region ichthyologically 
lying beyond the “ Pillars of Hercules.” Warned by falling temperature, the 
fish is said to seek a stratum of congenial thermal conditions. All the known 
facts regarding this species indicate that it makes no extensive coastwise migra- 
tions, and since the requisite equable temperature, it is thought, can not be 
found anywhere else, the fish must find it in or near the Gulf Stream, notwith- 
standing the fact that so little is actually known about the winter conditions 
there. But why the fish should seek that locality for so brief a period has not 
been shown. Mackerel remain in northern waters until November and Decem- 
ber and menhaden have been taken in quantities in southern Massachusetts in 
January, where they reappear in April. 
Waters corresponding in temperature with those to which the fish have 
been accustomed in the summer or early fall could hardly be conducive to 
inactivity. Activity necessitates food. If the fish are sojourning in the midst 
of food and in an active condition, they would necessarily eat. Eating, they 
would continue fat. But mackerel and menhaden when first seen in the spring 
are as a rule very thin, indicating abstinence from food. If the fish live among 
an abundance of food, abstinence must be due to disinclination to eat. Such a 
condition could be ascribed to some degree of hibernation, but that would 
be inconsistent with warm waters. If, then, the fish is in such winter abode, 
it must be assumed that there is little or no food there. This, too, is contrary 
to the usual conditions. Food such as mackerel subsist on extensively, and 
menhaden to some degree in early spring, is particularly abundant in the 
spring, at least, in the Gulf Stream and its neighborhood. Moreover, dur- 
ing the alleged fall migrations the fishes are not observed moving offshore. 
Such movements as are observed are coastwise. After all, the fish are some- 
where, but where is yet to be learned. Theory does not satisfy. As spring 
approaches immense bodies of fish often appear swimming at or near the surface. 
This appearance of the fish has been ascribed to rising temperature and the 
breeding instinct. Surely the depths of the Gulf Stream or the equable stratum 
have not become uncomfortably warm and forced them into the ‘‘cold wall’’ or 
arctic current? It is conceivable, however, if the fish were at or near the surface 
of the stream the warming water spread by southerly winds would cause the 
fish to advance with it. But these conditions are not invariable, and even if 
they were it would require some other impulse to force them into the much 
colder northern coastal waters. ‘‘ Breeding instinct’’ fails to explain why 
immature fish are impelled to move in the same way as the adult breeders. 
Let it be assumed that the fish—mackerel, menhaden, or other species— 
have not gone in the winter ‘‘ migrations’’ quite beyond the mysterious ‘‘ pillars;”’ 
that they are lurking somewhere along the coast, outside or within the bays, or 
