FISHES AND FISHING IN SUNAPEE LAKE. 67 



^Ir. De Roclier states that when he first took up his work there 

 the fish would run 2 and 3 pounds on the average and larger ones 

 up to 7 pounds were often caught, but now they do not average over 

 1{ pounds, although some larger ones are still taken. 



An increase in numbers is possible through the larger ninnbers 

 planted and the decrease in the number of landlocked salmon. But 

 the chinook salmon is a menace. A number of instances are reported 

 where small white trout have been found in chinooks' stomachs. 

 That this sahnon has had no very apparent effect upon the trout is 

 probably due to the comparatively recent increase in numbers and 

 size of the chinook. The winter ventures to predict that if the chinook 

 continues to increase in numbers the white trout will again decrease. 

 The same may be said of an increase in the number of landlocked 

 salmon. This has been discussed in another place and need not be 

 repeated here. 



Characteristics.— AW. of the saibling group are readily distinguished 

 superficially from the common or ''native" trout by the absence of 

 rivulation on the back and usually by the more slender form. The 

 common trout at all ages possess the rivulations. The presence of 

 basibranchial or so-called "hyoid" teeth also is a distinguishing 

 characteristic in New England, but farther north, as in Labrador, a 

 fish supposed to be S. fontinalis, having the rivulations or wavy bars 

 on the dorsal and caudal fijis, at least has been found to have teeth 

 on the "root of the tongue" or basibranchials. This is the case with 

 the type specimens of S. hudsonicus, and this form (S. Tiudsonicus 

 Suckley or perhaps more correctly S. canadensis Hamilton Smith) on 

 that account, perhaps, should stand as a good species or, if inter- 

 gradations are found, at least as a subspecies. 



While it is comparatively easy to distinguish the common trout 

 from the saibhngs, it is rather a difficult matter to distinguish the 

 species of the group. If they were not so closely related, it would 

 have been easy to decide whether the Sunapee white trout was a 

 Rangeley blueback or not. Dr. Bean distinguished Salvelinus aure- 

 olus from S. oqttassa by the following differences: 



SUNAPEE TROUT. BLUEBACK. 



1. Anal III, 8 Anal in, 10. 



2. Immature 9 inches in length Matiu-e 9 inches in length. 



3. Color of back in young, numerous dark blotches Back uniform steel blue. 



4. Embryo with white lines ^at the upper and lower edges No such white lines. 



of caudal. 



5 . Spawns in lake on shoals Spawns in streams. 



6. Gill rakers shorter and usually less numerous and almost More numerous and not 



always curled . curled . 



The first difference will not serve to distinguish, as S. aureolus some- 

 times has 10 anal rays, but in general it is of significance, especially 



