REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES. 65 
SHAD AND ALEWIFE INDUSTRY OF CHESAPEAKE BAY AND TRIBUTARIES. 
In view of the large interests dependent on the perpetuation of the 
supply of shad and alewives, or river herring, in the Chesapeake Basin, 
the Bureau in 1915 made a complete canvass of the industries con- 
nected with these fishes, for the purpose of being in position to sub- 
stantiate the often expressed opinion that radical action was demanded 
of the States in order to prevent commercial extermination. The 
results of the canvass were promptly published in a statistical bul- 
letin, which was at once sent to the governors and legislators of Mary- 
Jand and Virginia, accompanied by three large charts showing the 
actual location of each pound net and gill net set for shad in 1915 on 
certain sections of the western shore of Virginia. The data thus 
supplied are thought to have influenced the Virginia Legislature, in 
its closing hours, to pass an act, effective in 1917, which will have the 
effect of permitting a larger portion of the run of spawning fish to 
reach their spawning grounds. ‘This act, if its object is realized, will 
_supplement in an effective way the protection that has heretofore 
been afforded to the migrating fish by the War Department through 
the insistence that certain lanes for navigational purposes shall be left 
in the maze of set nets on the shores of Chesapeake Bay and its major 
tributaries. 
The fishery for alewives is closely connected with that for shad, 
the same apparatus being used and the seasons being coincident. The 
canvass therefore included the alewives as well as the shad, and the 
published bulletin, herem reprinted, gives the statistics of both 
fisheries. 
The catch of shad in Maryland in 1915, compared with that of 1909, 
the latest previous year for which statistics are available, declined 
more than 50 per cent in quantity and about 29 per cent in value, 
and the catch of alewives decreased nearly 47 per cent in quantity 
and about 15 per cent in value. Chesapeake Bay, in Maryland, 
showed a decline of about 45 per cent in the shad catch and 31 per 
cent in the alewife catch. A still larger decrease occurred in some 
of the more important rivers. In the Susquehanna River, in Mary- 
land and Pennsylvania, there was a decrease of 88 per cent in the 
shad and 88 per cent in the alewife catch. In the Penna’ River 
and tributaries there was a decrease of 83 per cent in the catch of 
shad and 84 per cent in that of alewives. In the Potomac River the 
shad catch decreased 11 per cent and the alewife catch 74 per cent. 
In the Northeast River, which was the only one of importance which 
did not show a decided decline in these species, the catch of shad fell 
off less than 10 per cent and that of alewives increased 47 per cent. 
The catch of shad in the Patuxent River in 1915 amounted to 1,118 
in number, compared with 7,485 in 1909, 9,577 in 1904, 43,000 in 
1901, and 52,354 in 1896, the only years for which statistics are 
available. The alewife catch fell off from 796,300 in 1909 to 20,400 
in 1915. 
The Elk River has never been a prolifi¢ shad stream, but has always 
furnished large quantities of alewives. The largest output of shad 
was in 1904, when 8,850 were taken. The catch of alewives in this 
river was 6,736,000 in 1909 and 3,608,950 in 1915. 
