1 []2 REPORT OF COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND FISHERIES. [4J 



are greedily feeding, and consequently a considerable sbare of the fry 

 wonld be consumed for food. This, however, may be avoided by pro- 

 viding places where the fry can be free from the presence of predatory 

 enemies till they are able to look after their own safety. 



" From the circumstance that they have not always beeu readily 

 found in the second year, where the jdaiits have been made, it has been 

 surmised that they are a .migratory fish — working their own "way, as 

 soon as thej' attain any considerable growth, down-stream toward the 

 ocean. Their disappearance, however, may be accounted for by theother 

 cause stated. Further experiments will be necessary to solve all the 

 problems connected with their establishment in the eastern waters : 

 but the promise continues to be that they will i^rove themselves a fish 

 of great value in stocking large streams whose temperature is too high 

 for brook trout." 



An editorial note in Forest and Stream of May 1, 1884, written by 

 myself, says of the rainbow trout : 



'' We would call attention to the paragraph in our notice of the report 

 of the i^ew York fish commission concerning these fish. It is begin- 

 ning to be learned that they are migratory, and do not remain in brooks. 

 We have never been much in favor of this fish, because we have known, 

 what is not popularly- known, that the fish is strongly suspected to be a 

 salmon. There is no difference that an ichthyologist can find between 

 the Salmo irideus and the salmon known as ' steelhead,' 'hardhead,' and 

 ' salmon trout ' on the Pacific coast, the Sahno gairdneri. Although 

 this is the case, and the species irideus is a doubtful one, yet it has been 

 thought best not to combine them for the present. We have been wait- 

 ing and watching the habits of this alleged trout with great interest in 

 order to learn if its habits might not show it to be in some respect dif- 

 ferent from the steelhead. The evidence of the commission tends to 

 show that it is a migratory fish, and if so it may escape to sea and be 

 lost, as the other California salmon were. We believe that Mr. Eoose- 

 velt has not seen the rainbow trout whi(;h he planted in streams empty- 

 ing into Great South Bay, Long Island, since they were yearlings."* 



If this fish has to be confined by screens to prevent its migrating and 

 l)erhaps entirely disappearing, as the quinnat salmon did, then it will 

 be useless in our oi)en brooks. The promise of the rainbow trout was 

 that in it we had a quick-growing fish, which was not as sensitive to 

 warm water as our ownfonfinalis, a desideratum which now promises 

 to be filled by the brook trout of Europe, Salmo fario. 



*At the meeting of the American Fish-cnltnral Association in Washington, in May, 

 1S84, this assertion that S. iridetis was identical with S. gairdneri, which I regarded 

 as rash for one of my limited ichthyological knowledge, was sustained by no less an 

 authority than Dr. Tarleton H. Bean, who thought, however, that it was best to re- 

 Tain the distinction for a while. The only point that I know of which is against the 

 iiulentity of these fishes is the alleged fact that irideus remains in the streams of the 

 Pacific slope all the year, after reaching the breeding size. 



