[5] FAILURES AND SUCCESSES OV FISH-CULTURE. 441 



Knocb, who in 1857 constructed carp ponds on an estate belonging to 

 the Grand Duke Constantine Nikolajewitsch, as to the results of which, 

 however, Professor ]\Ialmgreu's report is silent. I remember, liowevor, 

 to have read somewhere that Dr. Knoch succeeded in artiticially rais- 

 ing the sterlet, which fact seems to have been unknown to Dr. Malm- 

 gren. (Later I shall have occasion to revert to the tish-cultnral estab- 

 lislimcnt in or near Suwalki, in Poland, which seems to have been suc- 

 cessful in raising Coregonus for the Raygrod Lake.) Alter mentioning 

 the artiiicial batching of trout and Corrfjonun, undertaken by j\Ir. ^lus- 

 chinsky, a banker of St. Petersburg, who had the young fish raised by 

 him transferred to his estates in Poland, I'rofessor IMalmgren speaks 

 of the Russian Fishery Association (founded in 1881 on the model of the 

 German Fishery Association), whose president. Counselor von Greig, 

 has established artificial hatcheries on his estates in Courlaiid, wliicli 

 seem to be planned on a large scale. Our best wishes follow this 

 young association, before whose activity a large field seems to be open. 

 May its motto be in general, " The right fish in the right water." We 

 hope that it will not waste its strength in irrational etiorts, such as 

 have been made in Russia by endeavoring to raise sterlets in ponds ; 

 bat that it will engage iji practical fish-culture, Avhose efibrts are di- 

 rected not towiirds forcing nature from its wonted course, but to make 

 the life and habits offish the basis in all undertakings of this kind. It 

 is also to he hoped that the Russian Fishery Association will not be 

 guided by (Uleifanti, whose etibrts but too often resemble a straw fire, 

 which soon burns out and leaves nothing but disappointment. 



With his criticism on the Nikolsk establishment. Professor Malm- 



gren combines a review of artificial fish-culture and its results in other 



countries, and arrives at the conclusion that nowhere have remarkably 



successful results been obtained. In view of this opinion of Professor 



Mahngren, I must state that he has certainly not made the necessary 



observations to enable him to come before the public with such a sweep- 



•ing assertion. I have taken the trouble to collect data for refuting his 



statements. These data would have been more numerous if it had not 



been for the circumstance that this whole literature, not very rich in 



itself, was v(;ry nuich scattered, and often difiicult of access. I have 



gathered my information principally from the circulars of the German 



Fishery Associistiou and from the files of the Bentsche Fiseherci-Zeitunf/, 



j those publications which, during late years, have furnished the most im- 



I portant information relative to the subject of artificial fish-culture, and 



I which have also been [)c'rased by Professoi' j\Ldmgren. But even with 



I this small amount of material, 1 feel confident that I can show conclu- 



( sively that Professor Malmgren is exceedingly unjust in speaking dis- 



I pnragingly of artificial fish-culture and its results. Following, with 



I some slight deviations, the order in which I*rofessor Mahngren speaks 



,i of the different countries, I shall begin with France, which, in 1850 and 



I the following years, gave a new impetus to artificial fish-culture. 



