[23] THE SPRING HERRING FISHERIES OF NORWAY. 149 
I have measured the length of body, length of head, and the distance 
between the fins, in some specimens of the former spring herring pre- 
served in the Bergen Museum, and I have also examined the number of 
rays in the fins, and compared all these data with those of our present 
mature spring herring. As regards the height of the body, if com- 
pared with its length, it is difficult to arrive at an absolutely correct 
result if the only specimens of which measurements can be taken are 
preserved in spirits of wine. These measurements prove this, however, 
that no such change has taken place as is maintained by the fishermen. 
I am inclined to suppose that a difference can only be noticed between 
the former spring herring and those of our present spring herring which 
are not yet ready to spawn, and this difference is only caused by their 
greater fatness, which makes the body appear comparatively higher 
and shorter. As soon as the spring herring of the present season 
spawned they were, as many fishermen were compelled to acknowledge, 
just as long and lean as the former spring herring. It is well known 
that in fat herring the head seems smaller than in lean ones, but in 
our present spring herring it was by no means smaller than in the old 
spring herring. As regards the distance between the fins and the num- 
ber of rays in each fin, I could not discover any regular difference. A 
comparative table, which will be of special interest with regard to the 
location of the fins, will be published at some future time. The num- 
ber of rays, both in the present and in the former spring herring, does 
not correspond entirely with Nilsson’s (and Boeck’s) statement, and, as 
‘might be expected, it varies greatly in the different fish. The dorsal 
fin does not have 18, but generally 19 rays, and their number even varies 
from 17 to 20. The anal fin had generally 18 to 19 rays, and in one 
20, whilst in another case it had as low as 14, which, of course, was an 
exceptional case. The pectoral fins had 16 to 17 rays, and the ven- 
tral fins had generally 9 bunches of rays, which is the usual number in 
‘all herring. When the Danish naturalist Kroyer wrote his description 
of the herring he had before him a specimen of the former Norwegian 
spring herring, and in counting the bunches of rays doubtless had ref- 
erence to this kind of herring, and he likewise counted 9 bunches of 
rays in the ventral fins. The circumstance that Nilsson counted 10 
bunches of rays in a former Norwegian spring herring was doubtless 
caused by his having before him specimens which accidentally had that 
number. In only one specimen of the former spring herring did I find 
10 bunches of rays. One specimen of our present spring herring showed 
a strange anomaly, the right ventral fin having 9 and the left 8 bunches 
of rays. One specimen of the great herring had 8 bunches of rays in’ 
each ventral fin. 
As regards the difference in the color of the eggs (in fish which are 
ready to spawn), it is impossible at the present time to draw any com- 
parison, as the eggs of the former spring herring have of course lost 
their original color by being kept in spirits of wine; and as, so far as 
