THE SEA FISHERIES OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA. 201 



Q. Has uot the mode in which the rivers oil the coast of Maine have heen treated 

 for a number of years back depleted the waters on that coast or on the New England 

 coast of cod, for instance, which you say was once one of the most important fish 

 found there ? — A. The destruction of river fish, in my opinion, has had more to do 

 with the diminution of inshore fisb, such as cod and haddock 



Q. And mackerel, too?— A. No, not mackerel; this has nothing to do with them. 

 Mackerel cannot be considered in that connection, because they do not depend on the 

 fish of those rivers for food ; but I think that such destruction has more than any- 

 thing else to do with the decrease of these fish I have mentioned, inshore ; and the 

 result of the measures which are now being taken by the States of Maine and Massa- 

 chusetts, in restoring the river fisheries, will bring back the original historical abun- 

 dauce of the sea-fish inshore. 



Q. What this will do is as yet in the womb of the future ; but at present are not 

 those fisheries depleted ? — A. The boat-fisheries for cod and haddock are now much in- 

 ferior in yield on most parts of that coast to what was the case 50 or 100 years ago. 



Q. You now allude to the coast fisheries within the three-mile limit? — A. Yes ; the 

 fisheries carried on in open boats, which go out as far as a man can comfortably go in 

 a day and come back again. 



Q. Do you wish the Commission to understand that this system of treating the 

 rivers has destroyed the food of sea-fish, and therefore that the bait or food is not 

 there to induce the cod to come inshore, but that this has had no effect on the fish 

 outside of the three-mile limit? — A. I cannot say how far out the effect extends, be- 

 cause some distance outside of the limits there are other fishes, such as herring and 

 mackerel, and food of various kinds which they can get at. 



Q. Is it possible that the inshore fisheries can be either destroyed or very con- 

 siderably depleted within the three-mile limit and yet leave the fisheries just outside 

 of this limit as good as ever ? — A. I think so. 



Q. And undiminished ? — A. I think so, for the very reason that these fish naturally 

 keep off from the shore. They are off-shore fish, and we find them largely inshore at 

 certain seasons of the year because they then follow the fish that are coming inshore; 

 and if you had an cuormous number of shad and alewives and salmon, and especially 

 of alewives and shad inshore, that involves their pursuit by an enormous number of 

 predatory fish, such as cod and haddock and pollock, just exactly as the same fish fol- 

 low the herring and caplin on the coasts of the Dominion and Newfoundland. 



Q. Then I understand you to mean that, although the food which these fishes prey 

 upon may be destroyed by reason of the depletion of the rivers, this will only affect 

 the fishing within three miles of the shore and have no effect on the fishing beyond 

 this limit ? — A. I cannot say how far it will have effect. 



Q. Will this effect stop short of the three-mile limit? — A. I think there are a great 

 many concurrent agencies which affect the fish supply at different seasons on the dif- 

 ferent parts of the coast, and that while the inshore fishing of herring and shad, or 

 other incoming fish, regulates that to some extent, it does not cover the whole ground. 



Q. I want a direct answer: Are you able to state that the destruction of bait, by 

 reason of the bad treatment of these rivers, only affects the fishing along the coast to 

 the extent of three miles from it ? — A. I cannot say that ; I cannot say how far such 

 effect extends, and nobody can do so. 



Q. It is reasonable to suppose that it extends for a considerable distance farther 

 than three miles from the coast? — A. That I cannot say. 



Q. Would this not more likely drive the fish to other coasts where the rivers are 

 not so treated ? — A. Fish certainly have to go where they can get food, and if they 

 cannot procure it on one spot they have to go to some other spot for it. 



Q. Is it not probable that they will go where the rivers are not so badly treated ?— 

 A. This depends on how far cod and haddock will migrate, under any circumstances. 

 If they leave the shore, but can find an ample supply of food on George's Bank or on 

 Nantucket Shoals, they will probably stay there. 



