80 American Fisheries Society 



grounds, such as is the case in the Chesapeake and other waters 

 of the country. In our case it has been proven beyond question 

 that state control proves a detriment to the interests of both 

 states. This has been especially marked in regard to crabs 

 which wintered in Virginia and were dug out of the mud during 

 the winter months, and it was of no use for Maryland to try to 

 protect them during the time they were in the waters of the 

 latter state. The shad is another illustration. Entering the bay 

 in Virginia on its way to the head of the bay to spawn, it is beset 

 by nets through the entire length of the bay. Neither state is 

 willing to give any protection which might in the least benefit 

 the other state, and consequently the shad is a fair prey from the 

 minute he sticks his nose into the Chesapeake. It is no wonder 

 that less than one per cent of the shad reach their spawning 

 grounds, though at least ten per cent, with the assistance of fish 

 hatcheries, must reach the spawning beds to keep up the stock. 

 This resulted in the closing of the United States Shad Hatchery 

 at the head of the Chesapeake, as it was unable to obtain a sufficient 

 number of eggs to pay for operating. The Conservation Com- 

 mission of Maryland, however, has operated several floating 

 hatcheries with considerable success, and is to be commended for 

 its uphill fight for saving this fish, but, without Federal control, it 

 is my opinion that little can be accomplished. 



In conclusion let me say that co-operation and common sense 

 are just as necessary in fish protection as in any other matter. 

 No two states pulling different ways will get anywhere. I shall 

 close without further remarks excepting to recommend to you 

 Fish Refuges and Federal Control. 



