FEDERAL CONTROL OF INTERSTATE 



WATERS 



By Eben W. Cobb, State Superintendent of Fisheries, 

 St. Paul, Minn. 



Though federal control of all interstate waters would 

 doubtless be a good thing, what I have to say is largely 

 brought to mind by my work in connection with the Miss- 

 issippi River. 



Of course, we are all aware that there is a wide dif- 

 ference of opinion as to where the authority of the United 

 States Government leaves off and that of the various 

 states begins, in this as in other matters, but I am assum- 

 ing that each has authority where they are now in 

 control. 



Each state along a stream or body of water which sep- 

 arates two or more states, makes laws regulating the 

 fishing according to its own ideas, and in some instances 

 with the idea in view of securing an advantage over the 

 other states interested. This leads to reprisals and the 

 waters suffer to a greater or less extent. 



In that portion of the Mississippi forming the boundary 

 of Minnesota, we have not suffered much from this 

 source as our sister state on the east has been very 

 friendly with us and we might almost say that a part- 

 nership exists between the two states for the purpose 

 of enforcing the laws along the boundary line. 



The greatest difficulty comes up in regard to the main- 

 taining of the river as a source of supply for game and 

 commercial fishes. 



The Mississippi River, with its hundreds of miles of 

 shore bordering on many different states and supporting 

 in its waters many varieties of both food and game fishes, 

 should be made to produce an enormous amount of fish 

 without in any way reducing the amount left in the river. 

 No one state could probably be brought to support a 

 hatchery for the purpose of stocking waters such as these 



