25S Roosczrll Wild Life Annals 



tip-ups. The total number of illegal devices destroyed was 4,761, representing a 

 total money value of $25,820, a sum greater than the whole investment in the 

 legal commercial fisheries of the entire region. 



"The greatest drawback to the fisheries of many of the lakes and streams is 

 the presence of undesirable species. The alewife in Seneca Lake, the gar in Lake 

 Chautauqua, and the ling in most of the lakes and rivers, are very vmpopular resi- 

 dents, and unless their numbers are reduced shortly they will do considerable harm. 

 The fishes appear to be useless, although the ling has been prepared as cod in 

 Buffalo. The German Carp is also regarded with some disfavor, but if taken in 

 the winter time and sent alive to New York City would net the shipper a fair price, 

 since it is a very hardy fish and would stand transportation in ice." Regarding 

 Oneida Lake he states (p. 233), "The principal fishing towns on the shore are 

 Brewerton, at the outlet, Constantia and Cleveland on the north side, and Cicero 

 Center, Bridgeport and South Bay on the south side of the lake. Trap nets were 

 in use at the time of the statistical canvass made by the U. S. Fish Commission in 

 1895, the common fish having become so plentiful as to interfere seriously with 

 the game fishing. The use of these nets was prohibited after the 1896 season had 

 passed, however. In 1902 close to and in the outlet 7 seines were operated for 

 black (Common) suckers, which cimie into the lake from Oneida River in count- 

 less numbers in the s])rin,t;. and these operations were considered a great benefit 

 to the other fisheries, as the suckers are said to consume great quantities of the 

 spawn of other species. Set fines, hand lines, and tip-ups were also used." And 

 (p. 234) further, "Oneida Lake is full of the commoner species of fishes, such as 

 ling, suckers, pumpkinseeds, rock bass, etc., which greatly interfere with the game 

 fishing, and it would benefit the sportsmen, with whom this lake is a favorite resort, 

 could some means be devised for decreasing the number of objectionable species. 

 The use of trap nets for a season or two would probably accomplish the purpose." 

 Cobb also refers to the catch of Eels on the Oneida River at Caughdenoy. 



It is very doubtful if any large body of water in the State is capable of pro- 

 ducing, per square mile, more fish annually than Oneida Lake. Without doubt its 

 output is relatively much greater than that for Lakes Erie or Ontario. In a 

 recent summary of the relative productivity of lakes (Adams, '26, pp. 537-54o), 

 are given calculations indicating that the fisheries of the (Ireat Lakes produce 

 roughly 1,000 pounds of fish per square mile. The W'hitcfish of Canadian Lake 

 Erie has been calculated to produce nearly 600 pounds per square mile. Pond 

 culture in America has produced as much as 100 pounds per acre, which for the 

 square mile would give 64,000 pounds. Evidently Oneida Lake stands in an inter- 

 mediate position, and therefore the following calculations are of interest. 



Tabic for Calculating Productivity 

 80 square miles or 51,200 acres in Oneida Lake. 

 67 square miles or 42,880 acres, over 12 feet in depth. 

 13 square miles or 8,320 acres, less than 12 feet in depth. 

 8,320 acres at 50 pounds per acre 416,000 ]xnmds, or 208 tons. 

 8,320 acres at 100 pounds jier acre 832.000 pounds, or 416 tons. 

 8,320 acres at 150 pounds ])er acre 1,248,000 ])ounds, or 624 tons. 

 42,880 acres -it 10 ])iiunds ])er acre 428,800 pdunds. or 214.4 t""^- 

 42,880 acres at 23 iionnds per .-lere l,n72,0(>() pciunds, or 536 tons. 



