46 REPORT OF STATE BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS. 



belong to the genus Salmo, and the only difference of any importance 

 between the salmon and the trout, so far as structure goes, lies in the 

 fact that the salmon shed the teeth on its vomer, that is, the middle 

 part of the roof of its mouth, as it grows older, while in the trout these 

 teeth are preserved throughout the life of the animal. Living in salt 

 water, and feeding on large fishes and Crustacea, the salmon is the more 

 vigorous, with coarser and more oily flesh, but this difference becomes 

 of small importance as a matter of distinguishing species. 



Besides these three, there is another and a finer fish, found in the 

 coldest and clearest lakes of the Alps and of northern Europe, dark 

 colored and spotted with bright red, the scales so small that they seem 

 as mere impressions in the slimy skin, so that the average fisherman 

 does not recognize their existence. This is a finer and more beautiful 

 fish than any of the trout, and it is very much less abundant. This is 

 known in England as the Charr, and on the Continent it has, in Ger- 

 many, the name of Saibling or Salbling (both words from the low Latin 

 name Salvelinus, which again is a sort of diminutive of Salmo — a little 

 salmon); in France it is called the Ombre Chevalier, which in turn 

 comes from the Latin name Umhla, given to the same fish in allusion to 

 its dark colors, and its love of shady places in the lakes and brooks. 

 This charr differs from all the trout in various anatomical respects, the 

 most notable of which is the entirely different form of its vomer, a form 

 which could only be satisfactorily described by a series of comparative 

 drawings. This character of the vomer distinguishes the genus Salve- 

 linus, to which the Saibling belongs, its scientific name being Salvelinus 

 alpinus. 



Armed with these names of Salmon, Trout, Salmon trout, and Charr, 

 our ancestors came to America. The name "charr" was doubtless un- 

 familiar to most of them, for the charr is scarcely found in England 

 except in the lake district of Cumberland, and for this reason, I sup- 

 pose, it has never been in common language applied to any American 

 fish. 



Our ancestors found running up the rivers of the Atlantic Coast, a 

 large fish precisely like the salmon of Europe; in fact, the very same 

 thing, and so they naturally and correctly enough called it Salmon. In 

 the fresh waters of New England and New York, in all the clear streams 

 throughout the Alleghany region, and in the lakes of Canada and to 

 the northwest, our forefathers found a red-spotted, fine-scaled, dark- 

 colored speckled beauty. Finding no creal trout with black spots and 

 large scales in the rivers, and having forgotten the name of "charr," 

 they gave to this fish the name of trout, or Speckled trout, or Brook 

 trout, and in spite of the fact that in reality it is not a trout, but a 

 charr, the name Brook trout is likely to adhere forever to the Salve- 

 linus fontinalis. 



Real trout there are none on our Atlantic Coast, and Salmon trout is 

 likewise wanting, but the name Salmon trout is often given to the Brook 

 trout, or charr, which has run out into the sea; and it is also often 

 given to another charr, a ver}^ large, coarse species, in which the red spots 

 have faded out to a cream color, which is found in all the lakes from 

 Alaska to Maine, across the northern half of our continent. This is 

 the Great Lake trout {Salvelinus namayciish) , and except for its large 

 size and comparative coarseness, it would never be mistaken either for 

 trout or salmon. The name Salmon trout is wholly inapplicable to it. 



