American Fisheries Society 163 



The mullet (Mugil dohula) of Huleia, Anehola, and Hana- 

 lei; squid (octopus) and freshwater fishes (Gobies) of Kauai. 



The shoal fish taken at the following places noted for the 

 abundance of fish frequenting- them : Off Oahu — Kalia, Keehi, 

 Kapapa, Malaeakuli and Pahihi. Off Molokai — Punalau, Ooia, 

 Kawai, Koliolanui. Kaonini, Aikoolua, Waiokama and Heleiki. 

 Off Maui — The Kuleku of Honuaula, and the same whenever 

 found off said island. 



All the following transient fish, viz: The kule (Trachurops 

 criniienuplithaJina) ; the anaehole fa young mullet) ; the alalau- 

 wa (Priacantlius cruewtatus) ; the unhukai ; the kawelea (Tra- 

 chiiiocepJiaJus nii/ops) : the kawakawa (Gynvnosarda alletterata) 

 and the kalaku. 



^^^len any of the above species were taken by the fishermen 

 they were to be divided equally between the king and the fisher- 

 men. Owing to the fact that it was found to be a difficult matter 

 for the king to collect his share, and the officers appointed for 

 the purpose were found, in some instances, to be oppressing the 

 people, the government in 1851 passed a law granting to the peo- 

 ple the free use of the government fisheries, reserving only the 

 right to establish taboo seasons when deemed necessary for the 

 protection of the fisheries. 



As these "fishery rights" appeared anomalous and inconsist- 

 ent with the customs and laws prevailing in this country, the 

 congress, in the enabling act creating the Territory of Hawaii, 

 which took effect June 14, 1900, repealed all laws of the former 

 republic and kingdom which conferred such exclusive rights, 

 subject, however, to vested rights, the latter, however, not to be 

 valid after three years from the taking effect of the act, provided 

 the owner had filed his claim to such in a circuit court of the 

 territory before June 15, 1902. In the event of his establishing 

 such right the territory was authorized to condemn it for public 

 use upon making just compensation to the owner. The territory 

 fought the claim that these were vested rights and two of the 

 cases were finally passed upon by the United States Supreme 

 Court, which upheld the contention that they constituted vested 

 rights. Practically all of the cases have now been adjudicated 

 by the territorial courts and the only thing remaining to he done 

 is to fix upon their values and then pay for them. 



