188 Tiiirty-niniJi Annual Meeting 



Mr. Fullekton : How many feet apart would you put the nests? 



Mr. Lydell : We used to put them ten, then twenty, and now thirty 

 feet apart, and are getting more fish at present than when they wen- 

 ten feet apart. Formerly we put thirty or forty pairs of hass in a pond 

 60 by 150 feet; but now we use only fifteen pairs and get more finger- 

 lings and more good nests than ever before. I am speaking of small- 

 mouth bass. Of large-mouth bass we had last year twenty-five pairs 

 in a pond 300 by 250 feet, and got about 225,000 number 1 and between 

 15,000 and 20,000 number 2 fingerlings. This year we increased the 

 numl)er of brood fish, putting in sixty pairs, and as a result we have 

 taken to date only about 30,000 number 1 and no number 2 fingerlings. 

 There are only a few left in the pond, which shows that the increased 

 stock of brood fish decreased the output. 



Mr. Fullerton : That bears out our experience in Minnesota. We 

 overstocked at first with too many breeders, which I realize was a 

 mistake. I agree with Mr. Lydell that more bass will be produced if 

 the ne.sts are placed thirty feet apart. 



Mr. Ward T. Bower: This question as to the proper numl)er of 

 brood fish per acre depends to a large extent on local conditions. 

 There is no advantage in hatching more fry than the natural food 

 supply will support. 



Mr. Lydell : The numlier of arlult fish or fry in a pond depends 

 entirely on its condition. In some ponds where food is very plentiful 

 we get double the number of fingerlings that we do from others twice 

 its size, simply because there is twice the amount of food. Every fish 

 culturist nuist be his own judge on tliis point. 



Question 6. — Ha\'e any experiments l^een luidertaken 

 towards the propagation of aquatic food for fish in streams? 



]\Tr. iMeehan : As the one who put this question in the box, I may 

 state that in Pennsylvania we are in a rather peculiar position, or 

 rather a good position in one sense, in that we are beginning to prevent 

 the pollution. of the streams. At one time in Pennsylvania we probably 

 had the worst polluted streams of any state in the country, but in tlie 

 last two or three years there has been a change of sentiment. The 

 people do not now believe in making their streams open sewers ; and 

 the Department of Health and Department of Fisheries have in hand 

 the purification of the waters. The laws are very sweeping and strong, 

 and we are beginning to prevent pollution. Over one hundred estab- 

 lishments have been cleaned up by the Department of Fisheries within 

 the last two months, and it comes now to a question with us, as we get 

 the streams clear, of providing food for them, because if the food is 

 not there we are not going to have fish. Has anything been done or 

 have any experiments been carried on with a view of restoring food life 

 in the waters in the shortest possible space of time? Of course I am 

 well aware tliat certain aquatic jilants like chara and fontinalis grass 



