American Fisheries Society. 95 
of any other similar apparatus; the prescribing of a weekly close 
season for allkinds of net fishing; the authorizing of the Secre- 
tary of Commerce and Labor to restrict or altogether prohibit 
fishing in waters where there-is evidence of over fishing, and to 
set aside any waters as preserves which he may deem desirable ; 
and the prohibition of the canning or salting of salmon dead more 
than forty-eight hours; and the misbranding of any canned, 
salted, or otherwise preserved fish. From the foregoing it will be 
seen that a very comprehensive and satisfactory law has been en- 
acted, and much benefit to the fisheries should be the immediate 
result. ‘The tax on preserved fish, amounting to about $100,000 
annually, was in the bill, as passed by the House, devoted to fish 
cultural work in Alaska; but this feature was not approved by 
the Senate and was not insisted on by the House. 
The ravages of dogfish on the Atlantic coast, and the appar- 
ent willingness or inability of the states to cope with the problem 
of combating these destructive fish, led to the flooding of Con- 
gress with petitions praying for government aid. The plans and 
hopes of the petitioners were expressed in a bill introduced by a 
Massachusetts member of the House which provided for a bounty 
on dogfish to be paid out of the treasury of the United States, 
the bounty being 2 cents for each dogfish tail delivered to the 
proper officials of the United States government. The bill ap- 
plied to the section between Cape Hatteras, N. C., and Eastport, 
Me., and had for its sole object the extermination of the dogfish. 
In a hearing before the House committee, the very serious 
damage being wrought by,these sharks was fully set forth by the 
author of the bill, by representatives of the fishermen, and 
especially by the chairman of the Massachusetts fish commission 
who had made a very thorough investigation and report of the 
matter. A representative of the Bureau of Fisheries, while con- 
ceding all that had been claimed in regard to the destructiveness 
of the dogfish, expressed doubt as to the efficacy of the proposed 
bill in materially reducing their abundance, and called attention 
to the far-reaching precedent that would be established if Con- 
gress should begin to pay bounties for noxious animals. The 
contention of the Bureau was for government assistance, but this 
should be in the direction of “‘determining the most effective 
methods of reducing the numbers of dogfish and of capturing 
