564 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 



required, even if possible. But in many instances the paleface proved himself selfish 

 and wanton to a superlative degree. This does not apply to the original white settlers 

 or to the immediate or following generations, but to later incomers, to whom some 

 one has referred as representatives and minions of incorporated desire for gain. 



The water-power and lumbering interests apparently cared not whether the spawn- 

 ing grounds of the trout were destroyed by flood or drainage or by the log drive. It 

 was no concern of theirs whether trout were destroyed by suddenly depriving them of 

 water, and they had no interest in whether angleworms or dynamite were used to sup- 

 ply the workman with fish food, or whether it was during spawning time or any other 

 time, as long as "grub expense" was reduced by a supply of free fish. In fact, it was 

 never given a thought, and it was not brought to their attention until almost, or quite, 

 too late to avert the extermination of this fish. 



The early inhabitants of the region in the neighborhood of the Rangeley Lakes — 

 and a distance of a great many miles was not remote in those days^ — were accustomed 

 not only to get their families' winter supply but also a market supply of trout during 

 the fall and winter. It was a common practice to spear them at night by torchlight. 

 Mr. Rich recalled that one night at Trout Cove an old hunter and himself took by this 

 means 100 "beauties," which weighed 600 pounds the next morning. 



In 1879, in a letter to Mr. Rich, the former fish commissioner of Maine, the late 

 H. O. Stanley, said he could well remember the time, some 20 years prior, when it was 

 very common to take 100 pounds of red-spotted trout in one-half day's fishing, but 

 since that time the practice of taking them with grapnel, spears, and nets had become 

 common, and the fish were greatly diminished. He recalled seeing at a fisherman's 

 camp, one October morning in 1854, 100 trout, weighing 600 pounds, that had been 

 speared the night before. Mr. Stanley probably saw the catch referred to by Mr. Rich, 

 in which he participated. 



It is stated that about i860 laws were not known and that trout had for years been 

 netted at the head of the river and taken out by the wagonload for the market; also, 

 that jigging them off their spawning beds in the fall was customary. 



Along in the eighties it was generally admitted that trout, especially large ones, 

 were decreasing in numbers, and the fact was ascribed by the anglers to various causes, 

 but to no one of them did it seem to occur that he himself might be particeps criminis. 

 One reason for the alleged decrease in big trout given by Mr. Rich was that anglers 

 had found most of the places where trout congregated preparatory to going onto their 

 spawning beds and diligently and persistently fished for them day after day, rain or 

 shine, and took every fish that would rise, and so reduced the schools of big fish. 



It appears that spearing, jigging, and dynamiting were not confined to the early 

 depredations, if the allegations of some Rangeley Lakes anglers were true. In 1887 

 native residents, and even some anglers, were accused of long-standing jigging. Having 

 discussed these alleged practices, a writer to Forest and Stream, in 1888, stated: 



One would imagine that the facts written here would sufficiently account for the poor success 

 fishermen now meet at the lake, but there is one more, far worse than any mentioned, and for which 

 the Water Power Co. is responsible. The workingmen at the dams took the trout in great numbers 

 during autumn from the spawning beds, and every fish so taken means the destruction of hundreds of 

 thousands of their species. They were speared by daylight and by torchlight, dynamite cartridges were 

 exploded in the water, and the fish were destroyed by the wholesale. 



