588 BUIvI^ETlN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 



CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 



The artificial modifications of the Rangeley Lakes waters have in some ways been 

 beneficial, in others directly and indirectly detrimental to the fishes of these lakes. Early 

 excessive and unseasonable fishing caused the necessity for legislative and fish-cultural 

 action. The necessity was augmented by the annually increasing number of anglers. 

 The trout supply was not greatly increased by fish culture, owing to the fact that the 

 Rangeley trout were for many years the source of supply for other waters. 



Partly to meet the demands of the greater influx of anglers each year, the land- 

 locked salmon was introduced. In furnishing the anglers with more game fish the 

 introduction of the salmon was a success, but its introduction resulted in the extinction 

 of the blueback. The blueback, however, was of no direct importance to the angler; 

 but the fact of its disappearance from this evident cause suggests that the cause of 

 the continued decrease of trout, for some years at least, may have been due to the 

 same fish. The salmon now greatly preponderate over the trout, notwithstanding 

 the extensive planting of trout. 



Any maintenance or increase in numbers of trout as shown by the records of catches 

 is only apparent and due to the greater number of anglers fishing there. It is 

 undoubtedly true that the trout are decreasing in numbers and fewer large ones are caught 

 than formerly. To keep up the trout supply, even approximately, many more trout 

 need be planted annually. It is doubtful, however, even with the salmon eliminated, 

 if a sufficient number of trout could be supplied to adequately meet the present 

 requirements of the large number of anglers. The salmon is more responsive to fish 

 culture and conservation, and to the majority of anglers, if not preferable to the trout, 

 furnishes a very satisfactory substitute. It is, however, a matter of regret to many 

 familiar with the one-time glory of the Rangeley Lakes as trout waters that the salmon 

 was ever introduced. But the evil, if it were an evil, has been done and can not be 

 undone. It can, however, serve as a warning to "let well enough alone," and where 

 the indigenous fish is all that can be desired in game and food qualities to attempt to 

 conserve or increase the supply, as needs be, rather than to introduce others, the possible 

 disastrous effects of which can not always be foreseen. Only a few years ago there 

 were those who stoutly advocated the introduction of white perch into Rangeley 

 Lakes. Fortunately, this was not done, and the suggestion now ofi'ered is that no 

 other fish than the trout and salmon be planted in the lakes. 



Of the other introduced fishes that have become established, it is doubtful if any 

 are of much harm under present conditions. The hompout is to some extent addicted 

 to eating young fish and to a great extent to devouring fish eggs when available; but 

 probably it does not frequent the spawning beds of salmon and trout. The pickerel 

 in its many years of existence in Umbagog Lake has shown that it is no menace to the 

 upper lakes and of little or no harm to Umbagog. It has been previously stated in 

 this paper that it is the opinion of the writer that fishing through the ice and plug fish- 

 ing in the deep holes at other times, in conjunction with the general unsuitableness of 

 the lake, is responsible for the scarcity of trout there and that the pickerel had no 

 appreciable effect on the trout. In fact, the lake is better suited to the pickerel than 

 to almost any other game fish. 



