ACCLIMATIZATION OF AMERICAN FISHES IN ARGENTINA. 



By E. A. TUUAN, 

 Chief of llie Section of Fish Culture, Ministry of Agriculture, Argentina. 



During the latter part of 1903 the Government of Argentina, having deter- 

 mined upon investigations as to the possibihties of practical fish culture in 

 that country, employed Mr. John W. Titcomb, chief of the division of fish 

 culture in the United States Bureau of Fisheries, to inaugurate the undertaking. 

 Mr. Titcomb was engaged in the work some eight or nine months, and during 

 this period arranged for the introduction of several species of fish from the 

 United States. He also chose the site for the first hatchery at Lago Nahuel 

 Huapi, situated in the Andes Mountains, within 2 or 3 miles of the Chilean 

 boundary. 



Actual fish cultural work was begun in Argentina March 4, 1904, with the 

 arrival at Lago Nahuel Huapi of a consignment of fish eggs with which I had 

 left New York January 19. From Buenos Aires I brought also the necessary- 

 equipment for a small temporary hatchery, the latter having been planned by 

 Mr. Titcomb and nearly finished under his direction before he left the lake. 

 The first part of the journey, from Buenos Aires to Neuquen, was made by 

 train, the time occupied being two nights and one day. From Neuquen to 

 Lago Nahuel Huapi, a distance of 300 miles, the eggs and hatchery equipment 

 were carried in wagons, the members of the party accompanying on horseback. 



The consignment of eggs consisted, in New York, of the following: One 

 million whitefish {Coregonus dupeiformis) , 100,000 brook trout {Salvelinus 

 fontinalis), 53,000 lake trout (Crisiivomer namaycush) , and 50,000 landlocked 

 salmon (Salmo salar scbago). The loss in the entire lot of eggs, from the time 

 they left New York until their hatching was completed, was less than 10 per 

 cent. The loss in the lake trout was only about 5 per cent, and the same in 

 one lot of brook trout, while the other 50,000 lot of this species began hatching 

 before reaching their destination, thereby causing a loss of about 30 per cent. 

 The loss of landlocked salmon was about 10 per cent, while the loss of white- 

 fish to the day their distribution was concluded had been only 10 per cent. 

 This consignment of eggs produced a great many more fry than we expected, 

 and it became necessary to move the hatching troughs and fish immediately 



957 



