The Zoologist — August, 1868. 1327 



mands. All the examples of whitebait 1 have examined are young 

 herrings." 



The positive determination of the identity of the whitebait and of 

 the herring throws light upon many of the singularities of the smaller 

 fish. Formerly the whitebait were regarded as peculiar to the Thames ; 

 it is now known that they are to be captured, in greater or smaller 

 numbers, in all rivers whose estuaries are frequented by mature 

 herrings. Dr. Parnell, in his ' History of the Fishes of the Forth,' 

 published in the seventh volume of • Memoirs of the Wernerian 

 Society,' states : — " The whitebait is not, as it was formerly considered 

 to be, peculiar to the Thames, as I have found it to inhabit the Frith 

 of Forth in considerable numbers during the summer months. From 

 the beginning of July to the end of September they are found in great 

 abundance in the neighbourhood of Queensferry, and opposite Hope- 

 town House, where I captured in one dip of a net, of about a foot and 

 a half square, between two and three hundred fish, the greater part of 

 which were whitebait of small size, not more than two inches in 

 length. . . Jn their habits they appear to be similar to the young 

 of the herring, always keeping in shoals, and swimming occasionally 

 near the surface of the water, where they often fall a prey to aquatic 

 birds." 



The question as to the effect of the capture of whitebait on the 

 numbers of the mature animals is one which will suggest itself to 

 most readers. It does not necessarily follow that because whitebait 

 are young herrings, therefore it is injurious to our herring fisheries to 

 capture them. The number of eggs deposited by a single herring is 

 enormous. Of these only two or three can arrive at maturity — the 

 rest must fall a prey to their numerous enemies ; and the utmost 

 destruction effected by man, with small nets a few feet square moored 

 in the water of a broad river or estuary, can have but little influence 

 as compared with the destruction by piscivorous fishes and fish-eating 

 birds. 



The present fashion of wearing bird-skins and plumes in hats has 

 led to the wholesale slaughter of gulls and other water-fowl, so that 

 at present scarcely one is visible in places where they formerly 

 abounded. It is not improbable that this destruction of their enemies 

 may have saved the lives of millions of young fry, and that the power 

 of man has not equalled that of the birds he has destroyed. But be 

 the bearing of the subject what it may, it is always desirable that the 



