332 Roosevelt Wild Life Bulletin 



aimed at the destruction of species regarded as harmful in one way 

 or another to the " more desirable fish/' that is to say, game fish. 

 Sometimes the two objects have been combined, or the first has been 

 subordinated to the game fish interests. 



Now just what successful outcome of the " experiment" of cisco 

 netting in Lake St. Catherine was anticipated, is not stated. Judg- 

 ing from analogy, the month of open season for the netting was 

 during the spawming time of these fish. If such was the case and 

 the object w^as the destruction of the cisco the procedure would give 

 full promise of success. 



It appears that the bulk of the 600,000 pounds of suckers taken 

 in 1903 in Oneida Lake was captured during the spawning time and 

 was permitted for both of the aforementioned objects. Just what 

 harm, if any, the ciscoes were to other " more desirable species " 

 in Lake St. Catherine is not apparent. The alleged harmfulness of 

 the suckers is based upon certain known propensities of those fish. 

 But the possible, if not to say the probable, beneficial part suckers 

 play in the natural economy of the waters has received no con- 

 sideration. 



As has been previously indicated, the destruction of these fish may 

 defeat the intended purpose of their destruction. Even though a 

 reduction of their numbers may be desirable in an effort to readjust 

 a balance that has been disturbed by a reduction of the game fish 

 to which the alleged harmful habits of the suckers or other fish 

 pertain, their relation to other perhaps even more harmful forms 

 should be taken into consideration. For instance, the bowfin which 

 occurs in both Oneida Lake and Lake Champlain may be even more 

 destructive to certain game fish of those lakes than are the suckers, 

 and the relation of the suckers to the bowfin may be such that the 

 destruction of the suckers would intensify the harmful effects of 

 the bowfin upon the game fish. This is purely hypothetical, how- 

 ever, for these specific relationships are not as yet established as 

 facts. But even this possibiUty indicates the necessity of ascertain- 

 ing every such fact concerning the fishes in any body of water before 

 intelligent regulation of fisheries can be established, and rational 

 procedures replace " experiment." It is possible that some other 

 method of fishing at some other season of the year would produce 

 the desired results of productiveness of the fishery resources, with 

 sufficient but not undue reduction of any species. 



The game fish situation in Oneida Lake appears not to have been 

 improved although the sucker supply has been greatly diminished. 

 What is wrong can only be conjectured. A step, if not to say a 

 stride, in the direction of a solution of the problem has already been 

 taken in the surveys to which previous reference has been made. 

 W^hat is now needed is continuation and amplification of the work 

 already begun. 



In the case of Lake Champlain neither game fish nor non-game 

 fish are maintained to the economic maximum. In fact, some valu- 

 able species have been reduced almost to extinction, notwithstand- 

 ing the fact that net-fishing in New York State has not been per- 



