REGULATION OF THE SEA-FISHERIES BY LAW. 113 



sage, past Point Judith, passed round tlie north end or across the south 

 end, and coming down the east passage, fell into the traps,* whose 

 mouths were alwaj^s set to the north. TJie hook-and-line men, however, 

 averred that the scup pushed up both passages at once, and in the mid- 

 dle also, andthose that were taken at Saugkonnet were hugging the shore 

 and got set into the traps by the tide. Both views may be correct ; but 

 the second one doubtless is, because the singular inroad of young scup, 

 which took place this year, and which will presentl}^ be spoken of, struck 

 first at Saugkonnet and afterward at Beavertail. It is usually thought 

 that no scup came in through Muskeget Channel, but this, like the rest 

 of the theory, is not well proved. The first specimen vras taken at Wa- 

 quoit, tliis season, as early as April 25, and the greatest numbers taken 

 were on May 10 and 13. The season was peculiarly early, and the first 

 " run " near Newj^jort was on Mtiy 3, which would be a week's difference 

 between these points, not enough, i^erhaps, for the slow scup to move 

 so far. The dates for appearance for past years, (table,) suggest that 

 the fish of that part of the coast must strike in through Muskeget 

 Channel. 



Withiu a few seasons, a great change has come over the numbers and 

 movements of the scup. In bays and salt ponds they have become 

 nearly extinct ; while in the great channels and near the mouths of the 

 bays they still are found in considerable though diminished quantities. 

 Witnesses disagree as to the exact time when scup began to fall off; in- 

 deed, it is not probable that they diminished uniforml}' and in all places 

 at once. Some aver that a falling off was to be noticed only four or 

 five years after the first traps w^ere set, which would make the year 

 1850. But most of the testimoDy goes to show that it was between 1856 

 and 1866. Certainly in 1860 scup were still plenty at Point Gammon 

 and in Lewis's Bay, near Hyannis. Four causes are alleged for this 

 diminution : 1. Impurities in the water. 2. Want of food. 3. Traps. 

 4. Blue-fish. As to the first, although gravely put forward by certain 

 witnesses, it is too absurd to be for a moment entertained. The idea of 

 poisoning all the waters of Buzzard's and Narragansett Bays by a few 

 mills and print-works near Providence, Greenwich, and Pall River, is 

 ludicrous in itself; and it is moreover well known that live fish are 

 found in plenty in close proximity to these very manufactories, and that 

 live clams lie directly in the track of the drainage of petroleum Avorks. t 

 As to want of food, it was stated that the five-fingers {Asterias) had 

 destroyed certain great muscle-beds, which were feeding grounds. But 

 the dredgings of Professor Baird, during the present season, have 

 shown, not only that there are vast muscle-beds still existing, but that 

 the tautog were no more plenty there than elsewhere ; and, moreover, 

 the sea-water Avas everywhere full of the salpse, fish-eggs, minute Crust- 

 acea, jelly-fishes, and small worms which are usually found in such 

 localities. The real i)erplexities of the question are to be found when 

 the effects of traps and of blue-fish come to be considered. The traps 

 can diminish scup in the Avay they have been diminished, only under 

 certain conditions, to wit: («,) all the scup must stand in betw^een 

 Montauk Point and Gay Head; because any that advanced through 

 Muskeget Channel would nowiiere find enough traps to interfere much 



* A trap is a simplified weir. The bowl is merely an oblong, rectangular pen, of 

 large size, and the tish would immediately escape, did not the fishermen, as soon as a 

 school had entered, pull up the net bottom and shut them in. A trap, therefore, 

 requires constantly to be watched. This modification of the Madrague is said to be 

 the invention of Benjamin Tallman. 



t See also Report of Massachusetts Commissioners for 1835, pp. 18 and 53. 



S. Mis. 61 8 



