CONFERENCE. 129 



vsorae fish, salmon, trout, &c. TLon comes Mr. Agassiz, who tells us 

 they are not pelagic fish; that they are born in fresh water, and we 

 have no right to know that they ever absent themselves far from the 

 fresh wateis. But it is not so with the wandering fishes of the sea. 

 Now, I have no theory on this subject, but I wish to call your attention 

 to it. 



Professor Batrd. We have the fact that last year's scnp are much 

 more plenty than the experience of the past few years wonkl lead us to 

 suppose ; and this year's scup are eciually plent3^ Now, what caused 

 this state of thinji^s? 



Mr. Lyman. The scraps that I have picked up indicate that scup 

 were here abundantly on the first arrival of the settlers in 162!). They 

 were abundant, still, down to 1642, as mentioned by Eoger Williams. 

 Then there is a little gap. In 1642 they were abuudant in all our bor- 

 ders. In 1659 the blue fish were abandant about Nantucket, and Macy 

 is very ])recise in this. There are seventeen years when the scup were 

 abundant, as well as the blue-fish, in the same waters, and remained 

 abundant until 1764. Then the blue-fish go away, disappear entirely, 

 as far as regards Nantucket. Macy says they totally disappeared, and 

 none whatever were caught in the seines. Now, we know that in 1790 

 the scup was unknown in Nantucket, because we have oral testimony 

 collected by Professor Baird ; and then, about 1794, tlie scup reap- 

 peared. There were thirty years, in round numbers, that the blue-fish 

 disappeared, and then again became very abundant, and have continued 

 so since, until about the year 1864, when everj^body agrees that they 

 fell off very much. 



Now, the blue-fish, coming in 1830, have continued to the present time, 

 thougli with decreasing abundance for a few years past. The blue-fish 

 having diminished in 1764, it took thirty years for the scujj to get back, 

 and then they continued side by side without anj- diminution until 

 recently, from 1830. At any rate, for twenty-five years the scup and 

 blue-fish lived side by side in vast abundance. 



What we know of nature does not indicate that the predatory fish 

 that is going to clean out another kind of fish is going to take twenty- 

 five years to do it ; that is to say, when it does it, it is not to be done 

 with a jump. I would illustrate it by saying that I find in testimony 

 from different witnesses, independent of each other, that in 1841 and 

 in 1856 there was an exceedingly cold snap coming on suddenly in 

 the autumn, the consequence of which was that immense quantities of 

 the bottom fish, tautog, rock, bass, &c., were killed throughout the 

 waters of the southern shore, and drifted ashore; and the next year 

 these species in many localities were almost extinct. But in three or 

 four years the tish had returned to their normal abundance. There is 

 an instance of a cause annihilating the local fish, and in three or four 

 years there is a return. It is an illustration that in nature the supply does 

 not take very long to recover itself. 



Professor Bated. It is "nip and tuck" between the blue-fish and the 

 scup. For instance, take the abundance of scup that existed twenty 

 years ago, and no man would have said it was possible, by any agency, 

 to make them scarce, because they thronged everywhere in Vineyard 

 Sound and Buzzard's and Narragansett Bays. Suppose one scup pro- 

 duces a hundred thousand young — that was more than all the blue-fish 

 could manage. They did all they could, but the scup were too many 

 for them. But the blue-fish kept preying upon them, and we can imag^ 

 ine that year by year they finally cut* down the supply to such a point 

 S. Mis. 61 9 



