VIII 



sufficient scale to enable us to tmnsfer many of the 

 young tish to the Potomac : but the numbers deposited 

 in that river were increased from year to year, until. a3 

 will be seen hy reference to the table of distribution to 

 be found i-n page 43. 14,35<X0CMJ were deposited during 

 last season. 



As the Susquehanna region had the advantage of at 

 least a year in the work of aititicial projjagation. we find 

 that the ascent of the curve appears tirst upon the chart 

 for that river. In 1S7S the yield of the Potomac had 

 reached its lowest figure, 166. 923. From this point we have 

 a marked increase in the yield of both rivers, whereas, 

 prior to our efforts to repopulate these streams, there 

 was almost alwavs a decrease in the one whenever anv 

 decided increase was observed in the yield of the other. 



The increase of the year 188< > was even more marked 

 when we take into consideration certain meteorological 

 influences and their effects upon other localities. It hap- 

 pened that during the early run of the shad in Chesa- 

 peake Bay southeasterly gales prevailed Avhich must 

 have driven the fish into Mobjack Bay in large numbers 

 while seekino: their native waters of the Potomac and 

 the Susquehanna, since a much larger number were taken 

 at the mouth of the York Kiver and in Mobjack Bay 

 during last season than had been captured the previous 

 year — the catcli l>eiug increased fi-om 179.374 in 1879. to 

 239.804 in 1880. 



I^^YESTIOATIOXS. 



The events of the year 1880 have not only demonstra- 

 ted beyond question the truth of the theories which have 

 been advanced, and on which the work of the Maryland 

 Comuiission has been been based : but they have also 

 opened up a new held for the usefulness of this Depart- 

 ment : and it is now quite certain that the work of artifi- 

 cial propag-ation can be extended to those fishes whose 

 habits have hitherto been little kno^vn. 



The investigations of the last season indicate that the 



