FISH AND FISHING. 



245 



bound to a pole, 10 to 20 feet long, a slow 

 fuse is lighted, the whole is chucked into 

 the water and the upper end of the pole is 

 nailed to one of the logs. A tremendous 

 explosion is the consequence and usually 

 the jam is broken. For the last year I have 

 noticed few trout in the stream where 

 formerly there were many, and the stream 

 is little fished in this locality. 



Can you tell me if this dynamiting is the 

 cause of the scarcity of fish? The explo- 

 sion often splits logs, 3 to 5 feet in diame- 

 tor, in half, and throws others 6 feet in the 

 air. The water is seldom over 15 feet in 

 depth and has a swift current. 



Paul McKercher, Portland, Ore. 



ANSWER. 



The use of dynamite in a stream such as 

 the White Salmon river in which there are 

 trout and other species of fishes must cer- 

 tainly result in greater or less destruction 

 to fish life. Whether the decrease in the 

 supply of trout for that river is due wholly, 

 or even partly, to the use of dynamite in 

 connection with the removal of the log 

 jams, can not be stated with certainty with- 

 out a fuller knowledge of the facts than 

 you have given. It is reasonable, however, 

 to believe that such use of dynamite is sure 

 to result in more or less destruction to 

 the fishes. In most States such a use of 

 dynamite is illegal, and it probably is so in 

 Washington. At any rate, every legitimate 

 effort should be made by those interested 

 in the preservation of the food and game 

 fishes of the State of Washington to do 

 away with this destructive custom. I sug- 

 gest that you refer the matter to Hon. T. R. 

 Kershaw, State Fish Commissioner of 

 Washington, Whatcom, Wash., and that 

 you also confer with the Superintendent of 

 the Government Fisheries Station at Little 

 White Salmon. — Editor. 



THE LOCATION MAKES THE DIFFERENCE. 



I am with you in your efforts to stop all 

 kinds of illegal and legal slaughter, and 

 enjoy reading your magazine; but why do 

 you print, without comment, a story about 

 2 men catching no trout and then give 

 other people fits, in the same issue, for 

 catching about the same number of fish at 

 Spirit Lake, la.? It does not look con- 

 sistent. 



Arthur E. Bartlett, Chetopa, Kan. 



ANSWER. 



Circumstances alter cases. The 2 men 

 whose story I printed on pages 27 and 28 

 of July Recreation, were fishing in a 

 mountain stream in Washington, a long dis- 

 tance from any town or village, and where 

 the supply of trout is practically unlimited. 

 I have fished many such streams myself, 

 and I know many trout die of old age in 

 that country, every year, A reasonable 



catch there, if made in Iowa or any Eastern 

 State, would put the angler in the fish hog 

 class. Furthermore, those Western anglers 

 did net rush to a photograph gallery and 

 have their pictures taken. They caught no 

 trout in 2 days, an average of 27 fish a day 

 to each rod, which is not excessive for that 

 country. 



The Spirit Lake crowd not only took too 

 many fish, and thus deprived their neigh- 

 bors of a part of their share, but they strung 

 up the result of their day's work, posed be- 

 hind the string, and had themselves photo- 

 graphed. This, of itself, shows a vulgar, 

 swinish taste, which is condemned to-day 

 by all decent sportsmen, everywhere. I 

 heard Congressman Lacey spy, in a speech 

 several years ago, that no decent sports- 

 man would allow himself to be photo- 

 graphed with a string of fish or game, much 

 less seek an opportunity for the making of 

 such a picture. 



I am working with a view to educating 

 sportsmen out of this habit. I strongly 

 recommend the use of the camera in hunt- 

 ing and fishing, instead of the gun and the 

 fishing rod, but I do not approve of parad- 

 ing pictures of dead fish, or dead birds, or 

 dead animals, together with the faces and 

 figures of the people who did the killing. 

 I have said as much in Recreation time 

 and again. 



I realized when I printed the story of the 

 Washington men that I should be criticized 

 for not roasting them, but under the cir- 

 cumstances I do not consider their catch 

 excessive. — Editor. 



FISHING IN LAKE CHAMPLAIN. 



I have for 15 years spent my vacations 

 mainly fishing in Lake Champlain, and am 

 much interested in preserving the fish in 

 that beautiful lake. Will you allow me to 

 point out what seems to me a lamentable 

 defect in our law, or the enforcement of it. 



Early in May last, while visiting in Mil- 

 ton, I declined an invitation to go to the 

 Lamoille river to catch pike. The fish 

 were said to be in the river in such num- 

 bers that one man hooked a bag full, 

 another nearly 100, and many others re- 

 ported large hauls. There was no secret 

 about this. It was done openly, by men 

 who claimed they were angling within the 

 law. The news of the various catches was 

 telephoned from house to house. The pike 

 are steadily decreasing in the lake. 



Will you also permit me a word in favor 

 of the much maligned but gamy old pick- 

 erel. Every year I meet many campers who 

 come to Lake Champlain, from different 

 States, and I know that for most of them 

 the chief attraction is trolling for pickerel. 

 Though it may be heresy I join with many 

 others in rating the lake pickerel as equal 

 tg wall eyed pike or bass as a table fish. 



