84 
FOREST AND STREAM 
For Forest and Stream. 
DESPAIR. 
T HERE comes an hour, a bitter hour, 
When life is dark and drear, 
When Faith and Hope and Love itself, 
Are powerless to cheer; 
When gloomy thoughts oppress the soul, 
And choke the founts of mirth; 
When memory is but remorse, 
And hope expires at birth; 
When far away from friends and home, 
Your lonely bark you steer 
Upon the ocean’s wilderness, 
With not a true heart near; 
When from the anguish’d heart despair 
E’en brief oblivion snatches— 
You find the soothing pine and weed, 
But ah I you’re out of matches! J. J. Roche. 
This Journal is the Official Organ ©f the Fish Cnltur- 
ists* Association. 
IS THE YELLOW PERCH (Perea flavescens) A 
GOOD FISH TO INTRODUCE INTO 
CALIFORNIA? 
I SHOULD like to ask those who are so horror struck at 
the prospect of introducing yellow perch (Perea flaves¬ 
cens) into the State of California whether they suppose that 
any given fish is the same in quality all over the world, or 
that the yellow perch is a poor fish everywhere because it 
happens to be where they have known it. If they do, I 
advise them to take what spare time they have and read 
themselves up in natural history. They will then find that 
it is one of the most common facts of natural history that 
fish, as well as food and fur yielding animals, vary almost 
indefinitely in quality with their habitat. Why does not 
the fur of a California mink bring as much as that of a 
Labrador or Lake Superior mink? The reason is obvious. 
The climate of California does not produce such good fur 
as the climate of Labrador or Lake Superior even on the 
same animals. It is exactly the same with fish. Different 
climates, and especially different waters, produce fish of 
entirely different qualities, though of the same variety. 
The bass of our southern waters is not the same as the 
bass of Saratoga Lake and Lake Champlain, but a far in¬ 
ferior fish. So with the yellow perch. In some warm 
waters it is a poor fish enough, but it is not so in the cold, 
pure lakes of New England or northeastern New York. I 
will agree with my friend Mr. Mather, if he insists upon it, 
that the yellow perch that he is acquainted with is a mis¬ 
erable fish, and not fit to take to California. But the yel¬ 
low perch of Saratoga Lake and Lake Champlain and Mo- 
nadnock Lake, in New Hampshire, is an entirely different 
thing. Mr. Mather must come and eat some of them before 
he puts them down so summarily. If he will, I have no 
doubt that he will also agree with me that the yellow perch 
of these localities is a very sweet, firm, and excellent fish 
when in season. I am not sure, if he should eat some Sar¬ 
atoga Lake perch off the table of my friend, Mr. Moon, 
that he would not say the yellow perch was about as good 
a fish as he had ever eaten. Anyone who is in the habit of 
going to Saratoga, knows Mr. C. B. Moon, of th$ Saratoga 
Lake House, the reputation of whose game and fish dinners 
is world wide, and no one who is acquainted with Mr. 
Moon and his dinners can have a shadow of a doubt that 
he is an unimpeachable judge of the qualities of game and 
fish. I wrote to Mr. Moon for the purpose of getting his 
opinion of the merits of the yellow peren, and he sent me 
the following reply:— 
Saratoga, January 30, 1874. 
Mr. Stone, Dear Sir:—Your letter is arrived, making 
inquiries in regard to the yellow perch. I use a large quan¬ 
tity of these fish every season. I consider them a most 
excellent fish indeed. Many of my customers at the lake 
give them the preference above all other fresh water fish on 
account of their sweetness and flavor. They increase rapidly 
when’ introduced into good waters, and I am sure they 
would be a hardy fish to ship, and any section of the coun¬ 
try might well feel glad to have them introduced. 
Yours truly, C. B. Moon. 
Now, as to the actual charges against the yellow perch 
that they are “bony and predacious.” I say, what of that? 
The shad is very bony, but a capital fish nevertheless. The 
brook trout is more predacious than the perch, but he is the 
king of fresh water fish nevertheless. Saying that the 
perch .is bony and predacious does not make a case against 
him. The question is, whether these disadvantages affect 
his good qualities? I think very decidedly that they do 
not. I reaffirm that the yellow perch of northern and 
northeastern waters is a very sweet and excellent fish when 
in good condition, and people must call them worse names 
than bony and predacious before they can put them down. 
Besides possessing edible qualities of an excellent char¬ 
acter, the yellow perch has other merits. It is a hardy fish, 
and can probably be introduced successfully where other 
fish would fail. It is very prolific also. Not but that other 
fish are equally so, but the eggs of the yellow perch will 
hatch under circumstances that would be fatal to other 
eggs, so that the perch is, in consequence, practically more 
prolific than other fish. It is also exceedingly easy to hatch 
the spawn of the yellow perch artificially, which is another 
advantage. 
If this is not a sufficient vindication of the attempt 
(which, by the way, I would have it understood, had the 
full sanction of the California Fish Commission) to intro¬ 
duce the yellow perch into the waters of the Pacific slope, 
let me add that it is at all events far preferable to most 
of the fish at present existing in the fresh waters of Cali¬ 
fornia, and even if it destroyed four fifths of the other fish 
there it would replace them by a better kind. 
For instance, the fish of Clear Lake are (I give the local 
names, for I do not yet know the scientific names) the Cali¬ 
fornia salmon trout, white perch, shapaulle, hitch, suck¬ 
ers, chy, roach, spotted sun fish, mud fish (mud suckers), 
black fish, trout, bull heads, vivaparous perch. 
The fish of the Sacramento River are trout, salmon, 
chubs, perch, hardheads, Sacramento pike, viviparous 
perch, split tails, suckers, herrings, sturgeons, crabs, lam¬ 
prey eels. 
The varieties contained in the waters of these two locali¬ 
ties comprise most of the fresh water fishes of northern and 
central California, and I think it is safe to say with the ex¬ 
ception of the salmon and trout, and possibly the vivipa¬ 
rous perch and black fish, which latter is quite rare, that 
there is not one of these fishes that is superior to the yel¬ 
low perch of New England and northern New York, which 
it was proposed to take to California. 
I would like to hear the other side of this question from 
those who disagree with me, but until they make out a bet¬ 
ter case than they have done I shall continue to think that 
the Perea flavescens is a very desirable fish to introduce into 
California, and that the fish commissioners of that State 
are right in upholding its introduction. 
Livingston Stone. 
■■ 4 I » --- 
THE FISHWAY S OF PE NNSYLVANIA. 
[Bead before the American Fish Oulturists’’ Association, j 
^ BY JAMES WORRALL. 
S OME attention having been drawn to the Fishways con¬ 
structed in the Columbia Dam, on the Susquehanna 
River, in the State of Pennsylvania, in consequence of the 
fact that no work of the kind as yet erected in the United 
States has been known by ocular demonstration to have 
permitted shad (Alosa Pi astaMUs,) to have passed through 
it, and having been connected with the Pennsylvania 
Fishways from the commencement of the restoration rnove- 
ment, the undersigned hopes that a few words in the form 
of a paper, to be read before this Association at its present 
meeting, will not be uninteresting as an endeavor toward 
the establishment of the facts as they have occurred. 
The restoration movement in Pennsylvania originated in 
a Convention of citizens, most of them riparian to the Sus¬ 
quehanna, which assembled in Harrisburg early in 1866, 
and while the Legislature was in session. A bill was 
drawn up in this Convention which subsequently be¬ 
came a law, requiring Fishways to be erected in the 
dams of-the Susquehanna and its tributaries; containing 
other provisions for the restoration and protection of the 
fisheries; and providing also for the-appointment of a Com¬ 
missioner who was required to be a civil engineer, whose 
duty it was, amongst other psescribed duties, to plan and 
have these fishways constructed. It so happened that 
vested rights precluded the erection of fishways in any dam 
on the river except the Columbia Dam; so the Commis¬ 
sioner’s attention was exclusively conlned to the Columbia 
Dam. The undersigned was appointed Commissioner, 
under the act, by Gov. Curtin, and immediately proceeded 
to the performence of his duties. His only qualifi¬ 
cation at the time of his appointment was derived 
from his experience as a civil engineer. He did not 
know the form required for such a structure, although 
he believed himself competent to construct the work as 
soon as the form could be ascertained. The only successful 
fishway at that time known, was the Foster Fishway, and 
to that, therefore, his attention was naturally directed. 
Most, if not all the Foster Fishways at that time construct¬ 
ed protruded from the dam down stream. In considering 
the form of a fishway which would invite shad to pass 
through it, after enquiry amongst experienced fishermen 
and river men, the undersigned considered the Foster 
ladder decidedly objectionable, for he ascertained that shad 
moved much more frequently in schools and flocks than in 
pairs or small numbers. He made up his mind then that 
the true form for shad should be capacious in size and as 
gentle as possible in inclination. Further, that it should 
be so located as that it would be easy to find. All these 
views indicated a cutting into the dam rather than a gradus 
or ladder below it. He was strengthened in this view by 
advice received from Mr. Daniel Shure, at that time Super¬ 
intendent of the dam, and from Major George M. Lanrnan, 
(now deceased,) who had been engaged in its construction 
originally. 
Advice was sought on the subject in Massacliussetts also, 
whither he repaired and consulted with the Fishery Com¬ 
missioners of that State, but especially with Col. Theodore 
Lyman. This latter gentleman stated that he believed an 
inclination of 1:10 would be overcome by the shad, but 
agreed otherwise with the undersigned as to the form of 
the fishway. Returning to Pennsylvania, Mr. Shure was 
consulted again, who also recommended 1:10 for*the slope. 
The inclination of 1:15 was however eventually adopted, 
and a simple trough cut into the dam forty feet wide at its 
mouth, narrowing to twenty feet at its inlet by means of 
three or four rectangular offsets; these being the sugges¬ 
tions of Mr. Shure, who believed that they would create 
eddies and resting places for the fish, should they fail in 
gliding through the whole chute by a single impulsive 
movement. The rise to be overcome was about three feet,* 
and the length of the fishway was consequently forty-five 
feet,obeying the inclination of 1:15. The width of the 
chute was considered very small by the undersigned (only 
forty feet in six thousand eight hundred, the length of the 
dam,) but its cost was to be about $5,000, and the whole 
affair being but an experiment, he hesitated in putting the 
owners of the dam to a greater expense than that for a mere 
trial of a principle. He felt sure that a few fish would 
ascend the chute and these would soon cause a feeling in 
favor of the system which once established would eventually 
induce the Legislature to make ample appropriations for 
more extended works. Thus also the fishway was located 
near the off shore or right bank of the river, in expectation 
*The dam is six feet high, bat the floor of the weir is two feet below 
the top of the dam, and its lower end one foot above the bottom of the 
dam. 
of having another closer to the nigh shore or loft 
The work was finished in 1866. In 1867 it waq m i an ^ 
with great interest by a few friends of the measur P ° a to 
was treated with ridicule by most others. The w' t !t 
1866-7 caused an abrasion pf the dam, and this aid' 0f 
fishway, produced a considerable run of shad abo 1U ^- 
that a very fair catch was the consequence. This J' 6S ° 
stance helped the reputation of the fishwav no 6 nnk+ CUra ' 
has that fact ever been denied. Dt > n or 
In 1868 the catch was not so great, for there was no ah 
sion, but the catch exceeded the average of former aDra ' 
and so matters continued, the catch always increase ?? 
1871-2, when the extraordinary catch estimated at som/m? 
000 as against ten, twenty and thirty thousand in ordin 
seasons occurred on the Susquehanna lelow the dam ^ 
Fishing was prohibited by the law of 1866 within half 
mile of the dam, but local pressure in the Legislatin’ a 
pealed the prohibition, and since 1867 fishing has beer S’ 
lowed nominally to within 200 yards of the fishwav 1 
actually there has been no prohibition as to distance ° Ut 
that it has endured the most adversecircumstances ’ 
good catch however was made above the dam in Wi 79 
and from that year onward the river has been regards 
as having been partially reinstated in its fisheries. 0 U6Q 
New “batteries” have been prepared below Columbia 1 
men who, having but small capital, would not have invest 
ed in them had they not believed that the chances for h 
muneration were very much improved. 
At Newport, on the Juniata, fifty or sixty miles abov 
the dam, since 1867, a steady increase has been observe/ 
and in these neighborhoods no one believes otherwise than 
that shad in greater or less numbers may be confidently m 
pected every year. 3 
At Newport, in 1872, the catch was quite small, but that 
is the only year since 1867 in which a decided increase has 
not been observed there. This however arose from local 
causes. The river at their fisheries was too low during the 
whole season. The fishermen saw the fish hut could not 
catch them. But the series of increments met with no real 
break, for at Sunbury, above a second dam, and just below 
a third one, on the Susquehanna, the extraordinary catch 
of 2,000 was made in 1872. In which year there was no 
abrasion of the Columbia Dam, and 2,000 represents a 
large multiple of the number caught near Sunbury at any 
period in the quarter of a century preceding 1867. 
There are facts current amongst the people of the upper 
Susquehanna and the Juniata, and which are implicitly be¬ 
lieved, so much so that whereas the restoration movement 
commenced in utter incredulity and ridicule,the Legislature 
now finds itself encouraged by its constituencies riparian to 
the great rivers in appropriating money for carrying out 
improvements which have already borne such good fruit. 
People of Sunbury have stated to the undersigned that pre¬ 
vious to 1867 a shad of the upper Susquehanna would fetch 
in their markets always more than a dollar and sometimes 
as high as three, four and five dollars, whereas they look 
for them now every spring and scarcely have to pay more 
than a dollar a pair for them. 
The people of Maryland riparian to the lower Susque¬ 
hanna have observed a change for the better in their 
fisheries. They have done nothing to effect'this, and the 
conclusion is inevitable to them that their neighbors up the 
river have been doing something, so that they are now ex¬ 
ceedingly anxious to know what they shall do to aid and 
abet in the good work. There is scarcely any doubt that a 
commission will be appointed for that State at their present 
session of the Legislature. The abrasions in the Columbia 
Dam of 1873 were not easier of ascent for the shad than 
those of 1867. Yet the most extravagant claim for the 
catch of 1867 above the Columbia Dam was 20,000, the 
estimates varying betweenl 2,000 and that number. If the 
fisheries of the river had not improved then since 1867 how 
could 50,000, (the number justly claimed,) he caught in 
1873, whilst the utmost amount for 1867 did not exceed 
20,000? In both years every available seine was employed. 
It is entirely fair to infer that a large natural spawning 
took place year after year above the dam in years when 
there were abrasions of the dam as well as in years when 
there were not. The dam was originally so unfortunately 
located that abrasions have followed each other regularly 
on the recurrence of a severe winter as often before 1866 
as since that time. But before 1867 there was no regular 
annual increase.There would be a good year and a bad 
year, due almost alone to the abrasions of the dam, the 
number ascending the navigation chutes being always very 
small, the great bulk of the runs of shad missing their 
mouths probably from their out-of-the-way locations. 
There are navigation chutes in all the dams, yet saw 
only seem to ascend the first and second of them, the 
Sliamokin Dam, just below Sunbury, has a large chute 
it, yet shad, it may be said, are never caught above tn 
structure. Yet, up to last year, it was only about a to 
higher than the Columbia Dam, say seven feet five mc > 
the Clark’s ferry dam, up the chute of which a few alw y 
have passed, being seven feet in height. , . , Q71 , 
When ordered by the Senate of Pennsylvania in IW w 
make a Report on Fishways, the undersigned agame 
upon his friends, the Massachusetts Commissioner, 
with the experience gained up to that time, they g . 
with him that the simple inclined trough wms the b 
low dams and shad. The gentler the inclination of corns 
the better. . , * w ;t,h 
When the Pennsylvania Commission was appointe, . 
money in their hands to construct fishways, they „M S 
the idea of the inclined trough, employing the uRjersig _ 
engineer to construct it, and to make assurance dou y > 
reduced the inclination from 1:15 to about 1:35, wh ■ 
added fifty per cent to the width of the opening m 
They however regard the success of the old efiute - n 
credulity and hesitate even to pronounce before . 
favor of the new one until shad shall absolutely be 
nets placed at its head. in 
Herewith is submitted a diagram of both the c > ^ 
plan and in profile, in order that a correct ide °j 
formed as to their form and their inclinations. as 
[It is impossible to give these diagrams in our pap 
they would occupy a large space.— Ed.] , . * g 
In December, 1873, the Pennsylvania Commissi j 
Messrs. Reeder, Hewit and Duffy visited botfi ^ 
when the water as it entered them was about f_ . j n 
depth, the stage at which the shad are usually 0 | c b- 
the spring. At this stage the chutes can only v 1 v ear . 
ed in a steamer. The inclination of the new efi ■ fijj on 
ed so gentle that it was the unanimous opim ar . 
board the vessel that if shad could not ascend t ..Agin¬ 
atively gentle current they would ascend no 
