50 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Aug. 11, 1887. 



Trout from burns above Howietown are comparatively 

 much longer in the head than those raised in the fishery 

 where they have been fed from birth. This may serve to 

 show that the size of the head depended on the food, and 

 was not a real difference between the two fish. 



Another distinction I found in the measurement of the 

 different fish was, that the pectoral fin of the trout is 

 shorter than that of the samlet; this I also found to be 

 true in all the cases I measured. I could not trace any 

 fixed proportion between the length of the fish in either 

 trout or salmon; but, out of a given number of samlets 

 and a given number of trout, the length of the pectoral 

 fin of the samlet is always larger than that of the trout. 

 I could not detect any perceptible difference between the 

 length of the pectoral fins in the different sexes of trout, 

 but in the samlet there is a difference between the length 

 of the pectoral fin in the different sexes, the female hav- 

 ing a longer fin than the male. This held good in all the 

 fish I measured and from whatever stream they came. 

 Fisli differing in length, marking, condition, and in some 

 cases, when the fish were the same or almost the same 

 size, the length of the fins varied; but, with all other dif- 

 ferences, this rule held true throughout, that the pectoral 

 fin of the female was longest. Here, again, the remark 

 as to the size of the head applies, that far fewer females 

 were measured than males. These two are the only 

 approaches to direct results I was able to axrive at; and it 

 is very likely that when I test them more largely another 

 year i may find them all wrong. But, so far, my meas- 

 urements show that, out of an equal number of trout and 

 samlets taken at random from different streams, the 

 length of the head and pectoral fin in the samlet is greater 

 tlian the length of the head and pectoral fin of the trout; 

 that no reliable variation can be noticed between the 

 measurements of head and pectoral fin in the sexes of 

 trout, but in samlets the head and pectoral fin of the 

 female are larger than those of the male. 



I should say that all the fish measured were caught in 

 August and September. I have not been able to try any 

 spring measurements, and I am not sure I should get the 

 same results, as both trout and salmon are in different 

 condition in the spring and in the autumn. 



Examining these fish for their measurement led me to 

 one or two very interesting questions: (1) At what stage 

 do female trout begin to breed in their natural state? I 

 purposely use the term "natural state," for a careful 

 perusal of Sir James Maitland's book shows clearly that 

 the Howietown fish are not in the same condition as the 

 fish in a mountain stream. Fish that are regularly fed, 

 that have nothing to do but to get fat and grow, are in a 

 very different position froni fish who have to get their 

 own living as well as do their duty in their state of life; 

 plenty of food stimulates the reproductive organs of fish, 

 and scarcity of food causes temporary sterility or at least 

 delays the development of the reproductive organs, and 

 this seems to be the case both if the fish are fed artifi- 

 cially or if there is abundance of natural food. Trout from 

 eggs sent from Howietown to Gloucestershire, at a place 

 where the fish are not fed, but where natural food is 

 abundant, breed in the second year. It therefore seems 

 that the answer to the question woidd depend on the 

 quantity of food in the stream; and if this is so, then 

 overstocking may check breeding or at least put off the 

 period at which the fish begin to breed. It does not, 

 therefore, of necessity follow that a well-stocked stream 

 is in the best condition for keeping up a good head of 

 fish. I am rather inclined to think that the small female 

 trout in the mountain streams do not begin to breed until 

 their third year. It is very difficult to come to any con- 

 clusion, for all one has to go by is size, and size depends 

 on food, or perhaps to one fish being stronger than an- 

 other or on a number of other details; but I am inclined 

 to think that in a stream in which a trout has to get its 

 own living and in which there is a large number of small 

 trout a six-inch trout is a three-year old trout. I do not 

 mean to say that a trout grows two inches a year. The 

 year's growth depends on a host of things, and very often 

 the fish may grow more rapidly in its first year than 

 afterward. "What I say is that the majority of trout of 

 six inches are three years old. If this is right, then of 

 the trout under six inches that I caught andT examined, 

 what I usually found was this, that in the females the 

 ova were not so far developed as to be ready for spawn- 

 ing that season. A four-inch female trout caught in 

 September, 1886, would not spawn till the autumn of 

 1887; at least that is so far the result of my observations. 

 I examined from different streams about 100 trout last 

 autumn, and of the females I only found one doubtful 

 case of a fish under six inches that would have spawned 

 last year. The fish were caught from different streams 

 in the watersheds of different rivers; and although it is 

 dangerous to generalize from so few cases, yet this is the 

 result; I found of the fish that would spawn the ova was 

 differently developed, as the fish came from one stream 

 or the other, some would spawn earlier that the others, 

 yet with those over six inches, with but two exceptions, 

 all would have spawned in 1886. To arrive at any satis- 

 factory conclusion, what requires to be done is to artifi- 

 cially breed a number of trout and mark them and then 

 note their growth and development. In most mountain 

 streams there are great difficulties as to this. 



The next question is, When do the male trout begin to 

 breed ? and I think it is clear they begin at least a year 

 earlier than the female, at least in some streams. It 

 would not do to state this as an invariable rule, for if it 

 were so, and femaLes as have been proved at Howietown 

 breed at two years, the males would breed at one year, 

 which is certainlv not correct. For some cause that has 

 to be explained, both in the trout and in the salmon the 

 milt develops earlier than the ova. If a 4in. trout is a 

 two-year old fish (and I believe this to be so), there can 

 be no doubt that male trout begin to breed at two years 

 old. Out of 100 4in. trout taken in September, at least 90 

 per cent, of the males have the milt so developed that 

 they will spawn the same season; and unless it be that the 

 female trout grow much faster than the male, a point on 

 which I have no evidence, one is led almost irresistibly to 

 the conclusion that in the mountain streams the male 

 breeds a season before the female. It is not the males 

 taken from a particular stream that have the milt thus 

 developed. In September the males of nearly all the small 

 brook trout have the milt so developed that they will 

 spawn in that season. If you get a male fish with the 

 milt developed, it is almost certain to be a large fish, 

 about a pound or so. One sees but few of these fish, but 

 in the few one does see, it is by no means infrequent to 

 find the milt in a rudimentary state. Most of these large 



trout I have seen are males. This gives rise to a very in- 

 teresting question, Does the early development of the 

 males exhaust them so, that after a short time they be- 

 come either wholly or seasonally sterile ? On this point, 

 except so far as we have evidence from Howietown, I know 

 none ; and, as already stated, the results from the fish in 

 an artificial state by no means of necessity govern the fish 

 in a natural state. The Howietown experiments would 

 seem to point to this, that after a certain age the reproduc- 

 tive powers of fish become exhausted; in other words, the 

 fish become useless for breeding purposes, and it has been 

 found at Howietown, that the males, as a rule, die several 

 seasons before the female. There is one point to be con- 

 sidered that may upset the whole of my observations. 



The fish I have dealt with are the fish that are found 

 in the brooks in August and September; these may be 

 either the fish that permanently dwell there or the young 

 of larger fish that remain in the brooks for the first year 

 or bo of their lives before they drop back into the main 

 river. That trout ascend the brooks from the main river 

 and spawn, and, having spawned, drop back to the river, 

 is, I think, clear. The point I have no evidence on is this: 

 What are the trout that so ascend? Are they only large 

 fish, or are they small fish as well? If so, the" better food 

 that the fish get in the main river may wholly reverse the 

 state of things found in the brooks. A female trout in 

 the liver may begin to breed (and the reasoning is all in 

 favor that she should) far earlier in the river than in the 

 brooks. A second-season trout in the river may be over 

 6in., while it takes three seasons to produce such a fish in 

 a brook. I have been trying, and hitherto without suc- 

 cess, to collect some reliable evidence as to this. I have 

 only got as far as what is almost every one's experience: 



(1) That the river trout are larger than the brook trout; 



(2) that the river trout ascend the brooks in the autumn 

 to spawn; (3) that a large proportion of these ascending 

 fish, having spawned, descend. The points on which in- 

 formation is wanted are: What is the age of the fish that 

 ascend? Are they over two years old? Of the fish that 

 descend, do the young fish come down to the main river 

 or do they remain for a time in the place where they are 

 bred? I incline to think — but I say this with great reserva- 

 tion, as the evidence is almost nil — that the fish that are 

 spawned in the brook remain there till they reach a cer- 

 tain size. What that size is I cannot yet say definitely, 

 but I am led to think that it is until they are about 6 or 

 Sin. in length, and that then they descend to the main 

 river. 



If I am right in this, it would be an explanation — 

 there are also others — of how it is brook trout are as a rule 

 so small; but here one is met by this difficulty: There are 

 numerous small streams in which trout breed, but the 

 streams are so small that there is not sufficient food to 

 enable the trout even to reach a size of 6in. What be- 

 becomes of these trout? 



I think the trout only stay in the brooks during the 

 first year or two of their fives; and then, in the winter 

 and spring floods, having spawned, go back to the main 

 river. Some of the fish that have spawned remain; these 

 are the large fish one finds here and there in deep pools. 

 They have found comfortable quarters and they stay, 

 eating all they can and doing no end of mischief in de- 

 vouring the food that should go to the support of small 

 trout. These fish should be caught and killed. It is easy to 

 say but difficult to do, for they become as crafty as the 

 professional poacher, and know the exact liniits in which 

 to trust themselves. I am far from sure if the night line, 

 which modern legislation has excluded from our streams, 

 was altogether hurtful. It captured the old cannibals: 

 now they remain "monarchs of all they survey." It is by 

 no means certain — I say it with fear and trembling — that 

 our modern precautions really do so much good. They 

 probably produce, by preserving the spawning fish, a 

 larger number of small trout. But, and it is a large but, 

 does this multiplication of small fish really beneficially 

 affect our streams? The stock of food is limited, the 

 small mouths must be fed and they require a good 

 deal; is not the result to retard development by short 

 commons, and hence to delay the fish, who used to grow 

 larger a year earlier, another year in the river, making 

 - so many more mouths to feed and thus injuring the rest ? 

 It seems to me that, in our great desire to develop our 

 trout fisheries, we have lost sight of one most important 

 point — that, so far as we know, the food supply is a con- 

 stant quantity, or at least it is not a quantity that varies 

 within the stock of fish; and that when we hear of Mr. A 

 and Mr. B having turned such a number of fry into the 

 river it does not follow that they have done good, but, 

 with the best intentions, harm in giving so many more 

 mouths to consume the food of the river. I do not desire 

 for a moment to discourage fishculture, but I am by no 

 means sure that there is not a zeal which is not of knowl- 

 edge, and that the best thing for a trout stream is not 

 necessarily to fill it with artificially-bred fry. I am by 

 no means clear that food or want of it is not one of the 

 reasons why mountain trout are always small. There 

 are, however, a number of matters to be taken into ac- 

 count before even a guess at this can be hazarded. Of 

 these I propose to treat in a future paper. All that I can 

 now say is that I have found to my cost that excessive 

 preservation of a trout stream, although it may — I do not 

 even say it does — increase the number, does not as a con- 

 sequence increase the size of the fish. 



St. Louis River Fish Pirates.— Much complaint is 

 being made of violations of the game law in the vicinity 

 of Duluth. Last spring the Sun published a synopsis of 

 the new game and fish law for the purpose of bringing 

 the matter to the special attention of those who are in the 

 habit of violating it. We are reliably informed that the 

 law for the protection of fish is being daily violated in a 

 most outrageous manner. On the St. Louis River, not 

 far from this city, thousands of fish are being destroyed 

 by nets, fish traps and other unlawful devices for taking 

 them. Men make a business of taking them by any 

 method most convenient and successful, whether the 

 means employed be lawful or not. The St. Paul & Duluth 

 short line, which is being built from Grassy Point to the 

 junction, gives employment to a large number of men. 

 These predatory fishermen take all the chances of punish- 

 ment in order to furnish these railroad employes with 

 fish. The camps buy them, of course, without knowing 

 that they are unlawfully taken. We are informed that 

 when first captured the fish are put into boxes sunk in 

 the water, and there kept from day to day without food 

 until a sufficient number are collected to justify a trip to 

 the railroad camps or to Duluth, when they are put up 



for sale. Fish have been kept alive in this way so long 

 that they have been known to bite and snap at poles or 

 sticks or any object placed near them, so crazy are they 

 for food. The fish that are thus wantonly and criminally 

 destroyed in the St. Louis River and other streams and 

 lakes are among the best game and food fish of the North- 

 west, comprising black bass, pickerel, pike, perch and 

 trout. The game and fish law is a very stringent one, 

 and in addition to the severe penalties it imposes upon 

 the offender, it provides for the severe punishment of 

 certain officers who refuse or neglect to prosecute those 

 who violate it. We would recommend to officers within 

 whose jurisdiction these outrages are said to be of daily 

 occurrence to look sharp to their duties lest they be them- 

 selves indicted when the time comes for them to render 

 an account of their stewardship.— Duluth (Minn.) Sun. 



Princess Bay, lower end of Staten Island, resorted 

 to by New York salt-water fishermen, has afforded good 

 sport this year. Among the captures have been a 201b. 

 sheepshead, taken with rod and reel after a fifty-minute 

 struggle by J. W. Campbell, Jr.; a drum laflfcs., by M. 

 Conners; a 201b. drum, by A. Lorey, and a 14-pb. drum by 

 J. Feuerbach. 



Aadrem all eammnnimtions to Uic Forest and Stream Pub. Co. 



NORTH CAROLINA ENCOURAGEMENT TO 

 SHELLFISH CULTURE. 



BY S. G. WORTH (RECENT STATE COMMISSIONER). 



[Read before the American Fisheries Society.] 



MR. PRESIDENT— The subject to which I desire to 

 direct the attention of the Association is the new oys- 

 ter law of my native State, North Carolina. When, four 

 years ago, I met Lieut. Francis Winslow urging before this 

 body the adoption of a resolution declaring in favoT of priv- 

 ate ownership of oyster bottom, I became impressed with his 

 views, and brought about, after months of ceaseless work, 

 the passage of a resolution in the North Carolina Legisla- 

 ture of 1885, instructing the State Board of Agriculture to 

 expend $3,000 on a survey of the oyster area, looking to the 

 adoption of the principle of ownership in fee simple. Ac- 

 cordingly the work was done, and two years later, in the 

 session of January-February, 1887, in consequence of the 

 able report of Lieut. Winslow, an act was passed which puts 

 on sale, at twenty-five cents an acre, nearly a million acres. 



Owing to apprehensions of assemblymen, lest too big a 

 step should be taken at once, the bottom within two miles 

 of the shore was exempted from the general provisions of 

 the act and left under jurisdiction of the several counties, 

 but the main body of Pamlico Sound and much additional 

 area was put on sale, except the well established natural 

 beds. These, as public beds, were exempted and still re- 

 main the common property of the people. Under laws 

 operative prior to the new act, no person could own more 

 than ten acres in a county, and as a consequence the limited 

 areas precluded the use of dredges and restrained healthy 

 growth. Under the new act a person can own any amount 

 up to a square mile. The new law is regarded by "the press 

 of North Carolina as an advanced movement, and as the law 

 found its origin in a meeting of this body, I now gladly lay 

 it before you entire, with all that may be good or bad in it, 

 and invite friendly criticism from members practically ex- 

 perienced in such legislation, looking to modifications which 

 may be suggested to the next General Assembly in the in- 

 terest of the people at large. 



The Board of Shellfish Commissioners is elected outside 

 the membership of the State Board of Agriculture and con- 

 sists of three — W. J. Griffin, Elizabeth City, Pasquotank 

 county; I. B. Watson, Hyde county, andW.'T. Caho, Bay- 

 boro, Pamlico county. Lieut. Francis Winslow, schooner 

 Scoresby, of the U. S. Navy, is conducting all details of a 

 complete survey. 



THE ACT. 



An act to promote the cultivation of shellfish in the State Lot 

 North Carolina]. 



The General Assembly of North Carolina do enact: 



Section 1. That the State shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction 

 and control over all shellfisheries which are or may be located in 

 the boundaries of the State, south of Roanoke and Croatan sounds 

 and north of Core Sound. 



Sec. 2. In order to carry out the purposes of this act the southern 

 boundary line of Hyde county shall extend from the middle of 

 Ocracoke Inlet to the Royal Shoal Lighthouse, thence across 

 Pamlico Sound and with the middle line of the Pamlico and Piingo 

 rivers to the dividing line between the counties of Hyde and Beau- 

 fort, and the northern boundary line of Cartaret county shall ex- 

 tend from the middle of Ocracoke Inlet to the Royal Shoal Light- 

 house, thence to the Brant Island Shoal Lighthouse, thence acmes 

 Pamlico Sound to a point midway between Maw Point and Point 

 of Marsh, and thence with the middle line of the Neuse River to 

 the dividing line between the counties of Carteret, Craven or 

 Pamlico, and tha t portion of Pamlico Sound and the Neuse and 

 Pamlico rivers not within the boundaries of Dare, Hyde or Car- 

 teret counties, and not a part of any other county, shall be in the 

 county of Pamlico, and for the purposes of this act and in the ex- 

 ecution of the requirements thereof the shore line as now defined 

 by the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey shall he accepted as 

 correct. 



Sec. 2. The State Board of Agriculture shall, at the next regular 

 meeting following the passage of this act, elect three commission- 

 ers of shellfisheries, whose term of office shall be one year, and 

 the said board of commissioners of shellfisheries shall be. main- 

 tained so long as may be necessary to carry out the special duties 

 confided to them by the provisions of this act and no longer, and 

 they shall employ such engineers and clerks as may be necessary 

 for the execution of the said duties, and fix their compensation. 



Sec. t. The Board of Shellfish Commissioners shall make or 

 cause to he made a survey and map of the area hereinbefore de- 

 scribed, whereon shall be shown the location and area of all the 

 natural bods, and of all the grounds which may have been occu- 

 pied under authority of previous acts for the growing, planting or 

 cultivation of shellfish, and upon the completion of the said sur- 

 vey in and maps of each or any county the Board of Commission- 

 ers of Shellfisheries shall determine the location, area, limits and 

 designation of each and every public ground in the county, and 

 such public grounds are to include the natural beds, together with 

 such additional areas adjacent thereto as may be deemed by the 

 Board of Commissioners as necessary to provide for the natural 

 expansion of the said natural beds: and having decided upon the 

 location, area, limits and designation of the said public grounds, 

 the Board of Commissioners of Shellfisheries shall publish the 

 same for the period of thirty days at the court house door and in 

 four other public places in the county wherein the said public 

 grounds are loca ted, and any person or persons objecting to the 

 decision of the Board of Commissioners of Shellfisheries, as pub- 

 lished, may file a written protest, stating the ground for his or 

 their objections, within the said thirty days, with the clerk of the 

 Superior Court of the county wherein the said publication is made, 

 upon payment to the said clerk of the sum of twenty-five cents, 

 and at the expiration of the said thirty days the said clerk of the 

 Sdperior Court shall forward all such written protests to the 

 Board of Shellfish Commissioners, and in case such protests are 

 so filed and forwarded, the said Commissioners, or a majerity of 

 them, shall upon fifteen days' notice, in writing, mailed or person- 

 ally delivered to all parties in interest, hear and pass upon such 

 protests or objections in the county in which the said public 

 grounds are located: and the said Board of Commissioners of Shell- 

 fisheries, having fully informed themselves of the facts in the 

 case, shall make within twenty days from the conclusion of the 

 hearing a decision which shall be final, and shall be so considered 

 until reversed on appeal to the Superior Court. And at all hear- 

 ings authorized by this act the said Commissioners may, by them- 



