Feb. 21, 1889.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



91 



thing to do with oiir success remains an open question : 

 but the fact is, that we very soon began to obtain re- 

 markable strikes, and were rewarded by bringing to net 

 •during the remaining two hours that' we fished no less 

 than twenty-three of the finest speckled trout that cither 

 of us had ever before seen at one time. The smallest 

 weighed over three-quarters of a pound, the next small- 

 est a trifle over a pound, and ranging up to the three 

 largest, which pulled the scales at 241bs. each. They 

 were, indeed, a splendid string, and had afforded us mag- 

 nificent sport in handling with our 7oz. split-bamboo 

 rods, and excited the admiration and possibly the envy of 

 all who saw them when they were proudly exhibited on 

 our return to the log sportsman's hotel at Smith's Lake. 

 The greater part were served for supper, and were 

 found of fine flavor and the meat firm and of the salmon 

 color. 



The writer tried an experiment with a few of the 

 largest to determine whether "jerked trout ' would he 

 palatable and could be kept for any length of time, and 

 the result was so satisfactoiy that it is given for the bene- 

 fit of the readers of the Forest and Stream. The trout 

 after having been nicely dressed and washed, were 

 placed over night in a weak brine, that they might 

 thoroughly slime. Then after washing and then drying 

 with napkin, they were slightly peppered sufficiently as 

 for cooking. A jerkiug rack was improvised by putting- 

 cleats and birch slats across near the top of a box 3ft. 

 long, set on end. The trout having been placed on the 

 rack, an iron pot with coals fed by bits of bi ch. was 

 placed under them, and the front of the box closed by a 

 board held in position by a stick slanting to the ground. 

 A slow T fire was kept up— except during the night— for 

 t vo days, and the trout were thus slowly cooked and 

 thoroughly dried and smoked, and were reduced nearly 

 one-half in bulk. Some were served hot from the rack 

 and pronounced delicious. Others were kept and served 

 at intervals of one to three months, and found to be in 

 nic? condition and very palatable. A number of sports- 

 men who partook agreed that trout thus prepared would 

 be a convenience for preserving and prevent wasting 

 when more were caught than could be at once used, be- 

 sides being an acceptable variety to camp stores, and in 

 shape to carry for lunch or home use. 



The red-ibis was the moc-t eagerly taken of the flies 

 used: the grizzly came in as a fair second, while the 

 white-miller was but occasionally struck. 



There are numerous bodies of water in the Adirondacks 

 where large trout are known to exist, but are exceedingly 

 difficult to catch, especially late in the season. Notably 

 so Is Spring Pond near the Bog River chain of ponds, 

 mentioned in Colvin's report of the Adirondack survey, 

 stocked originally by the veteran sportsman A. E. Kerr. 

 After the experience recorded, it might prove advantage- 

 ous for sportsmen to add a few bass flies to their trouting 

 paraphernalia, and try deep trolling when visiting such 

 waters. The season having closed ere another oppor- 

 tunity presented , the relative merit of additional worm 

 -appetizer remains yet to be tested. E, S. W, 



ARK ETTSVTLIiE, O. 



THE CARP AS FOOD. 



.Editor- Forest arid Stream: 



1 beg to differ with you as to the edible qualities of 

 carp and suckers. Their very habits would at once to 

 my mind settle this question. They live in the mud or 

 sluggish water except when running up to spawn. Their 

 food consists of dead and decayed substances that lie 

 upon the bottom and are sucked up, squiggled and then 

 swallowed with portions of mud. Sometimes they come 

 in contact with the spawn of other fish, which are gulped 

 with as much avidity as a piece of half decomposed 

 animal matter. You say "they are always kept a few 

 days in pure cold water before they are killed.*' Of 

 •course this would tend to work off some of the food 

 effluvium and improve the flavor of the flesh. Again 

 you say "much of the blame attached to this fish really 

 belongs to its surroundings." Of course it does — living 

 in the mud and picking any decayed matter deposited 

 there would make the fish offensive to both smell and 

 taste. But why does he seek such "surroundings?" Sim- 

 ply because it is his nature. Why don't the sucker ex- 

 hibit more enterprise and sometimes capture a live tit of 

 food if he expects to adorn a plate on a gentleman's table? 

 But no, he has no such elevated notions. His instincts 

 are low, his tastes are low and he must al ways be classed 

 with " those that breathe out contagion to this world." H. 



FJditor Forest and Stream: 



I was interested and amused by reading to-day, in your 

 issue of this week, the communication of Mr. Hapgood, 

 of Boston, that great center of learning and information; 

 concerning the capture of a "mysterious millpond mon- 

 ster," which is duly described with semi-scientific min- 

 uteness, worthy of Bostonian culture. Being myself a 

 Massachusetts man, I naturally felt proud of the elucida- 

 tion, and especially because it treated of the best-abused 

 fish in American waters, and one which I delighted to 

 champion for a dozen or more years past, as the files of 

 the Forest and Stream will abundantly testify. I can- 

 not understand why the communication should have re- 

 minded me of another Boston incident, but it did, and 

 although "chestnuty" I will repeat it. When the Colo- 

 rado beetle, or potato bug, had been for several years 

 ravaging the country, a specimen was caught in the 

 suburbs of Boston, and duly brought before a highly-cul- 

 tured class of Boston scientists for identification. A 

 young lady of the class adjusted her eye-glasse3, and 

 examining the beetle promptly announced its scientific 

 name, whereupon the poor beetle at once rolled over and 

 died. Is it not possible that the shooting of this fine 

 carp, in the zenith of its spawning season, saved it a 

 more horrible, scientific death ? 



But seriously, now, is it a wonder that the Massachu- 

 setts Fish Commission cannot understand why the people 

 of the State do not engage in carp culture, when they 

 know so little of the carp? (See last report of the Com- 

 mission). Hundreds of Massachusetts farmers would en- 

 gage in the fascinating industry if they knew the intrin- 

 sic value of the carp, the ease "and comparatively slight 

 expense of inaugurating the business, and when started 

 systematically, how very little attention is required ever 

 after, and finally, how much more profitable the business 

 is than the same areas devoted to any other farm in- 

 dustry. As before intimated, the carp has been out- 

 rageously belied , and mainly by those who do not know 



a carp when they see it. I have investigated several 

 cases where carp have been publicly pronounced a very 

 inferior table fish, and by prominent gentlemen, who 

 would not knowingly misrepresent any subject under 

 discussion. In every instance I have ascertained that 

 they had eaten of carp which had been taken out of 

 season, as was the case with the one shot in the pond at 

 Shirley, Mass., "early in September," In the vicinity of 

 Boston, carp will commence spawning in May, and con- 

 tinue spawning fiom time to time until October, provid- 

 ing the weather is moderately warm and the conditions 

 of the pond are favorable. These months, then, are 

 properly the close season, when the carp is unfit for 

 table use. But. even during the cold months, if taken 

 direct fi*om waters having muddy or otherwise filthy 

 bottom, they will be found to be in poor flavor. If , how- 

 ever, they are placed in clear, cold water for two or three 

 weeks, and screened or floored from contact with the 

 earth, they will be found to be second only to the 

 Salmonidu. Milton P. PbirOB, 



COTvUMBllS, Ohio. 



Florida Explorations.— Feb. 9 the Grampus took a 

 seine boat fully equipped for cruising along the shore 

 and in the lakes and lagoons of Florida to Indian Key, 

 75 or 80 miles from Key West and about 30 miles from 

 the point where Dr. Henshall was to go in her among 

 the islands, to enter Biscayne Bay, Feb, 1 1 the Doctor, 

 with two seamen and a Ideal pilot, left the Grain pus for 

 Biscayne Bay. The Grampus returned to Key West 

 Feb. 12 and was joined by Mr. W. C, Kendall, who will 

 accompany her to the Gulf fishing banks as naturalist. 



Goose Fish in Brackish Water, — A correspondent, 

 "C." living in New Jersey, mentions the capture of a 

 goose fish or angler (Lophius piscatoHws) near the month 

 of the Cohansey River, about Dec. 20, 1888. This is a 

 very unusual locality for this marine species and it is not 

 to be wondered at that the fishermen did not know it. 

 The length of the fish was four feet. The stomach and 

 mouth contained fifteen large menhaden. Daniel Biggs 

 was the fortunate captor of the curiosity, 



Laroe Bass Caught Throuc;h the Ice. — West Win - 

 sted, Conn. — Editor Forest and Stream: One week ago 

 tc-?lay Will White, of this borough, caught a small- 

 mouth black bass 2 tin. in length and weighing 5 Jibs. 

 On the following Saturday the same fisherman secured 

 another of the same species weighing l^lbs. Both these 

 elegant fish were taken from Little Pond about LV miles 

 north of Winsted, and were caught while fishing through 

 the ice for pickerel with tips. — B. 



New Hampshire Trout in January. — Conway, N. H,. 

 Feb. 16.— E. B. Hodge, Fish and Game Commissioner of 

 the State, was here this week and had ten fishermen 

 brought before J. C. Wood, J. P., charged with catching 

 brook^trout in January. They all pleaded guilty and were 

 fined in sums from $5 to §50 each and costs. This will 

 put a stop to illegal fishing in this part of this State for 

 the present. Thev were catching brook trout ranging 

 from 2 to 6Mbs. each.— Saco. ' 



Nova Scotia Fishes.— Mr. Harry Piers, an assistant 

 in the Colonial Museum at Halifax, records the follow- 

 ing fishes as new to the fauna of Nova Scotia: Oceanic 

 bonita (Euthynnus pe/amys), harvest fish (Stromateus 

 triacanthus), swell fish (Tetrodon sp.). The last we 

 suppose from the description to be the common T. 

 tttrgidus. The oceanic bonito was eaten at one of the 

 hotels and pronounced excellent, 



SAWDUST IN STREAMS. 



THE effect of sawdust in lakes and streams has been dis- 

 cussed by many writers and with conflicting opinions. 

 In the second 'part of the Report, of the XL S. Commissioner 

 of Fish and Fisheries. Mr. James W. Milner gives the result 

 of his observations on the Great Lakes. Speaking of Green 

 Bay, he says that whi fetish were formerly taken in abund- 

 ance in the spawning season iu a number of rivers emptying 

 into this bay; but sawmills are numerous at present on all 

 of these streams, arid the great amount of sawdust in the 

 rivers has caused the white-fish to leave them. The effect of 

 the sawdust, he states, is to cover up the spawning grounds 

 and destroy the food of the fish. Watson, in the third part 

 of the same report, charges the sawdust with the destruction 

 of the purity and aerated condition of the water, so changing 

 its character as to revolt the cleanly habits of the salmou. 

 He mentions the experience of Mr. Arnold, who had seen the 

 gills of salmon filled with sawdust. Mr. Mather, in Trans- 

 actions American Fish cultural Assoc., 1882, and in these 

 columns of the same year, thinks that sawdust is destruc- 

 tive to the young by covering up the spawning grounds and 

 by polluting the water with turpentine from the pine and 

 tannin from oak. Mr. J, J. Brown, of Ludington, Mich., in 

 Bulletin V., TJ. S. Fish Commission, charges the sawdust 

 and shingle' shavings dumped into Lake Michigan with the 

 annihilation of the feeding grounds of fish. The statements 

 of "Sportsman" and Livingston Stone in recent numbers of 

 this paper, are very positive as to the deleterious influence 

 of sawdust in polluting the water, killing the young and 

 promoting the growth of fungus. Mr. Stone believes that 

 after the spawning grounds are covered with sawdust the 

 stream can produce no 7nore trout, 



Charles G- Atkins, in Part II.. Report of U. S. F. C, speaks 

 of the Penobscot River. He finds that sawdust has inter- 

 fered with the success of certain fishing stations, but the 

 salmon are not prevented from ascending to their spawning 

 beds, which are free from obstruction and seem to suffer no 

 1 injury from the refuse. Prof. H. Rasch, an eminent author- 

 ity in Norway, communicated his views on the sawdust 

 question to the Norwegian Hunting and Fishing Association 

 in 1873. He admits that rivers on which there is considera- 

 ble cutting of timber gradually become more and more desti- 

 tute of salmon, hut thinks that the injury is not to the fish 

 directly, but is caused by limiting and partially destroying 

 the spawning grounds. He cites the river Drammeu. which 

 was greatly polluted by sawdust for many years and in 

 which the salmon decreased constantly until the fishermen 

 at Hellefos begun hatching them artificially and planting 

 the fry annually. Having access to the upper part of the 

 river, which was comparatively free from sawdust, the as- 

 cending fish seemed to be little affected by the mill refuse 

 from below Hellefos. His opinion, based upon experience 

 ( on the Drammen River and the Soli, was that unless the 

 ' salmon are prevented by impassable dams from ascending 



above the mill locations, t he sawdust will not drive them 

 from the streams nor materially injure them. "Piscaior, 1 

 Charles Hal lock, and Milton D. Peirce have produced sta- 

 tistics and observations to prove that sawdust in streams 

 of Nova Scotia and Massachusetts has not injured the fish- 

 ing for trort and has not unfavorably affected any of the 

 river fisheries. 



From the foregoing survey it wil I be evident that there are 

 two sides to the question as to the influence of sawdust in 

 streams and lakes, and it may be possible that some of the 

 States which have legislated against the deposit of this sub- 

 stance iu certain waters have placed unnecessary restrictions 

 upon an im nortaut industry. Unless spawning grounds are 

 actually covered and feeding grounds destroyed^ there would 

 seem to be no case against the sawdust. At all events, the 

 instigators of this legislation should produce evidence of 

 deleterious effects to be remedied by leg il enactments, and 

 show that such pollution is necessarily and always fatal and 

 cannot be mitigated Ly measures to aid the ascent to the 

 spawning beds. 



E'litor Forest and Stream: 



In your last issue, in an article treating on sawdust in 

 streams, it is held that such pollution does not pi'event the 

 population of the waters unless the spawning grounds or 

 feeding places are invaded by the deposit. It seems to me 

 that as long as such a contingency might exist, it furnishes 

 a sufficient warrant for prohibitive legislation on the part 

 of the States. I would add in the interest of the owners of 

 saw mills, that if they would give the matter a moment's 

 serious thought they'could see in the laws forbidding the 

 dumping of their refuse in the streams a means of perma- 

 nent benefit to themselves. Let them dig a pit, such as used 

 for charcoal burning, except that a flue should be run up 

 from the center to promote draught. The flue could be 

 constructed of flat stones, and the entire cost would only be 

 the labor, while the benefits would be lasting. Into this pit 

 all the ashes and refuse of the mill could be put and burned, 

 the fire being introduced from the top of the flue. When 

 the mass is reduced to ashes the mill owner will find him- 

 self in possession of a fertilizer especially valuable for low 

 lands contiguous to all bodies of water — his own lands or 

 those of his neighbors. Farmers have little use for saw- 

 dust, but they all understand and appreciate the value of 

 ashes. J. D. J. 



N ew York. 



Editor Forest ami ' Stream: 



Let me thank Mr. Hallock and Mr. Peirce for their cool- 

 headed utterances on this sawdust question. I have been 

 for many years investigating this subject, and have under my 

 hand many such facts as I published in my former letter, 

 and it is cheering to have them so effectively buttressed as 

 they have been by similar experiences and facts. That laws 

 have found their' way upon the statute books of the country 

 prohibiting the passing of sawdust into the streams is not 

 proof that to do so is an evil. Many other laws have found 

 their way there as well only to be repealed after more was 

 known upon the subject, and I feel quite sure that the law 

 against sawdust ought to and will share the same fate, and 

 because it never should have been enacted, as the necessity 

 for it does not really exist. 



At the risk of wearying you on the subject, I add a few 

 more facts, which to' me are quite significant. The River 

 St. John, in New Brunswick, is only to a limited extent on 

 its branches encumbered with mill dams, but it is and has 

 been for nearly a ceutury abundantly supplied with saw- 

 dust, still it produced during the six years from 1876 to 1881, 

 of salmon, an annual average of 172.9421bs., and during the 

 six years trom 1881 to 1887 210,36(11 bs, an excess during the 

 latter over the former period of 234,5441 bs. tts product of 

 alewives during the former period was 10,01Sbbls, per an- 

 num, and during the tatter period 16,622bbls., an increase 

 during the latter period of 39,624bbls. The fish killing 

 properties of sawdust do not seem to be very formidable on 

 the river, though much of it is of that horrid pine which 

 "Sportsman" seems to think is so deadly in its results. 

 The following catch of shad on the river during the years 

 indicated also tells its own story in the same direction: 1878, 

 429bbls.; 1879, 521bbls.; 1880, (ilSbbls.: 1881, l,885bbls.; 1882, 

 1,8S2bbls.; 1883, l,72Sbbls.; 1884, 2,420bbls.: 1885. 2,189bbls.;' 

 1886, 2,71'ibbls.; 1887, 3.95()bbls. These fish were mostly 

 caught during the month of May while full of spawn. 



The whole Province of New Brunswick with her large 

 fish-producing rivers, except the St. John, clear and clean 

 of mill dams and sawdust, 'produced of salmon per annum 

 during the nine years from 1869 to 1877 l,7S9,930lbs., and 

 during the ten years from 187S to 1887 but 1. 189,9801 bs., a 

 decrease of 599,9501 bs. per annum: and of alewives during 

 the. former period 23,053bbls. and the latter 17,714bbls. per 

 annum, a decrease of 5,339bbls. per annum. Those figures 

 of course include the St. John, so that while anadromous 

 fish of all kinds are increasing on the sawdust-cursed St. 

 John by including the produce of her clean rivers, we see 

 there must be something at work much worse than either 

 dams or dust. Had the reverse of these figures been the 

 result he would be a much bolder man than 1 who under- 

 took to prove that sawdust did no harm: but as it is I claim 

 that I have made a strong point in favor of the innocence 

 of sawdust. If the deadly dust is as ruinous to fish as some 

 suppose, it should produce results iu a series of years which 

 could leave no doubt upon the mind of any person. 



The very best thing to be done for anadromous fish in 

 your country as well as ours is to put good fish ways in the 

 dams at any cost and add to the fish year by year by arti- 

 ficial culture, and the imaginary sawdust evil will soon 

 vanish and the lumbering interests will be saved a need- 

 less expense. 



Your New Brunswick correspondent "Fisher" seems to 

 think that I am not informed as to the enormous size of the 

 New Brunswick trout, which he seeks to make one think are 

 very whales as compared with the troutlings of Nova Scotia, 

 which he intimates are too small to be killed by sawdust! 

 When he takes this singular position, he proves nothing so 

 much as that he and his companions— in the contention 

 that sawdust kills fish— are advocating error and wrong, 

 because no two of them can agree as to how or why it is so 

 destructive; see Livingston Stone's view as compared with 

 "Fisher's" and "Angler's". There are as many theories as 

 writers; but all are provokingly economical of facts, and it 

 is facts we want; we have been familiar with groundless 

 theories from childhood, and it is about time the theories 

 were supported, to some extent at least, so give us data and 

 don't, ask us to take fancy for fact. 



As to the size of trout in Nova Scotia. 1 have seen thou- 

 sands that weighed from lib. to 4 and 51bs., and one or a half 

 dozen may be seen in the museum at Halifaxweighing from 

 5 to 71bs. ' They catch double the quantity every year taken 

 in New Brunswick. It is quite evident "Fisher" should be 

 m ore sure of his facts. His Province produced of trout in the 

 vear 1886, 65.6501bs., and Nova Scotia the same year, 131,502 

 lbs., double the New Brunswick catch; and in 1887 the 

 former Province caught but 71,7651hs. iu her clean rivers, 

 while the latter Province in her sawdust-poisoned waters 

 caught 155,469108., being 11,9391 bs. more than double that of 

 New Brunswick, the increase inNova Scotiain a single year 

 being nearly 20 per cent, as compared with less than 10 per 

 cent, in New Brunswick. Had the result been the reverse of 

 this the facts would at once be accepted as conclusive against 

 the deadly dust; as it is I claim them as being overwhelm- 

 ingly in the opposite direction. 



He discourses on the poisonous gases from rotting saw- 

 dust, and I will not waste space in refuting this idea, so 

 flippantly put forth from time to time, but demand that the 



