Jan. 13, 18&4.J 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



Mr. Roosevelt— You say that the supply of fish on the 

 Jersey coast has not diminished by reason of the pound fish- 

 ing. Are you acquainted with the supply of fish in Barnegat 

 Bay? 



Me. Walling — I cannot say that I am familiar with the 

 supply of fish in Barnegat Bay. I represent the pound-net 

 interest on the Atlantic coast, a'nd it is capable of the clearest 

 proof that there is no diminution in the supply. As to Bar- 

 negat Bay, it was claimed that the use of seines destroyed 

 their hook and line fishing; they went to the Legislature and 

 got a law passed prohibiting the use of seines in that bay, and 

 it is a fact that this last season, when those seines were pro- 

 hibited they could catch no more weakfish than before. 



Mb. John Githens (Asbury Park) said: Mr. Chairman 

 and Gentlemen: I stand before you a pound net fisherman 

 and a merchant. It will be my wish to start right, and to 

 make a faithful and impartial statement. I can say that all 

 the bluefish taken in our pounds in a season's catch will not 

 amount to 5,0001bs. This can be substantiated by the bills 

 where we have sold our fish. As to weakfish, 1 defy any man 

 to show me where ocean weakfish have been caught largely 

 with hook and line. Five hundred or a thousand boats will 

 not catch lOOlbs. of weakfish a day. I have lived on the 

 A tlantic coast since T was eight years old, and not lOOlbs. of 

 bluefish will the pounds average in a day. Asbury Park, 

 with its population of 40,000 people, requires from 10,000 to 

 15,0001bs. of fish per day for its supply, in addition to that 

 which is required for 'interior cities. As to weakfish, in 

 Barnegat Bay they are small fish, as a rule; while the kind 

 that 1 catch in my nets are a different fish and do not go 

 into the bay, but come up the coast. Now is there a single 

 pound net below Barnegat Inlet, except one at Cape May? 

 With regard to the destruction of small bluefish, we will 

 frankly and honestly admit that it is true to a certain ex- 

 tent; but not nearly to the extent that is reported, that there 

 are millions and millions of them destroyed. It is the 

 thimble-eye mackerel. But there is a smaller percentage of 

 fish lost from getting into the pounds than in any other 

 method of fishing. In all the history of our pound fishing 

 (and that happened this season), there has been only one in- 

 stance of our getting 20,0001bs. 



In answer to Mr. Roosevelt, Mr. Githens said that the 

 poand nets are usually complete for fishing about June 1, or 

 a little sooner, and that they do, get spawning fish; but he 

 thought that the loss could not be great because each spawn- 

 ing fish has about a million eggs. 



Mb. Roosevelt said that spawning weakfish had nearly 

 two million eggs, and that the pound nets catch the fish be- 

 fore they have a chance to spawn. 



To this Mr. Githens made inquiry how is it that weakfish 

 are more plenty than ever before, after twenty-four years of 

 pound fishing? 



■m Mr. Roosevelt said that was something he wanted to find 

 out— how it is that the more nets there are the more fish 

 there are to be caught. 



Mr. Githens said that the average cost of the fish sent to 

 the markets of Philadelphia, New York, Detroit, Chicago 

 and Buffalo this year was not more than one and one-half 

 cents a pound. 



A desultory conversation then began, interrupting Mr. 

 Githens' further remarks, and .upon the suggestion that no 

 progress could be made in that way a recess was taken until 

 2 o'clock. 



Afternoon Session. 



Meeting called to order by the chairman, William H.Bow- 

 man, at 2:30 o'clock P. M. 



William Thompson, of Pennsylvania, said: I want to 

 suggest that in order to expedite business the secretary call 

 the roll of States, beginning with Maine. 



The chairman suggested that he put it in the form of a 

 motion. 



Mr. Thompson then moved that the secretary proceed to 

 call the roll of States, beginning with Maine, and that all 



Eapers, and all persons who desired to speak from Maine, be 

 eard in their order, and that the States then be called as far 

 as represented. 

 The motion was carried. 



A. M. SP ANGLER, of Pennsylvania, then spoke as follows: 

 I shall probably be met, as I was by one of our menhaden 

 friends who figured in the convention at Chicago, with the 

 remark that I do not know what I am going to talk about. 

 However, living in a fresh-water country, I may not be sup- 

 posed to have a great amount of knowledge in regard to 

 coast fishes, but I guess if I were to give you an account by 

 years, I can count more years' familiarity with the fishes of 

 the coast of New Jersey than any man in this convention, 

 for I am a pretty old fellow. I am celebrating my seventy- 

 sixth birthday to-day. (Applause.) 



I have been a fisherman along this coast almost ever since 

 I kntw what it was to catch a fish, and I will give you the 

 results of some of my observations. Forty years ago I could 

 go along the Jersey coast from any point from Sandy Hook 

 to Cape May, and around into Delaware Bay, and throw my 

 line into the water and catch, a fish of some kind. There has 

 during that time been a great decrease. Fifty years ago the 

 bluefish made their appearance on the coast in very large 

 numbers; in fact, in such tremendous numbers that you 

 might go where you would on the coast or go a mile from 

 the shore and you would be sure to meet those fishes in 

 schools in pursuit of the menhaden, as you know they do, 

 until they have earned the title of being the butchers of the 

 sea. Just in proportion as the menhaden fishing interests 

 increased the plentifulness of bluefish on the coast has de- 

 creased. I remember the tithe when I could fix the arrival 

 of the bluefish in Barnegat Bay with almost an absolute cer- 

 tainty from the. 6th to the 10th of June. I had instructed my 

 friends along the coast to telegraph me whenever the fish 

 made their appearance, and was ready to go at the first 

 notice. Now I don't know when the fish make their appear 

 ance. I have taken a great many bluefish in our central 

 bays. 



The assertion was made here this morning that such a 

 thing as taking a weakfish at sea was an unknown thing. I 

 wish I had as many dollars as I have taken weakfish at 

 say eight or ten miles off shore, drifting much of the time 

 or trolling or taking by anchoriug. You will find that it is 

 not only the bluefish that have decreased, but also the weak- 

 fish. 1 went out one day last summer with seven others and 

 we did not get as many fish in waters we used to take in 

 hundreds < f fish in a day, as a good healthy man could eat 

 here for his supper, and that was the story that was told 

 along the entire coast. It has been contended here quite suc- 

 cessfully, as the paper read by Mr. Huntington will show, 

 that the statements made by the menhaden advocates in re- 

 gard to the taking of food fish were altogether unreliable. I 

 will say this to yon that they certainly were not sustained 

 by their sworn evidence that was given in the investigation 

 from which the matter was read here this morniog. Yon 

 may take weakfish, bluefish, striped bass and sea bass and 

 blackfish and all other food fishes of the coast, and you will 

 find that there has been a gradual decrease in them, just 

 as there has been in our American waters generally. The 

 idea that the supply is inexhaustible is simply a 

 piece ot nonsense. There is nothing that is inex- 

 haustible, and we have demonstrated that. We have 

 done it in the buffalo, we have done it in our for- 

 ests. In a thousand ways we have shown that there is 

 probably no such thing as inexhaustibility. These food 

 fishes are not so liable to change. They don't fluctuate as 

 the herring and the mackerel and the menhaden are said to 

 do. I recollect distinctly when you could not go anywhere a 

 mile from shore without encountering millions. I have 

 seen menhaden so plentiful that the boat was actually 

 impeded in its progress by the mass of fish; yet I have it 



from Mr. Church, over his own signaturein black and white, 

 that he has had to send his boat hundreds of miles and not 

 get a fish. That does not look anything like inexhaustibility. 

 About ideas in regard to the. salmon fish on the Pacific 

 coast. I was out there last year and I wanted to familiarize 

 myself with some of the facts connected with them, and the 

 result was I found the British Columbian Government, had 

 extended the close time of fishing a month, because of the 

 scarcity of the salmon. They once believed out there that 

 the salmon could not be exhausted. What is the result? 

 To-day the Columbian River is practically no longer a sal- 

 mon river. The fish are exhausted and in British Columbia, 

 as I said to you, they had to extend the open season in order 

 to prevent the fishermen from starving. 



Arrangements are being made for the purpose of protect- 

 ing the same kind of fish on the Alaska coast. They also 

 were supposed to be inexhaustible. There is no greater fal- 

 lacy than such a statement as that. I hope that this congress 

 will bear the fact in mind. I could tell vou a great many 

 things in regard to the depletion of fish along the coast. We 

 have been told here that fish are more plentiful, that they are 

 more cheap than they have ever been. It is only the process 

 that is leading to exhaustion. It was stated here by one of 

 the gentlemen that where there, was one pound net twenty- 

 four years ago, they now have twenty-five or twenty-six and 

 they catch twenty-five or twenty-six times as many fish. 

 That does not show that the supply has increased, simply 

 because they catch more fish now than they used to, when 

 they only had one net while now they have twenty-five. 



About the price of fish. It is claimed they are cheaper. I 

 say they are not cheaper. There may have been times when 

 there have been gluts in the market. When those bad-smell- 

 ing boats come in here loaded with fish, which the markets 

 cannot take, as they are already overstocked, no doubt there 

 isa glut. Who wants them? These boats arenot fitted with 

 any appliances for preserving fish, and these hauls of food 

 fish are made in midsummer, and are dumped in the 

 hold with other fish. Of course by the time they reach the 

 markets they ajre in a pretty bad condition, and have to be 

 sold at any price. This of course operates to reduce the 

 average price of food fish in our markets. 



What becomes of their argument in the face of the testi- 

 mony that was produced here to-day? I don't say that the 

 gentleman misstated facts, but I do say that they don't seem 

 to have shown what appears to be the ground bottom facts, 

 just as my friend Mr. Church stated in Chicago in regard to 

 the bottom fish. I don't knowhowmany of you are familiar 

 with net fishing. I never was a commercial fisherman, but 

 I have had a good deal to do with drawing nets. Mr. Church 

 made this statement, that they did not take food fish to any 

 extent for the simple reason that food fishes are principally 

 bottom fish and escape along the edge of the nets. Any- 

 body that knows anything about the nature of fish knows 

 that the bottom of the sea where these nets are drawn is as 

 smooth as this floor, and if a bottom fish sees a lead line 

 coming toward him, it is not possible that he is going to run 

 toward it, but rather the other way, and is caught with the 

 rest of the fish when the net is pursed. Anybody that 

 knows anything about net fishing must know that 

 this is a fact. These menhaden, or commercial fishermen 

 as you call them, have come here in full force, and 

 it has seemed to me to be a strange thing that 

 you called a convention for the purpose of considering a 

 matter of this kind and at the same time invite more people 

 here who are opposed to any reformation than those who are 

 in favor of it. It strikes me very forcibly that if the friends 

 of the fisheries interests of this country should know that if 

 the fish-producing waters of the United States, the finest on 

 the face of the earth, were in the same condition that they 

 were fifty years ago before obstruction of the fish production 

 had grown to its present proportions, they would produce 

 fish enough to supply the entire wants of our enormously in- 

 creasing population without any increase in their cost. I can 

 take you to fresh water rivers, like the Delaware, where for- 

 merly fish were plentiful, but the same destructive policy 

 was used there as along the coast, except that fish baskets 

 were substituted for pound nets, and the fishing became 

 greatly exhausted. When the fish baskets were removed 

 fishing began to increase again and is now almost as good as 

 it ever was. 



Col. Marshall McDonald then read the following paper: 



Relations of the Community to the Fisheries. 



by commissioner Marshall m'donald. 



The interest of the general community, or the great body 

 of consumers, relates to the quantity, quality and cost of the 

 supply drawn from the waters. A wise public policy should 

 not only permit, but should encourage the largest produc- 

 tion of which the waters are capable, but at the same time 

 should insist upon the observance of such conditions and re- 

 straints as are necessary to maintain supply. 



To the State Commissions and to the Federal Commission 

 of Fisheries are duly committed, each in its own sphere, the 

 custody and conservation of the resources of the water. 



The means to be employed are: 



1. The artificial propagation of fishes and the distribution 

 of the young to new or depleted waters. 



2. The establishment and enforcement of such regulations 

 as to the times, methods and apparatus of the fisheries as 

 careful inquiry into the conditions of the fisheriess, and the 

 influence of these conditions upon supply shows to be neces- 

 sary. 



In discharge of the delicate and responsible duties with 

 which we are charged under the law, it will be necessary to 

 occupy a middle ground between the extreme views which 

 prevail, and which demand on the one hand absolute free- 

 dom to fish without restraint or question, and on the other 

 insist upon unreasonable and oppressive restraints, which 

 would strangle the market fisheries and so restrict supply as 

 to enhance the cost of living to the great body of tbe people. 



Artificial Propagation. 



I am disposed to think that in this country we have relied 

 too exclusively upon artificial propagation as a sole and ade- 

 quate means for the maintenance of our fisheries. 



The artificial impregnation and hatching of fish ova and 

 the planting of fry have been conducted on a stupendous 

 scale. We have been disposed to measure results by quantity 

 rather than by quality, to estimate our triumphs by volume 

 rather than by potentiality. We have paid too little atten- 

 tion to the necessary conditions to be fulfilled in order to 

 give the largest returns for a given expenditure of effort and 

 money. 



The argument that underlies and justifies fishcultural 

 methods, and which has built up and liberally sustained our 

 State and National Commissions is this: The percentage of 

 survival under artificial methods is so largely increased that 

 by hatching but a small proportion of the total egg supply 

 in any given field we may equal or sui-pass the results from 

 natural reproduction in the same area, even when nature's 

 efforts are not contravened,ire*tricted or rendered abortive 

 by the adverse conditions under which the fisheries are pros- 

 ecuted. 



Our methods in this respect are the methods of the farmer. 

 From an acre of ground he harvests twenty or thirty or 

 under the best conditions, forty bushels of wheat. He sets 

 aside one bushel of seed, and the rest he may safely exchange 

 for the necessities, the comforts or the conveniences of life. = 



This one bushel, sown under proper conditions of tilth aiid 

 fertility (either natural or su pplied), is a sufficient guarantee 

 of the future harvest. 



It is the same in our fishcultural operations. By our 

 methods we give to a small percentage of fish ova the poten- 



tiality of the entire reproduction under unrestrained natural 

 conditions. 



In the same measure, therefore, as we enlarge the means 

 for artificial propagation, may we ease or release our re- 

 straints upon the commercial fisheries and permit a larger 

 catch without apprehending a deterioration of our fishery 

 resources. 



We must not, however, be unmindful of the fact that the 

 prosecution of the fisheries, without reasonable and neces- 

 sary restraints, is sure in the end to make adequate reproduc- 

 tion by artificial methods impracticable bv obstructing or 

 shutting off the sources of the egg supply. Protection, there- 

 fore, and reasonable regulations a* to the times and methods 

 of the fisheries, are. just as essential for their maintenance as 

 is the largest measure of artificial propagation. 



The two are intimately and essentially related and inter- 

 dependent; each implies the other; both must concur and 

 have equal consideration in devising a rational and fruitful 

 administration of our fishery interests. 



We should, I think, keep always in view that the object of 

 public fishculture is to assure the utmost realization' of the 

 resources of our waters, and to permit the lamest production 

 that can be accomplised without deterioration or impover- 

 ishment. 



We should insist upon whatever measures of protection or 

 regulation that may be found necessary to accomplish this 

 end. 



On the other hand, we should be careful not to embarrass 

 or harass the enterprises of our hardy and adventurous fish- 

 ermen by restraints that are not clearly necessary to accom- 

 plish the end in view. 



In pursuing this wise and conservative course, we must 

 expect to encounter the opposition and denunciation of men 

 of extreme views on either side; men who base their conclu- 

 sions upon misapprehensions derived from limited and local 

 observations; who have mistaken coincidences for causes, 

 sequences for consequences, and who are dogmatic, dicta- 

 torial and arrogant in the assertion of their own opinions, 

 and intolerant and denunciatory of opposite opinions in pro- 

 portion to their own ignorance. 



The Necessity of Protection. 



I think that every one who has given careful, intelligent 

 and disinterested study to the conditions of the fisheries will 

 be forced to the conclusion that there is not one of the im- 

 portant commercial fisheries which may not be pushed to 

 such extremes as to make it necessary to adopt proper regu- 

 lations and restraints in order to maintain supply. There 

 is no diversity of opinion in reference to this so far as it 

 relates to the resident species of our rivers (such as the 

 basses, the trout, the pike-perch, the pickerel, etc.), or those 

 anadromous species such as the salmon and the shad, which 

 though attaining their growth in salt water are compelled 

 by the necessities of their nature to enter our rivers for the 

 purpose of reproduction. 



When, however, we seek to apply the same conclusions to 

 the coast fisheries, strenuous and intemperate opposition 

 arises on the part of those who are engaged in the prosecu- 

 tion of these fisheries. They insist that the proportion of 

 fish taken by man is so insignificant in comparison with the 

 vast numbers destroyed by adverse natural agencies that 

 therefore the amount withdrawn by him from the aggregate 

 supply of the ocean can have no effect iu determining the de- 

 terioration. In support of this they quote. Prof. Huxley, 

 who is said to have declared that the destructive agencies 

 exercised by man are so small compared with the destruc- 

 tive agencies of nature that man's efforts constitutes no 

 important factor in determining the decrease in the abund- 

 ance of any species. 



Now it is undoubtedly true that the number of fish of any 

 species taken by man is absolutely insignificant compared 

 with the vastly greater destruction wrought by the agencies 

 of nature. The inference therefrom, namely, that the agency 

 of man is therefore no factor in determining the decrease of 

 species is not sustained by the facts. Man exercises his 

 destructive influence upon that small remnant of the total 

 production which has survived the natural casualties, upon 

 that small portion which is left to secure the maintenance 

 of the species. Any invasion by man in however small a 

 degree necessarily disturbs the balance of nature and intro- 

 duces deteriorating influences which must determine de- 

 creasing production unless we interpose, and by artificial 

 reproduction and by regulating the conditions of the fisher- 

 ies we restore this balance. I can make this plainer by an 

 illustration drawn from agriculture. Of the total produc- 

 tion of the cereals of the world one-tenth is required for 

 seed; the other nine-tenths may be and are consumed either 

 for food or in the various arts. If the one-tenth reserved for 

 seed is kept intact we have the means of continual repro- 

 duction of the world's supply. Should, however, by reason 

 of famine or diminished crops the world's supply fall short 

 of the demand for food and it became necessary to entrench 

 upon the one-tenth reserved for seed, it would result, of 

 course, in a diminished acreage and a decreased production 

 which would continue as long as these influences lasted. 



Now, in the case of our market fisheries, man is operating 

 upon that portion which is reserved for seed, and the repro- 

 duction of which is necessary in order to keep up the supply. 

 When by our operations we withdraw any proportion of this 

 remnant from production, it is necessary for us in order to 

 keep up the balance to have recourse to such regulations 

 and restraints as will permit the least interference with 

 natural reproduction and at the same time by the vastly im- 

 proved methods of artificial reproduction provide compensa- 

 tion for any deficiencies in natural supply. 



Careful attention should be given to the fact that nearly 

 all of our important market species, such as the scup, the 

 sea bass, the squeteague, and the Spanish mackerel, in large, 

 if not in entire measure, either spawn immediately upon 

 our coast line or in the different bays and estuaries which 

 indent it. The active operations of the fishermen are con- 

 ducted upon their spawning grounds, or their apparatus is 

 so located as to intercept the approach of the-species to their 

 spawning grounds. The effect of these methods, unless 

 properly and intelligently restrained and regulated, must be 

 to diminish the supply and to impoverish the fisheries. 

 When, however, we attempt to deal with any particular 

 fishery, we are confronted with inadequate information in 

 regard to the habits, distribution, and conditions of distribu- 

 tion of the species which is the object of our solicitude. I 

 may illustrate this by reference to the menhaden fishery. 



The menhaden, as you know, is not a food fish. It is, 

 however, a most abundant species upon our coast line, its 

 range extending from Florida to Maine. The menhaden is 

 itself doubtless a source of food, probably a main source of 

 food to many of the commercial species which frequent our- 

 coast. On the other hand, it is the object of one of the. 

 largest fishing industries prosecuted on the coast, an industry 

 which furnishes occupation and living to many men, which 

 has an invested capital of probably a million and a half dol- 

 lars. The annual product of the fisheries reaches about the 

 same amount per annum. The oil obtained is applied to 

 various uses in the arts. The scrap, composed almost en- 

 tirely of ammonia and phosphates, is largely employed in 

 the manufacture of ammoniated superphosphates, and thus 

 indirectly, if not directly, this species contributes vastly 

 toward the food supply in furnishing essential elements of 

 fertilization to the farmer. 



The menhaden fishermen have opposed any restraints upon 

 the prosecution of this industry. They have insisted that 

 nothing was known in regard to the habits of the menhaden; 

 that it spawned offshore; that it was not amenable to fish- 

 cultural methods, and that nothing that man could do 

 therefore could influence their abundance. Meanwhile we 

 were in ignorance of the natural history of the menhaden, 



