of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



317 



I cannot find words more apposite to describe the ruin going on in the 

 fisheries, or to give the cause and the remedy for the evil than in a former 

 Report of the Inspector of Fisheries for New Brunswick. I therefore quote 

 briefly from it, where speaking of the alarming decrease in the stock of all 

 anadromous fishes that frequent the waters of that Province, he says : — ' They 

 ' show beyond a doubt that this decrease has been brought about by wasteful 

 ' and extravagant modes of fishing in some places, and by ' overfishing and 

 ' insufficient protection everywhere. They show that these causes are still 

 * actually at work — that fishing operations are annually extending, while 

 ' protection is annually becoming less ; that all the causes which follow in the 

 ' train of rapidly-increasing population are in full and increasing activity. 

 ' They show that everywhere, except where artificial culture has arrested the 

 ' decrease, tlie salmon fishing is in the same danger.* " 



NOTE III., APPENDIX G. 



THE BIENNIAL SPAWNING OF SALMON. (The Bucksport Experi- 

 ments.) By Charles G. Atkins, from the Transactions of the American 

 Fisheries Society, 1885. 



After the organization of the establishment for the collection of eggs of sea- 

 going salmon at Bucksport, on the Penobscot river, in 1872, it was one of the 

 earliest suggestions of Professor Baird that we should attempt, as occasion 

 might ofi"er, to obtain evidence bearing on the frequency and duration of the 

 salmon's migrations and its rate of growth. 



To carry out these suggestions it seemed requisite that observations should 

 be made on individual fishes at successive periods in their lives ; yet, what- 

 ever means should be taken to secure and identify them must, it was evident, 

 not prevent free movement in the open river to and from the sea, or interfere 

 in any way with the development of their functions or their regular growth. 

 They must be distinctly and durably marked, yet in such a way as to do them 

 no injury. The cutting of the fins would answer the purpose only in part, 

 since it would not afford a sufficient variety in form to enable us to distinguish 

 a great number of individuals. Branding upon the side of the fish was 

 thought of and even tried, but the serious mutilationithat befel the first fish 

 operated on, and the extreme probability that those marks that were so lightly 

 impressed as to do no injury to the fish would soon become illegible, or 

 so nearly so as to be overlooked by fishermen, caused that method to be 

 abandoned. A metallic tag, stamped with a recorded number, appeared to 

 off'er the greatest promise of success. The first tag tried was of thin aluminum 

 plate, cut about half an inch long and a quarter wide, and attached to a rubber 

 band which encircled the tail of the fish. It is possible that most of the bands 

 slipped off, and that those which were tight enough to stay on cut through 

 the skin, and produced wounds tliat destroyed the fish. At any rate, no 

 salmon thus marked were ever recovered. 



The next method employed was the attachment of an aluminum tag by 

 means of a platinum wire to the rear margin of the first dorsal fin. This 

 place of attachment was chosen because, being near the middle of the fish, it 

 has less lateral motion when the fish is swimming than any point nearer the 

 head or tail, and because the tag, lying thus in the wake of the fin and close to 

 the back, would be better protected from contact with foreign objects than 

 elsewhere. The attachment was eff'ected by placing the fish upon a narrow 



