Oct. 2, 1897.1 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
271 
from the csmp) and he came in with four trout. I weighed 
two: one weighed If-lbs. and the other lib. : two others be- 
ing about ilb. each. The other two boats had two small 
trout of perhaps Jib, each. We remained at that camp for 
supper- 
Credit for Stocking the Hudson. 
Some months ago Mr. Charles Hallock sent me a note witli 
a newspaper clipping m regard to who was entitled to credit 
for the suggeslion to stock the Hudson Eiver with salmon, 
and he has just reminded me that I stiU have the clipping, 
and that I have not used it in my notes. It was and is my 
intention to use the clipping in. a paper giving the history of 
the Hudson as a salmon stream if ever I get tSe lime to write 
it. I have collected all the facts obtainable about the early 
history of the Hudson from old Dutch records and colonial 
papers, and there will be no difficulty in showing beyond a per- 
advonture that the Hudson Eiver never contained salmon until 
they were planted in the river artificially within twenty years 
or such a matter. It is true that John, Earl of Dunmore, 
signed an act in February, 1771, "to prevent the taking and 
destroying of salmon in Hudson's Kiver," but the language 
of the act shows that there were no such fish in the river: 
"Whereas, it is thought that the fish called salmon, which 
are very plenty in some of the Rivers and Lakes in this and 
neighboring colonies, were brought into Hudson's River, they 
would by spawning there, soon become numerous, to the 
great Advantage of the Public." In the same year, April 2, 
the Common Council of Albany passed a resolution as fol- 
lows; "Resolved, by the board, that a letter be sent to 
"WiUiam Penturp for to come down and agree with the Cor- - 
poration if he can undertake to bring live salmons into Hud- 
son's River." Who William Penturp may have been or 
where he was to come down from, there is apparently no 
record, but I imagine he was to come down from Lake On- 
tario or the northern part of the State, where the rivers did 
contain salmon, as laws for their protection (and for fishing) 
will show, One of the earlj' laws protects salmon in Big 
Salmon River, Grass River, Racket River, St. Regis River, 
Wood and Fish Creeks. However, I did not intend to go 
into ancient history at this time. 
Now to the clipping I have mentioned. It is from the 
Brooklyn Union, no date, as follows: 
"SALMON IN THE HUDSON. 
"Through the efforts of Mr. Charles Hallock, the editor of 
FoRKST AND STREAM, the Hudson is soon to be stocked with 
salmon. The series of articles published by Mr. Hallock 
having called the attention of^the U. S. Fishery Commission 
to the subject, that gentleman has received the following let- 
ter, to the effect that his request will be attended to: 
"U. S. Commission Fish and Fishekies, Washington, 
Nov. 14, 1873. — GJiarles Ilalhch Esq. — Dear Sir: I am per- 
fectly willing to place a good lot of Sacramento salmon in 
the Hudson River. Seth Green has 250,000, and I will re- 
quest him to dispose of a portion for that purpose, subject to 
your direction. Very truly yours, 
SpkucE F. Baikd, Commissioner. 
"This will be gratifying news to our New York sportsmen 
of the angle, and they owe Mr. Hallock thanks for his efforts 
to restore the game fish to the waters of the Hudson, where 
they once abounded. " 
Certainly Mr. Hallock should have i'credit as one of the 
pioneers in the movement to make the Hudson a salmon 
stream. This may seem to interfere with Mr. Mather's 
claim that he was the first to make the suggestion to Prof. 
Baird, but I do not think it does. The effort to stock the 
Hudson with California salmon was a flat failure, for none 
of the fish came back from the sea, and that has been the 
history to date of all attempt to stock the Atlantic rivers 
with the Pacific salmon. My recollection is that Mr. Mather 
had no faith in the Pacific salmon experiment, and the fish 
that he suggested to Prof. Baird for the Hudson was the 
Atlantic salmon, anyway that is the fish he means when he 
says he made the suggestion to Prof. Baird and hatched the 
first eggs for this purpose. The Atlantic salmon came back 
on schedule time from the sea from the time the first plant 
was made in 1882, and have been coming back continuously 
as they have been planted each year in the headwater 
streams; but as the Hudson still lacks fishways in its upper 
parts the fish cannot return to proper spawning grounds 
near where they have been planted. 
It will be seen that Mr. Hallock, when editor of Forest 
and Stream, made the suggestion to Prof. Baird that the 
Hudson be stocked with California Salmon, which was 
done, and that later Mr, Mather suggested that the Hudson 
be stocked with the Atlantic fish, and that the first experi- 
ment was a failure and the last a success, should not in any 
way detract from the credit due Mr. Hallock or lessen the 
credit due to Mr. Mather, both being pioneers and striving 
to accomplish the same result. 
Spawning Season of Trout. 
Early in August a letter was sent to me from a fisherman 
just after he had been fishing for brook trout. He thought 
the present close season for brook trout, which begins Sept. 
1 and extends to AprU 15 following, should be changed, and 
the fishing should close legally on Aug. 15. The reason he 
gave for this was that of the trout he caught a great many 
were filled with spawn. If this reasoning should hold the 
fishing season would close before it opened. Because trout 
contains spawn the first half of the month of August it does 
not follow that they will deposit this spawn during the last 
half of the same month if they are not killed in the mean- 
time. My correspondent ceased to fish after he had caught 
about three score of trout, as he did not think it right to 
catch fish in such condition. Just why his conscience 
pricked him at that particular juncture he does not state, but 
he could have quieted the pricking conscience had he known 
that the trout would not have spawned in any event before 
the first or second week' of October in the section where he 
was fishing. Trout carry undeveloped spawn all summer, 
but do not deposit it untU. some time after the season closes 
legally for fishing. A. N. Cheney. 
Great South Bay. 
Last Tuesday I went on a fishing trip to the Great South 
Bay, in the vicinity of Fire Island. I found bluefishing 
fairly good, but bottom fishing very poor. The boatmen in 
the neighborhood of Babylon informed me that the bay was 
full of pound-nets, which made it dangerous to sail their 
small craft and also ruined all fishing. 
It is high time that the officials of the towns along the 
bay should show more activity in preventing this pound- 
fi.shing if they want fishermen to patronize their citizens in the 
future 
Nest Tuesday I will start for the woods of Maine on a deer 
and moese hunt, and will report my luck to Forest and 
Stream on my return. M. Q. Good, 
FISH PROTECTION AND FISH PRO- 
DUCTION. 
A paper read by Seymour Bower l)efore the American Fisheries 
Society. 
WfiiLE we must in the f uture, as in the past, depend upon 
scientific research to indicate the best methods of propagat- 
ing and cultivating water life, yet many of the complex and 
intricate problems that spring from a consideration of 
fishery economics are of minor importance when compared 
with the practical and less difficult questions that arise. 
These minor considerations differentiate in endless ramifica- 
tions, affording a broad and interesting field for the scientist 
and investigator. Water life, from its lowest forms up, is a 
mysterious maze of combinations and possibilities, involved 
in which are many paths that will never be explored and 
many secrets that will never be disclosed. 
But though many of these intricate problems shall never 
be solved and the door to a perfect knowledge of the interre- 
lations of water life shall remain forever barred, yet we are 
no worse off than the ignorant but thrifty husbandman, who, 
with the simple knowledge of when and how to sow and 
when and how to reap, secures almost as large a crop as 
though he understood to a nicety the combination and rela- 
tion of everj"^ element and process of development. 
The term "fish protection" is a deceptive generality that 
may mean much or little, but which is quite apt to lead the 
unthinking into the error of supposing that in order to carry 
the annual production of mature fish to the highest point, the 
privilege of catching them must be surrounded at every turn 
with nearly prohibitive restrictions ; whereas, protection, in 
its truest sense, and in its true relation to production, seeks 
to provide an increase, not decrease, in the annual harvest of 
adults. The real problem, therefore, is to determine what 
measures shall be adopted to enable us to remove the largest 
possible number of mature fish from the waters each year 
without depleting them. 
Fish life is surrounded, perhaps to a greater extent than 
any other form of animal, with natural enemies and dangers 
that imperil existence at every stage and . every turn. Na- 
ture, of course, has provided for each some means of defense 
or escape; but there is incessant warfare and destruction 
from the moment the ova are laid — indeed, with many spe- 
cies, by far the greater part of the destruction is wrought 
during the ovum stage. 
Each species is an enemy of all others, ofttimes of its own. 
The spawning grounds of every kind of fish are likewise the 
feeding grounds of others, the spawn itself constituting 
the food; and every kind of the larger species is either a 
fish destroyer or spawn destroyer, or both, at some stage 
of life. 
Of course, this preying of one form of animal life upon an- 
other begins much lower down the scale ; in fact, the abund- 
ance or scarcity of the highest forms, or ultimate product, is 
determined by the volume of the lowest or fundamental 
forms. But the building up process finally results in popu- 
lating the waters with a variety of animals suitable in size, 
form and texture as food for man. These animals embrace 
many species, some of which are prized far more highly than 
others, but all are alike without vahie to mankind until 
caught, and the importance of any water as a source of food 
supply depends, not on the number of animals inhabiting 
it, but on the annual output of adults of the more highly- 
prized species. 
Opinions will vary as to the number or proportion of adults 
that may safely be removed each year, but no one will deny 
the proposition that all of the adults of any species might 
be caught out each year as fast as they come to full matui 
ity, provided that a sufficient number of young of the same 
species were reintroduced each year to make the loss good. 
Through the medium of artificial propagation, which pro- 
tects the ova that nature leaves unprotected, this compensa- 
tion of young is entirely feasible with the shad, the salmon, 
trout, whitefish, pike-perch and some other speeies, provided 
always that the catching and killing of the young and iayna- 
ture fish is absolutely prevented. 
Where artificial propagation is thus able to supplant nat- 
ural propagation, thereby eliminating the latter from consid- 
eration, it is much better to catch off the adults as fast as 
they mature, and thus make way for succeeding crops or 
generations. When fisli have matured, it is time, so to 
speak, to realize on the investment. They should then be 
converted into food, either for some other fish or for man. 
If allowed to remain, they defeat the very object for which 
they were created, namely, to be caught and utilized. The 
food which they consume by remaining should all be con- 
verted into increment by going to the young and growing 
fish, instead of being wasted on the adults merely to prolong 
their lives. When a female fish hag matured and yielded a 
crop of ova to the saving process of artificial propagation, 
she has accomplished more in the way of reproduction than 
she could in hundreds of seasons under natural environ- 
ments, and can, therefore, well be spared. 
It is evident that restrictive measures need not apply to the 
adult fish, provided a sufficient number are available for arti- 
ficial propagation, but as affecting the young and immature 
fish such measures should be of the most stringent character. 
The killing of young fish of the more valuable species is little 
short of criminal, and should be psnalized in every possible 
way. 
A little reflection must convince any one that natural 
propagation is entirely inadequate to keep the waters stocked 
to theh limit if considerable inroads are made in the parent 
stock at any season of the year, and it is a vain hope to ex- 
pect nature to recover and hold lost ground by nature's 
methods alone, unless the waters are closed absolutely and 
permanently. 
It is true that the catching off of one kind of fish some- 
times results in iLcreased production of others, and without 
the aid of artificial propagation, but such increase cannot be 
relied upon as being permanent, and depletion is sure to fol- 
low if fishing is continued and no restitution is made through 
the agency of artificial propagation. 
The history of fishing waters is replete with illustrations 
and examples to prove the proposition that the natural 
hatching percentage of many species is too insignificant to 
offset any considerable drain on the parent stock. How 
often we hear the remark, "There used to be mighty good 
fishing over in Smith Creek, or Jones Lake, but ttiey are 
pretty well fished out now." Even our best trout streams, 
after having been stocked to their limit, sooner or later be- 
come depleted unless kept up by occasional contributions 
from the hatcheries, and this, too, notwithstanding that the 
fishing is limited to hook and line and the season is closed 
two-thu'ds of each year. The reason for this is that it is im- 
possible to recoup from the fish taken in the open season , 
and equally impossible to protect from natural enemies the 
ova deposited in the closed season. The unripe spawn in 
the adult fish caught in the open season is hopelessly and ir- 
retrievably lost, while the ripe spawn deposited in the closed 
season is very largely so. 
Natural propagation will never force a water to its high- 
est productive limit, unless fishing is absolutely prohibited 
for an indefinite period. Fortunately, this course is not ne- 
cessary, for while we cannot prevent more or less destruc- 
tion of one kind or size of fish by another after they leave 
our hatcheries, we can and do save the enormous waste that 
occurs under natural conditions during the ova stage, and 
thus bring into existence immensely increased numbers of 
young fish. 
To appreciate fully the significance and importance of 
artificial propagation as a factor in fishery problems, we 
must ever keep in mind this wonderful margin of gain over 
natural propagation. 
Fishculturists and aU who have carefully investigated the 
subject are unanimously agreed that the treatment and pro- 
tection we extend to the ova multiplies hatching results 500 
to 1.000 times, and some place the ratio much higher. Nor 
is this enormous disparity to be wondered at when we in- 
quire into the conditions, and understand the dangers and 
perils to which spawn as deposited in nature is constantly 
exposed. 
But, taking the most conservative estimate, 500, as a basis,- 
and it will be seen that we produce as many fish from one 
pair of adults as nature does from 500, or that 1,000,000 ova 
artificially treated is equal to 500,000,000 on natural spawn- 
ing beds. Or, to put it another way, 500 pairs of breeders 
must be allowed to reach their spawning beds and spawn 
undisturbed to accomplish what we are able to, simply 
by lifting a single pair from the same beds and submitting 
the ripe ova to the treatment and protection called artificiaL 
While the ova on spawning beds has its uses in the economy 
of the waters, serving, as it does, as a source of food for 
other fish, yet, so far as reproductive results are concerned, 
499 out of every ,500 pairs may as well never spawn at all, 
provided always that the solitary remaining pair falls into 
the hands of a hatchery expert at the proper time. It wiU 
readily be seen, therefore, that compensation for the removal 
of adults is possible only when they are taken from spawn- 
ing grounds, and absolutely impossible only when taken 
elsewhere. 
It should not be inferred that an indiscriminate throwing 
down of the barriers to the capture of adult fish is advo- 
cated. Many species of fish guard their spawning beds and 
protect their ova and young from the ravages of na.ural 
enemies, performing functions that correspond with the 
parental care and solicitude of land animals, thus producing 
a large natural increase. These should be surrounded with 
all manner of safeguards and afforded the most ample pro- 
tection during their breeding season. 
But there are many species of fish whose ova yields read- 
ily to the methods of artificial propagation, that desert 
their spawning grounds the moment the spawn is cast, leav- 
ing the defenseless germs wholly uprotected, to be merci- 
lessly destroyed by a hungry horde of spawn-eaters. 
Now, when fish of this class assemble in sufficient 
numbers at the proper time to permit the collection of enough 
spawn to recompense the annual capture of adults, or, in 
short, whenever and wherever it is possible and practical to 
make complete restitution, it is obvious that no restrictions 
are needed. Desirable species that shirk parental duties after 
throwing their ova should not be allowed, to throw it; they 
should be headed off and forced to "cough up" in time to 
give the germs the treatment and protection that they de- 
serve, instead of being allowed to go very largely to waste. 
If all the salmon and all the shad that ascend our great 
rivers from the sea were allowed to reach their spawning 
grounds before being caught, the immense numbers of 
young that, by the grace of artificial propagation, it would 
then be practical to return, would soon restore the depleted 
waters to their virgin fruitfulness. Fishing would be 
concentrated to fewer points, tut the aggregate annual 
production might thus be greatly increased, and main- 
tained indefinitely. If these propositions are not true, then 
artificial propagation is a snare and a delusion, and should 
be discontinued. 
It must not be inferred that any relaxation of the protec- 
tion now afforded our trout streams is to be thought of. 
Circumstances alter cases. We are obliged, in Michigan 
waters at least, to close the spawning season for brook trout 
and leave reproduction to nature's wasteful methods, simply 
because the parent fish are distributed throughout innumer- 
able spring tributaries, making it impossible to collect the 
ova in paying numbers at anj' one point. It is a matter of 
the keenest regret, however, that all of the wild trout of 
spawning age in Michigan waters cannot be assembled each 
spawning season, and their ova submitted to the multiplying 
process of artificial propagation. There would be no un- 
filled applications, no unstocked streams, for the immense 
production of fry each season would keep every stream 
stocked to its limit for all time to come. 
But this, of course, is impo.sible; so the only alternative 
is to confine a stock of parent fish in ponds, simulating 
natural surroundings by providing an inflow of spring water 
over a gravel-bottomed raceway into which the gravid fish 
are enticed. But we do not allow the fish to spawn natu- 
rally, knowing as we do by actual trial, how meager the 
results would be. Nor should any fish of this class be 
allowed to spawn naturally, whenever it is feasible to take 
advantage of the saving economy of artificial methods. 
The most effective methods of fish protec.ion, then, must 
include protection of the ova. Protect the spawu as well 
as the immature fish, and there will be an abundant harvest 
of adults ; and the universal recognition and application of 
this principle will greatly enhance the value of some of our 
most important fisheries. Protecting the adults from the 
hand of man, instead of catching them and protecting their 
ova from the ravages of natural enemies, is a striking exam- 
ple of "saving at tbe spigot and wasting a; the bung." 
A Noble Rangeley Trout. 
We have been shown an outline drawing of a noble trout 
taken at the Upper Dam by Mr. Thomas Barbour, of Fram- 
ingham. Mass. Tne fish was a genuine speckled trout, 
weighed 91b3. 4oz., and was 28in. in length. It was taken 
Sept. 1 on a while tipped Montreal No. 2 fly, with a 4Joz. 
rod, and Mr. Barbour worked an hour and a half from strike 
to flni.sh before he had the big fellow "reduced to posses- 
sion." 
The Forest and Stream is put to pt-ess each week on Tueeday, 
Correspondence intended for publication should reach ua at the 
latest Monday, and as much earlier aa practicable. 
