May 24, 1902.] 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
409 
a single example, however, running below 68 and only 5 
above 74. The average of 49 examples was 45+26=71 
for the right side., and 46+26=72 for the left side. The 
average for the 4 known adult examples of the Alabama 
shad is 67, and even the minimum for the common shad 
is more than 50. In so far as the number of gillralcers 
is concerned, it thus appears that the Ohio shad is between 
the other two known species, approaching most nearly 
the Alabama shad (Fig. -3 and 4). Indeed, if this species 
resembled the Alabama shad in other respects as closely 
as it does in number of gillrakers I would hesitate to 
regard them as being distinct. 
The Alabama shad is a short, chunky species, having 
the depth one-third the length, and with the maxillary 
very slender; while the Ohio shad is a much longer, more 
slender fish, whose depth is scarcely more than a fourth 
of the length even in the females, while the males are still 
then until May 20 the daily catch at Mr. Sowders' fishery 
at the Ohio Falls ran from 125 to 740 fish. 
Mr. Sowders thinks the great increase in the catch in 
1897 was due to a change in the method of fishing. Until 
then the seines had been heavily leaded, hence hugged the 
bottom closely and caught only bottom fish, the seines 
not being deep enough to fish the entire depth of water. 
The catch was made up chiefly of such bottom fish as cat- 
fish, buffalo and fresh-water drum. The surface-swim- 
ming fish, such as the spoonbill cat, shovelnose sturgeon 
and shad, would pass over the net. Desiring to catch the 
spoonbill cat, Mr. Sowders instructed his fishermen to put 
lighter leads upon the seines, so that they would fish the 
upper portion of the water. As a result, not only were 
the spoonbill cat and shovelnose sturgeon taken, but the 
shad also. All three of these species appear to run at 
about the same time. 
catch any shad after the "light moon in May," but other 
parties continued for some days to catch them at the locks 
with drag hooks. 
Several years ago, it was stated, copperas water from 
the Cannelton mines entered the river and killed many 
fish, among them a "whitefish" which many now believe 
was the shad. The fishermen and others in this region 
who are familiar with the toothed herring and the skip- 
jack say that the fish they call the shad is a very different 
species. 
Lock No. 2, at Montgomery, is on the north side of the 
river and is faced by a high stone wall, on the outside of 
which in the swift water is where the shad were caught. 
For some time I watched a man with drag hooks trying 
for shad, but he met with no success. 
Inquiry among the fish dealers at Evansville, Ind., in 
May, 1898, developed the fact that the shad is scarcely 
Fig. 1 — Ohio Shad, Alosa ohiensis (Evermann) ; female. 
Fig. 2 — Ohio Shad, Alosa ohiensis (Evermann) ; male. 
more slender. And the maxillary in the Ohio shad is 
broader, more closely resembling that of the common 
shad (Figs. 5 and 6). 
Beside the four examples received from Mr. Sowders 
May 22, 1897, and the six received from him May 11, 1898, 
manv others were examined by me at Louisville May 16 to 
19, 1898, where I was able to do so through the kindness 
of Mr. Sowders, who permitted me to examine, weigh and 
measure those taken by his fishermen. 
In all, a total of forty-nine fish were examined critically, 
including twenty-seven females and twenty-two males. . 
In looking through the records in the Department of 
Fishes, U. S. National Museum. I found that a single 
specimen of shad was received from Louisville in May, 
The first shad caught in 1898 were gotten April 28. 
The catch in that year was said to have been much lighter 
than in 1897; but the catch of all species in 1898 was 
light. 
Very little is known regarding the distribution of the 
Ohio shad. All the specimens I have seen were taken at 
the Falls of the Ohio. About March 15, 1898, Mr. Sow- 
ders was at Coahoma, Miss., where he saw twenty-five or 
thirty shad caught. This was in the Mississippi about ten 
miles below Friars Point, Coahoma county, or about 
seventy-five miles -below Memphis. The fishermen said 
they caught a good many of them, but were uncertain 
what they were. Some called them "skipjack," but be- 
lieved them different from the common skipjack (Pomo- 
known at that place. One dealer stated that he had seen 
shad caught in the Ohio near Evansville about 1868 and a 
few in 1897. He also stated that he had taken them in 
the Wabash, about ten miles above its mouth.. He gave 
the weight of the shad as about two pounds, and says 
they die very soon when caught. 
Only one of three dealers interviewed at Vincennes, 
Ind., had ever heard of shad in the Mississippi Basin. 
Pie claimed to have received some shad a few_ years ago 
from St. Louis, but says they were too expensive for his 
market, as he had to sell them at 75 cents each. He 
did not know but that these fish may have been shipped 
from the East. 
All the known facts regarding the distribution and 
Fig. 3 — Alabama Shad, Alosai alabama (Jordan and Evermann) ; male. 
Fig. 4 — Alabama Shad, Alosa alabamce (Jordan and Evermann) ; female. 
1878, through the kindness of a Mr. Griffith. In the mu- 
seum register it is recorded as "Alosa sapidissima," and 
bears tag No. 21346. 
During my stay of four days at Louisville (May 16 to 
19, 1898) the number of shad caught was very few. 
The catch of May 16 was nineteen fish, that of May 17 
was sixteen, while only three were gotten on May 18. At 
this time the roes were quite small, and I think the shad 
would not have spawned before the 1st to the 15th of 
June. The examples received from Mr. Sowders in 1897 
and 1898 indicated that their spawning time would have 
been in the first half of June. 
These shad were caught by means of seines light-leaded 
so that they would fish the upper few feet of water rather 
than the bottom. This method of fishing was adopted 
in. order to get the spoonbill cat, which, when running, 
swims close to the surface; and while fishing for the 
spoonbill, the shad were caught at the same time. The 
two species appear to "run" at the same time when both 
swim near the surface. 
The principal seining ground near Louisville in 1898 
was below the Falls of the Ohio, and between Rock 
Island and the Indiana shore. The seines in use were 
about 70 yards long, 1.5-inch bar, and 90 meshes deep. 
According to Mr. Sowders the first shad obtained at 
Louisville were caught about 1876, when a good many 
were secured by seining just below the Falls. Mr. Sow- 
ders' father, who was then in the fish business, compared 
them with shad billed to him from Baltimore as "Po- 
tomac shad." Being unable to detect any important differ- 
ence, he called those from the Ohio "Potomac shad," 
which name they haw ever since retained among the 
Louisville fish dealers. They found a ready sale then, 
perhaps at a better price than they now receive. Since 
that time a few have been taken each year, but no large 
catches until 1897. The catch that year was relatively 
very larg:e. The first fish were gotten May 5, and from 
lobus chrysochloris). These fishermen said they had been 
getting this fish for years, but never valued them very 
highly. They used them chiefly for catfish bait. The roe 
of those which Mr. Sowders saw were very small. 
The next place from which this shad has been reported 
is Flint Island, in the Ohio River, a mile below Con- 
cordia, Ky., or about ninety miles below Louisville. Mr. 
Sowders reports that he got shad there in small numbers 
about April 20. 1897. They were seen at Brandenburg, 
Ky., about forty miles below Louisville, about the same 
time. 
Mr. Sowders says he heard of the shad at Vicksburg 
about 1883, and in 1884 in the Ohio at Hickman ; also at 
Aurora, Ind., in 1886 and subsequently. 
As already stated, the Fish Commission heard of the 
occurrence of shad in the Kanawha River at Montgomery, 
W. Va., in May, 1896. On May 13, 1898, I visited Mont- 
gomery, hoping that I might be able to secure specimens, 
or at least obtain further data regarding the occurrence of 
shad at that place. Very little additional information, how- 
ever, could be secured. It was learned that shad had never 
been seen there, according to the persons interviewed, un- 
til in May, 1896. Only a few people knew anything 
about them, and not many were caught. The fish were 
seen at Lock No. 2, which is at the town of Montgomery, 
and at Lock No. 3, which is five or six miles below. 
According to Mr. Pink Brown, shad were abundant 
during the "light moon, in May, 1896," in the Kanawha at 
Cabin Creek, just below Coalburg, or eight miles below 
Montgomery. The river was full of them and he caught 
a great many with a seine. He sold none, because every- 
body was catching them. He took some to Capt. James 
Calvert, of the Kanawha Belle, who said they were com- 
mon all along the river. Mr. Brown says those he caught 
were fine, large fish, excellent eating, and full of roe when 
caught, but he did not notice any eggs running from them, 
though others reported that they did. Mr, Brown did not 
habits of the Ohio shad indicate that it has regular runs, 
like the common shad. 
It appears in the Mississippi on the borders of Coahoma 
county, Miss., about the middle of March; in the lower 
Ohio about a month later (April 20) ; at Louisville still 
a little later (April 28 to May 20), and in the Kanawha 
River at Montgomery, W. Va., in the latter part of May. 
The Ouachita River, Arkansas, from which shad have 
been reported, has its mouth in the Red River near the 
confluence of the latter with the Mississippi, more than 
200 miles below Coahoma, where they were seen by Mr. 
Sowders, and only about 200 miles from the Gulf of 
Mexico. Although it has not been proved that these shad 
come up from the Gulf of Mexico, it may be regarded as 
(Wilson) ; female. 
certain that they do and that they are as truly anadromous 
as is the Atlantic shad. 
Whether important fisheries for the Ohio shad can be 
established remains to be determined. In the first place, 
it is not yet known whether the fish is commercially abun- 
dant. It is not at all improbable that its apparent scarcity 
may be due merely to the fact that the methods of fishing 
in vogue in the Mississippi Basin have not been such as 
would prove effective in the capture of shad. Gill nets and 
trap nets are scarcely known, and where seines are used 
they are usually leaded so as to fish the bottom, and are 
hauled mostly during the daytime. Shad might very well 
be present in abundance and remain forever unknown so 
long as the present fishing methods are continued. 
Many plants of Atlantic shad have been made by the 
United States Fish Commisison in the waters of the Mis- 
sissippi Basin — the first in 1874 and the last in 1893 — and 
although none of the plan ted^ shad has since been received 
by the Fish Commission for identification, and the capture 
of none has been fully authenticated, it does not follow 
by any means that none has survived. It is by no means 
improbable that the Atlantic shad may now be abundant 
in the Gulf and its tributary streams, and that a thor- 
