32 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
trated in Figure 3, taken from the report by the senior author on the results of the 
tagging operations of 1922. 2 The tags were almost invariably so firmly attached 
that it was necessary to cut the tail in order to remove them. It seems very im- 
probable, therefore, that any considerable number were lost from the fish while 
they were free. Some were torn from the fish as they were brailed from traps into 
scows or cannery tenders, as was evidenced by occasional tags found loose on the 
scows or in the holds of the tenders. A very small proportion, however, was found 
in this manner, and the possible loss of tags as a result must be considered as negli- 
gible. A slight wearing of the tissue of the fish is sometimes caused by the tag, 
but no examples have come to our attention where this appeared to be serious. 
It can be noticed in Figure 3. 
As mentioned above, the tagging was done exclusively in traps. It was found 
Impracticable to tag at the time the traps were lifted by the fishing crews from the 
canneries on account of the fact that these fishing crews were nearly always anxious 
to complete their work as soon as possible and return with the fish, whereas the tag- 
ging operations usually consumed several hours. In ordinary practice, therefore, 
we found it necessary to lift the traps ourselves, an operation which was not always 
easy with the limited aid at our disposal. We usually had hut two assistants. 
In this connection we wish to acknowledge the efficient aid of W. P. Studdert, who 
assisted in the tagging both in 1922 and 1923. His practical knowledge of boats 
and fishing gear and his willing and energetic activities along many practical lines 
made his assistance invaluable. 
A small seine sk iff was made use of in manipulating the traps and in doing the 
actual tagging. (See fig. 4.) With the top line lowered the skiff was introduced 
into the spiller of the trap, which was then “lifted” in the usual manner until a 
sufficient number of fish were collected in the pocket formed by the outer wall of 
the spiller. Then the bottom line was lifted above the surface of the water and 
was fastened to the gunwale of the skiff. The top line was then dropped, pulled in, 
and fastened to the gunwale near the bow of the skiff in order to facilitate the release 
of the tagged fish. With this arrangement the pocket formed by the side wall of 
the spiller remained open toward the stern of the skiff, so that the fish were easily 
reached by the man assigned to dip them up. A section about 4 feet long was 
roughly partitioned off in the stern to prevent the fish when dipped into the skiff 
from getting forward where the tagging was being done. 
To aid in holding the fish for tagging, a number of small boxes were made, 
approximately 4 by 7 by 18 inches. One end was left open and the box lashed 
with heavy seine twine. This lashing formed a sort of handle and also strengthened 
the box. The fish were placed head first in these boxes. In this position only the 
tail and the caudal peduncle of fish of average size extended beyond the box. The 
peduncle was grasped by the operator holding the fish for marking, and the box so 
restricted the movements of the fish that holding was a comparatively easy matter. 
The tags, tongs, books in which the scale samples were preserved, and a small 
knife used in scraping scales from the fish were arranged conveniently on one of the 
thwarts near the bow of the skiff. The tags were arranged on sticks in serial order 
and, as mentioned above, the spaces in the scale books were serially numbered to 
correspond with the tags. The scale samples were taken from the caudal peduncle 
2 See footnote, p. 27. 
