THE SMELTS 
317 
minnows, shiners, and small suckers, can be caught and kept alive; but where there are smelt in 
the water a piece of maple sugar for bait would be almost as effective as any other fish but smelt. 
No doubt of the smelt being great food; but if it spoils fishing with rod and tackle where is its 
advantage? It certainly may ruin the fly-fishing, as it no doubt does the bait fishing, to a very 
great extent. 
There is no fly-fishing at Sunapee at all, and the only way it is accounted for there is 
the smelt. 
In 1899, a correspondent of Forest and Stream (“Special” 1899a) after discuss- 
ing the abundance of breeding smelts and the number of dead and dying at the sur- 
face, wrote: “Later these little fish disappear — no one knows whither — and the trout 
and salmon that have been feasting on them are forced to seek other food. 
In another place, speaking of the fishing for salmon and trout in New England, 
he said: “The last reports say that the smelts are fast disappearing, and there is no 
doubt but what fishing will be better very soon.” 
In the May 20, 1899, issue of Forest and Stream a correspondent, writing of 
New England spring fishing, said that in Richardson and Mooselucmaguntic Lakes 
there were millions of smelts, many of them dead from spawning, and that the trout 
were gorging on them and would not take artificial flies or other bait till the smelts 
were gone. Yet, he added, “Still a few trout were taken.” 
Maine Woods of May 12, 1905 (p. 2), having reported “lots of dead and dying 
smelts on the surface of Rangely Lakes,” said: 
It is a mystery yet unsolved why smelts die in this manner nearly every spring, but one 
thing seems pretty certain about it; the fish [trout and salmon ] can not be caught at the time the 
smelts are dying. Trout and salmon both feed on smelts, and if one is caught it is found to be 
full of them. The period, however, is short, beginning as soon as the ice is out and lasting a week 
or ten days, when the supply runs out and the fish are ready for something else. 
In the report of the division of fisheries and game of Massachusetts for 1921, 
concerning artifical propagation of the smelt, it was reported that no collections of 
fresh-water smelt were made for distribution. It said: 
The run at Laurel Lake, Lee, was scattering, and apparently the smelt are dying out — a 
source of gratification to local fishermen who believe them to be a detriment to the fishing. 
Commenting on the statements contained in the letter above quoted, Mr. Tit- 
comb (1896) wrote: 
It certainly would be unreasonable to think of depriving a body of water of desirable fish food 
for the purpose of forcing a fish to rise to the surface to take flies or artifical food. 
This is a very pertinent remark, for where there is not sufficient food the fish 
can hardly attain a size to make them worth catching. Where insects afford the 
only food supply trout do not attain a very large size, and it has been proven that 
if there are no smelts the salmon as a rule do not thrive. 
It seems to be a peculiar trait of some men to account for phenomena by the 
most prominent or conspicuous condition that may be a possible cause. In other 
words they are prone to jump at conclusions without sufficient verification. This is 
particularly characteristic of some anglers. If in any lake the water is high or low 
and the fishing good or poor, it is good or poor because the water is high or low, as 
the case may be. Good fishing or poor fishing in a lake abounding in or free from 
smelts is ascribed to the abundance or lack of food supply, and those persons have 
44699—27 21 
