48 
KENDALL: NEW ENGLAND CHARRS. 
Up to the 29th females were in the minority but during the latter part of the month greatly 
predominated. This may be due to the fact that the males running first were nearly all caught. 
A female is stated to average about 1200 ova to the pound of fish. From fish-cultural 
operations it is observable that the eggs are not always deposited at once, more than one and 
sometimes several strippings being required to get all of the eggs. While this may possibly be 
due to the abnormal conditions incident to the retention of the fish in live cars, it is probably 
a natural condition. 
It is not known how long the young remain upon the shoal after hatching, but young White 
Trout of only a few inches in length are taken on the same grounds as the large fish in summer. 
The following observations upon young White Trout were made by the present writer in 
1910 and 1911. 
April 23, 1910. Along the shore of Soo-nipi Park, principally over coarse gravel and over 
sand beach near the gravel, several young White Trout were seen and four of them caught, each 
about one inch long. When disturbed they would swim and dart about, hesitating to go far 
into deep water. But if they went toward shore they would not conceal themselves under the 
gravel but seemed to depend for protection upon darting and dodging, at which they were quite 
adept. Apparently becoming tired, however, they swam more slowly and were easily caught. 
Their stomachs contained larval Diptera (Chironomus) and some minute crustaceans (Ento- 
mostraca). 
April 28. At the head of Pike Brook deadwater eight specimens from 1 to 1^ inches long 
were caught. Their stomachs also contained principally Chironomus larvae. 
August 13. Three White Trout from 5s to 7| inches long were caught at the Hedgehog 
fishing ground in about 90 feet of water. 
Characterization. 
The Blueback advocates would have rejoiced had they foreseen that the Blueback in its 
native waters would reach the size of an average Sunapee White Trout, as the main argument 
against the Blueback theory was the small size attained by the Blueback. As a matter of fact, 
the small size was the chief difference. Dr. Bean mentions one additional character, viz., the 
difference in the gill-rakers, which in the Blueback were always straight and in the Sunapee 
fish usually more or less curled and distorted. But this character does not obtain in the small 
Sunapee fish and in the large Blueback they are frequently as distorted as in the Sunapee fish. 
Indeed, it is a difficult matter to distinguish a large Blueback from a White Trout after it has 
been preserved in alcohol for some time and even when fresh. 
While it is comparatively easy to distinguish the Common Trout from the Saiblings, it is a 
rather difficult matter to distinguish the species of the latter. If they were not so closely related 
