FISHERIES OF LAKE ONTARIO. 
187 
the capture of immature fish aud that the adult individuals should be protected during 
the spawning season; and (2) that artificial propagation should be resorted to. As to 
the expediency of enacting more fishery laws for Lake Ontario there may be consider- 
able difference of opinion; but in regard to the desirability of carrying out the second 
suggestion there can be no doubt, for the feasibility of hatching the lake sturgeon 
artificially has been fully demonstrated by both the United States and the Michigan 
fish commissions. 
THE ALEWIFE. 
This is. one of the most interesting species in Lake Ontario, and its occurrence is 
the cause of the most diversified, comment and speculation on the part of fishermen 
and others. The fish is recognized by fishermen of Lake Ontario under numerous 
names, which alone are sufficient to. exhibit the various ideas which are entertained 
regarding the presence and identity of the species. The name alewife is naturally the 
most common and generally distributed one, but in many localities this is unknown. 
The most numerous designations were heard at Cape Vincent and in the eastern 
end of the lake, where the names shad, little shad, alewife, menhaden, and manhaden 
were indiscriminately used by different fishermen. Both “shad” and “menhaden,” in 
addition to “alewife,” were quite frequently heard in other portions of the lake and 
in the St. Lawrence River. Among some Canadian fishermen of French extraction at 
Ogdeusburg, New York, the name gaspereau was used — a designation applied to the 
alewife throughout the maritime provinces of Canada — but shad and alewife were the 
common names in the river. In Monroe County the name sawbelly was in use, and in 
Niagara County the name moon-eye was heard. 
The alewife (Clupea pseudoharengus) is a coastal species not indigenous to this lake, 
and the circumstances of its introduction can probably never be established beyond 
question. Three principal views are now entertained regarding the origin of the fish 
in Lake Ontario : (1) That it gained a circuitous entrance into the lake from salt water 
by means of certain lakes, canals, and rivers in the State of New York ; (2) that the fish 
ascended the St. Lawrence River from the gulf of the same name; and (3) that alewife 
fry were accidentally introduced with young shad obtained in the Hudson River. 
In support of the first view the existence of a continuous water way, other than 
the St. Lawrence River, between the ocean and Lake Ontario is to be recognized and 
the possibility of a fish making this transit acknowledged. The writer has no per- 
sonal acquaintance with the conditions of union of the bodies of water in question, 
but the maps available indicate numerous routes to the lake by way of the Susque- 
hanna and Hudson rivers and their tributaries; lakes Seneca, Cayuga, Canandaigua, 
Onondaga, and Oneida, and the Seneca, Oneida, and Oswego rivers, together with the 
numerous canals which traverse this part of the State. 
The existence of alewives in lakes Seneca and Cayuga has been known since 1868, 
some years before the planting of shad in this region began, and there is little doubt 
that the fish naturally wandered into these lakes from the ocean, artificial water 
courses probably being important factors in this extension of the species 7 range. 
Both of these lakes have easy communication with Lake Ontario by way of the Seneca 
River and the Oswego River or Oswego Canal. 
