200 
BULLETIN OE THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
Whereas we believe that the ouly way in which this industry can he preserved and the good 
quality and quantity of such fish maintained, is by the enactment by the United States of laws pro- 
hibiting the landing or importation into the United States by their own citizens, or the citizens of any 
other nation or its colonies, of any mackerel caught between December 1 and Juno 1 of any year 
beginning January 1, 1885: 
Therefore we, the undersigned, engaged in said industry in our several relations of owners of 
vessels, tishermen employed on such vessels, and others directly interested in this industry, do hereby 
respectfully request that the United States Fishery Commissioners do urge upon our next Congress 
the necessity and desirability of such protection by suitable and sufficient legislation. 
From this begiuumg the agitation of this question spread throughout the fishing 
communities of the Atlantic coast and even into the interior of the country. Petitions 
to Congress, similar in phraseology to the one quoted, were circulated and very e.vten- 
sively signed by fishermen, fish-dealers, vessel owners and fitters, and other classes 
of citizens. 
The opposition to the continuance of this fishery, which developed in 1885 and 
finally resulted in the passage of a prohibitory act by Congress, chiefly originated with 
or was pressed by dealers in salt fish and vessel-owners engaged extensively in the 
salt-mackerel fishery, A majority of the fresh-fish dealers were not in favor of any 
legislation at that time affecting this fishery, A small percentage of the dealers in 
fresh fish agreed with the salt-fish dealers as to the desirability of suspending this 
fishery; and, on the other hand, a few salt-fish men sided with the larger number of 
fresh -fish dealers. 
The arguments presented by those who favored the abolition of this fishery were 
numerous and varied, and for the most part not referred to or suggested in tlie 
petitions sent to Congress or in the act which finally became a law. Among other 
objections to the fishery the following were urged in substance: 
First. This fishery is e.xtremely uncertain and has usually been carried on at a loss 
from its origin to the present time, A few vessels each year have done well, and, in a 
few instances, the same vessels have year after year been successful, but a great deal of 
money has been lost by the dealers and fitters, and the fishery is, at best, little more 
than a lottery. The vessel-owners are reluctant to place their vessels in an enterprise 
which experience has taught to be so uncertain, but the chances for a good season are 
often too strong to be resisted by captains and crews, and the owners, often against 
their better judgment, fit out for the fishery. The captains, who are frequently part 
owners, are anxious to get to work, and their views have to be considered; even 
when captains have no pecuniary interest in the vessels, if they are efficient and have 
made money for the vessel-owners in the past, their wishes have to be regarded, as 
other firms of vessel-owners might otter them vessels for this fishery and thus secure 
their services permanently. 
Second. The continued catching of mackerel on so large a scale before the fish 
liave spawned will ultimately result in the exhaustion of the supply and the practical 
destruction of the maclierel fishery. 
Third. The continual harassing of the fish by so large a fleet of seiners early 
in the season interferes with their migrations along our shores, breaks up the 
schools, prevents spawning, and drives the great body of mackerel from the New 
England coast, where they would be caught after they had deposited their spawn and 
grown fat. The catch on the northern part of our coast later in the year is thus seri- 
ously interfered with, the tendency of the seines being to keep the fish off the United 
States coast and to cause them to enter the Gulf of St. Lawrence. 
