1002 
$2.10, would be wise and proper to establish. It 
goes almost without saying that such fishing 
license fees would aid materially both the states 
and anglers in properly solving the problem of 
how best to establish true conservation 
So far as the section comprising the New Eng¬ 
land States, New York, New Jersey and Penn¬ 
sylvania, is concerned, the same general laws 
governing the taking and killing of trout should 
apply equally well to all, except in particular 
cases when special laws should be passed to meet 
the unusual conditions. 
The brook trout is a native; it is the indigen¬ 
ous Charr or trout found in all of these states 
which has very justly and rightly been called 
“the most beautiful fish that swims.” As the 
brook trout is a native and as it far exceeds in 
number all of the other species found in these 
states, it would appear as if it were entitled to 
the greatest consideration when formulating new 
laws for the protection and conservation of trout. 
Especially when everything that is done for the 
brook trout will serve just as well for all other 
species of trout, except the Sunapee trout, the 
Dublin pond trout, the Blue Back or Rangeley 
trout and the Lake trout, all of which should be 
protected by special laws. 
The brook trout is a cold-water breeder; it 
spawns in the late fall or early winter; as this 
is an undisputed fact, it is apparent that the 
spawning season comes around earlier in the wa¬ 
ters of northern Maine than elsewhere. For 
this reason, if no other, it would seem as if the 
more southerly states could, in all reason, sub¬ 
scribe to an “open season” which has proved ad¬ 
vantageous for many years in the most northerly 
state. 
The restricting as to the size, weight and num¬ 
ber of trout that could be legally taken in one 
day would surely apply equally as well to one 
state as another, provided the limits were wisely 
determined in the first place, which ought to be 
easily and satisfactorily accomplished. 
Probably, all things considered, the most im¬ 
portant feature in relation to proper conservation 
of trout which should be determined after most 
careful investigation is how to prevent the need¬ 
less waste of trout each year by the anglers them¬ 
selves. As the laws in the different states stand 
now the number of trout one angler can kill in 
one day is altogether too large, and it can be 
materially reduced without depriving anglers of 
the. enjoyment of their sport in a reasonable and 
rational manner. 
The time has arrived when anglers who 
fish game fish for number must be satisfied 
with a lower limit. 
If the limit is not made less as soon as possible 
one of two things must inevitably follow, either 
the. sport of trout fishing will die a natural death, 
owing to the exterminating of the species, or a 
“close season” extending over a long period of 
years in most of the states will have to be en¬ 
forced. 
Is it not better then to reduce the permissi¬ 
ble limit of catch per day rather than to be 
forced to accept one of the two alternatives? 
While new laws governing the catching and 
killing of trout should not be enacted for the 
benefit of any one class of trout angler because 
the small boy with his alder pole is entitled to his 
rights just the same as the fly-fishing angler with 
his split bamboo rod, there are, however, certain 
well established facts in relation to trout fishing 
which make it necessary, for the good of all 
anglers, that the limit of catch in one day should 
be differently governed for each method of fish¬ 
ing. 
Having fished for trout in many states for over 
twenty-five years, and having given much time 
for the past twelve years to the study of their 
habits and conditions under different circum¬ 
stances, as well as to the investigation of the 
laws of the states where trout fishing is to be 
had, I feel that I can speak with some degree of 
authority upon the subject. 
There are three well recognized methods of 
trout fishing, and they are bait fishing, trolling, 
and fly-fishing. 
When trout are caught by the bait method 
FOREST AND STREAM 
ninety out of every hundred so caught if re¬ 
turned immediately to the water will eventually 
die because the hook (and generally a good-sized 
one) has reached a vital spot. When trout are 
caught by the trolling method fifty out of every 
hundred so caught if returned immediately to the 
water will die because the hook or hooks have 
fatally injured them. On the other hand, when 
trout are caught by the fly-fishing method, only 
one in one hundred so caught if returned imme¬ 
diately to the water will die. This is because the 
hooks in ninety per cent, of the cases being small 
do not reach any vital spot; and when medium¬ 
sized hooks are used, owing to the nature of the 
method, trout are uninjured because they are 
hooked in the lips or the tough part of the mouth. 
There can be no doubt whatever that the fly¬ 
fishing method is the least destructive and is the 
most skilful; that the bait method is the most 
destructive, yet requires considerable skill, and 
that the trolling method, while not as destruc¬ 
tive as the bait method, is markedly so and re¬ 
quires but little skill. Therefore, as the bait 
and trolling methods are responsible in them¬ 
selves for the killing and wasting of more trout 
many times over than the fly-fishing method, it 
should be self-evident that there is urgent need 
of restricting the use of these two methods as 
far as possible consistent with fairness to all 
anglers. 
In relation to the limit of trout that may be 
caught and killed in one day, the following gives 
the situation as to how the law stands to-day in 
the nine states in the section named heretofore: 
One state has limit of 25 trout, or 15 pounds. 
(Maine.) 
Two states have no limit of number, but have a 
weight limit. (Vermont, 5 lbs.; New York, 10 
lbs.) 
Three states have limit for number, but no 
limit for weight. (New Jersey, 25; Connecticut, 
30; Pennsylvania, 40.) 
Three states have no limit for number or 
weight. They are: New Hampshire, Massachu¬ 
setts, Rhode Island. 
After seriously considering and analyzing these 
figures for a day’s catch, is it not to wonder that 
the sport of trout fishing has lasted as well as it 
has under such adverse conditions? Just con¬ 
sider for a moment what it means to have a daily 
limit of 25, 30 and 40 trout, or even a limit of 
10 pounds in weight with no limit for number 
and then what a no limit at all means! 
Is it strange, then, that many angling sports¬ 
men are awakening to the realizing sense that 
something must be done to preserve the sport 
and that real conservation, in part, means regu¬ 
lating the taking and killing of trout according 
to the methods used in capturing them? 
The daily limit that should be established for 
the taking and killing of trout by the three radi¬ 
cally different methods of fishing should not be 
determined without much thought and careful 
consideration based upon the best information 
and experience that is obtainable. 
From my study and investigation of the sub¬ 
ject I beg leave to suggest that the following 
limits, if established, will be fair and just and at 
the same time will prove advantageous alike to 
the anglers and the different states interested. 
Bait Limit. 
The daily limit for trout that can be taken and 
killed in one day by the “bait method” shall not 
be over ten fish; the total weight of the trout 
shall not exceed seven pounds, except that it shall 
be legal to take one trout if it exceeds seven 
pounds. 
Trolling Limit. 
The. daily limit for trout that can be taken 
and killed in one day by the “trolling method” 
shall not be over three fish; the total weight of 
the trout shall not exceed ten pounds, except that 
it shall be legal to take one trout if it exceeds 
ten pounds, and if one or two trout have been 
caught that do not weigh over seven pounds, then 
one more trout can be taken. 
Fly-Fishing Limit. 
The daily limit for trout that can be taken and 
killed in one day by the “fly-fishing method” 
shall not be over ten fish; the total weight of 
the trout shall not exceed seven pounds, except 
that it shall be legal to take one trout if it ex¬ 
ceeds seven pounds 
Note.—When fishing by the bait or trolling 
method each trout that is caught shall be killed 
and counted as one of the legal limit allowed 
for one day provided that it is over the legal 
limit for length. 
Note.—When fishing by the fly-fishing method 
the angler may catch and not kill as many trout 
as his ability will permit, provided after he has 
taken his legal limit all others are at once re¬ 
turned to the water unharmed. 
Note.—No angler shall have in his possession 
at any time during the “open season” more than 
the daily prescribed limit of trout for the method 
he has used in catching them. 
Note.—“In his possession” shall be deemed to 
mean trout that the angler has caught and not 
disposed of that may be at his home, camp, 
hotel, on his person, or elsewhere. In other 
words, if an angler catches and kills ten trout to¬ 
day and disposes of five trout, and has on hand 
five trout to-morrow, the number which he can 
catch and kill that day is automatically reduced 
to five trout. 
Note.—Each method of catching trout should 
be restricted to such waters as are prescribed 
by law. It will be found in all states that on 
certain waters all methods can be allowed, on 
some waters two methods can be allowed, and 
on other waters only one method should be al¬ 
lowed. Each state will have to decide this ques¬ 
tion for itself. 
Note.—By restricting certain waters to certain 
methods the trout will be better protected and 
each class of angler will also have protection 
and ample opportunity for enjoying the sport 
of trout fishing in his own way. 
The length of the “open season” for trout 
fishing is a subject that requires more than ordi¬ 
nary consideration, especially as the nine states 
in question all have different limits at the present 
time. 
THE “open season” AS IT IS TO-DAY. 
For Brooks and For Ponds and 
State Streams Lakes 
Maine .Ice out to Sep. 15_Ice out to Oct. 1 
New Hampshire. .Apr. 1 to Aug. 1 Apr. 15 to Sep. t 
Vermont .Apr. 15 to Aug. 31.... May 1 to Aug. 31 
Massachusetts ...Apr. i to Jul. 31 Apr. 1 to Jul. 31 
Rhode Island.Apr. 1 to Jul. 15....Apr. 1 to Jul. 15 
Connecticut .Apr.. 1 to Jun. 30.... Apr. 1 to Jun. 30 
***New York.Apr. to Aug. 31....Apr. to Aug. 31 
New Jersey.Apr. 1 to Jul. 14....Apr. 1 to Jul. 14 
Pennsylvania ...Apr. 14 to Jul. 31....Apr. 14 to Jul. 31, 
***First Saturday in April. 
In trying to arrive at what should be the length 
of the “open season” it is well to leave out of 
consideration such waters and species of trout as 
have had and will continue to have “special”' 
laws for their protection and to consider only 
the waters and species that come under the gen¬ 
eral trout laws. 
Probably all those interested in this subject 
(assuming they are familiar with the facts) will 
agree that the “open season” should close earlier 
on brooks and streams than on ponds and lakes- 
For those who are unfamiliar with the facts, it 
may be well to say that trout in the vast majority 
of cases, when they can, leave the ponds arid 
lakes (often called “still waters”) for the brooks 
and streams, to spawn. 
Although the spawning season comes around 
earlier in the more northerly states than else¬ 
where it is seldom that the act of spawning 
actually takes place before October ioth to 15th. 
The trout, however, begin to arrive at the spawn¬ 
ing beds about or shortly after September 15th, 
when they clean and prepare the beds for use 
at a later date. For these reasons, if no others, 
the “open season” should close on brooks and 
streams at an earlier date than on ponds and 
lakes, in order that the propagation of the spe¬ 
cies will not be disturbed and the best results 
will be attained. The ending of the “open sea¬ 
son” on brooks and streams now varies from 
June 30th in Connecticut to September 15th in 
the state of Maine, a difference of two and one- 
half months As the earlier date applies to the 
more southerly state of the two, would it not 
seem as if something were radically wrong with 
one of these “open seasons” laws? The varia¬ 
tions in the “open season” laws of the different 
