Northern tribune. [volume] (Cheboygan, Mich.) 1875-1885, 1883-02-17
NORTHERN TRIBUNE.
SATURDAY FEBRUARY II. 1883.
FISH CULTURE.
Ahe work Of The United States and
Stats &c mm IA sfOners

Ss"" Ce mmiss1Oners.
There has been good deal of interest
exhibited OF late Oh the subject of fish
culture and some opposition has been
developed against any further expendi-
lures for the propagation of white
fish for the great lakes. A petit
tiOn against further expenditure
on this direction which has been pre-
sented to the legislature was sent by
one of the state commissioners to Prof.
Baird and elected from him the follow
ing response, which will be of interest to
all citizens of Michigan and of the
states bordering the great lakes:
U. 8. COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND FISHERIES.
WASHINGTON, ID. c., January 2S 1883. I
TO Spencer f. Baird,
of your letter of January 20, enclosing
copy of remOnstrance against fur
ther expenditures by the Michigan COM
missiOners in Matching whitefish in the
great lakes, addressed to the legislature
of that state, and asking my views in re-
gard to it.
Referring to the several paragraphs
of the memorial remOnstrance in ques-
ton, in their order, beg leave to make
the following remarks as expressing in
a general way the policy of the United
States fish commission in such cases.
l. The waters OF the great lakes, ad-
jaceut to the states, are under the juris-
dictiOn either of the state or of the gen.
eral government. The latter controls
matters relative to navigation, but
whether it has anything to do with the
question Of the fisheries has yet TO be
decided. At any rate, the legislatures
respectively have assumed that their
states control the lakes, by making en-
actments In regard to the times and
character Of the fishing and other points,
which are in force and accepted. If.the
jurisdiction on this point he In the gen.
eral government, then the action has
been illegal, and fishermen and others
are not bound to assent to 1t. The gen.
eral government has not as yet indica-
ted any intention to regulate or control
the fisheries even in navigable waters or
on the high seas, and the case, for the
present, Is in the hands of the authOri-
ties of the states.
In further reference to the first para
graph; 80 far from the appropriations
by congress having been spent In large
part in the propagation of sea fishes, no
expenditure of this kind has been made
beyond few experiments designed to
the work when undertaken. The outlay
under the head of propagation has been
for the Matching of shad, salmon, white
fish and carp, of which the lake states
received large proportion.
2 1t Is mistake to assume that the
fish produced by Michigan money, and
placed in the Detroit river and in the
great lake, are lost to the inhabitants of
the state. The whitefish are migratory
to some extent, and although they 90
into Lake Erie and elsewhere to remain
for considerable time, only a small
portion are taken while there. The
main catch is on the approach of the
period of their reproduction. 1t Is a
we'll known fact that fish always return
to spawn to the place where they are
born; and that, with the exception of
certain class Of migratory fish In the
ocean, their movements are from the in
shores to the deep water and back again
rather than in an extensive, lateral mi
grafton. The latter view, as applied to
the salmon, the shad and the herring,
has long since been exploded.
think am not mistaken in assum-
ing that the great catch of whitefish is
in the autumn; and that the amount of
fish taken in the summer Is Of COMPARE
lively little magnitude. or course they
may De taken by the ton. but that does
not necessarily express very large fig
ure. Thus, young fish planted at Alpe-
ma would, according to our present light
on the subject, return to the same neigh
bOrhOOd when mature, and of course be
taken there. They would not go to the
Canadian side, nor would they go down
or into the Detroit river. The young
fish planted in the Detroit river, would
in all probability 20 down the stream
into Lake Erie, but they would return
to the Detroit river at the spawning age
and time. lido not believe that fish
planted at Sandusky would 20 up the De-
trOit river and be taken there. They
would rather 90 into the deep water and
come back again. There Is an entire
fallacy, therefore, in the assumptions of
the second paragraph.
Another misstatement is that New
York and other seabOard states have
abandoned their coast work, and are
giving their funds and labor to the In
land fisheries. New York never prose-
cuted any coast fish-hatching, bnt has
within year established station at
Cold Spring HarbOr, Long Island sound,
for the express purpose OF giving partlc-
ular attention to this subject. The
same is likely to occur with other coast
states.
The United States fish commission does
not desire to monopolize the whiteish
work along the great lakes. Indeed, for
several years 1t refused to enter upon 1t,
on the ground that the law authorizes
expenditures for the introduction OF food
fishes into new localities, and not for
their multiplication In particular spots.
1t is only for the purpose of getting the
eggs of the whitefish for distribution to
California, Nevada and other places