Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1925-08-13
COMMUNICATED

An article appearing in the Villas
County News under date of Aug. 5-25
and in the Eagle River Review under
date of Aug. 6-25 signed by VIM. F.
Fenske excites my curiosity as to
where the author received his informa-
ton. 1t is quite certain this informa-
ton is not from personal observations
as the statements set forth are exceed
of MIR. Fenske and wishing to remain
as such, venture to correct the errors
appearing in the article above his sign,
ature and trust he will accept them as
one who has been misinformed.
1t appears peculiar to me that the
editor of the Villas County News, who
advocates propagation and protection,
sponsors associations of this nature
and who assumes to be authority on
past and existing conditions, would
print such an article without editorial
comment The only conclusion to ar
rive at, especially after referring to
back issues of the News, is that the
editor is anxious and willing to take
rap at the Conservation Commission
and the state administration whenever
opportunity presents itself. 1t may
seem strange to some readers of this
article that |, as an unpaid officer of
N rot; u
champion the cause of the department,
more especially as l and the head of
Commission are not on agreeable,
terms at the present time. To this
will say that the department in generA
al is not to blame for the actions On
it's chief executive and that the per-
sonell of the various departments un-
der the Commission, direction are
striving in the best manner possible
to serve the people under the present
restricted condition of things.
Returning to the question of spawn
ing game fish and the distribution of
fry after the spawn is Matched let us
see what was taken from the Eagle
chain of lakes and what was returned.
In the first place there has been nc
spawn taken from the Eagle chain in
the past four years. Second the chain
was only fished on two different oc.
cassions and at those, times less than
three cases of eggs were taken alto
gether. This may be corrected by say
ing-three cases of good eggs. While
in return the Eagle chain and sur
rounding lakes have profited by the
presence of our hatchery for eight
spawning seasons. The fish returned
to the chain has been over thousand
to one egg taken away. The author of
the article against our hatchery stated
that people from inland lakes carried
away the fry-pray why did not the
people from the chain carry away their
share? | have been directly connected
with the hatchery for seven years and
each year have taken my car, gone out
and planted fry in the chain that PEG
pie living on the lakes ordered and
never called for. There is about one
person in twenty living on the chain
who ever thinks about planting fish.
Again let us go back to the source
of supply for our hatchery The lakes
contributing to the hatchery supply
are Big Twin, Vieux Dessert, Sand
Lake, Dam Lake and Swamp Lake.
Why should not car load of fry be
shipped to Phelps when nearly every
egg going into the local hatchery this
spring came from Big Twin Lake? The
resort owners and people with sum-
mer homes on Big Twin lake are the
ones to complain as that lake has
furnished the community with eggs
for fry for years past. The taking of
eggs in the local chain was given up
by the commission at the start be.
cause it was an unpaying proposition
One more statement as tn the SIM