PART II.
There are two forms of fish culture. One of these, which has been practiced for many centuries in China, and perhaps quite as long in Europe, consisted in the transportation of living fish from waters in which they were abundant, to other waters, depleted or naturally deficient in fish life. The carp and the goldfish have been so long domesticated that they have become modified, like domestic fowls and cattle. The goldfish was introduced into all parts of the world from China, centuries ago. The introduction of the carp into the United States by the efforts of our Commissioner of Fisheries has been one of the most extensive operations in fish culture ever attempted. In 1878 carp were brought from Bavaria, and from this stock, planted in Babcock Lake, over 300,000 young fish have been distributed, in lots of ten to twenty, to every part of the country, so that almost every county is now stocked with this valuable food fish. As early as 1770 some experiments in transplanting fish were attempted, at the suggestion of Benjamin Franklin and others. In 1854, the black bass, now so abundant in the Potomac, were introduced by an engineer on the B. & O. R. R., who brought them over the Alleghenies in the water tank of his engine. This fish has also been sent to England and France, where it bids fair to become a favorite. In 1873, a car was freighted with eastern fish designed for introduction into the waters of California. The car ran off the track in Nebraska, and the rivers in that region are now stocked with our best fishes.
Far more important than fish transportation and the acclimation of foreign species, is the art of fish breeding, by which it is possible to keep up the supply of fishes in waters into which they have been successfully introduced. It was in the year 1741 that Stephen Ludwig Jacobi, a wealthy landed proprietor and civil engineer of northwestern Germany, discovered the method of artificially fertilizing the eggs of fish for the purpose of restocking ponds and streams, and began a series of painstaking experiments with that end in view. He first conceived the idea in 1725, when a youth of seventeen years, and was successful after laboring for sixteen years. His discovery was not announced till 1763. Although his discovery was thought to be of interest, and was used by physiologists and students of embryology, it was not until the French government resolved to make a grand experiment in stocking the waters of France with fish that modern industrial fish culture was born.
The establishment in 1850 at Huningen, in Alsace, by the French government, of the first fish-breeding station, or “piscifactory,” as it was named by Prof. Coste, is of great significance, since it marks the initiation of public fish culture. To this establishment the world is indebted for some practical hints, but most of all for its influence upon the policy of governments. The fortunes of war and conquest have now thrown Huningen into the hands of the German government. The art discovered in Germany was practiced in Italy as early as 1791 by Bufalini, in France in 1820, in Bohemia in 1824, in Great Britain in 1837, in Switzerland in 1842, in Norway, under government patronage in 1850, in Finland in 1852, in the United States in 1853, in Belgium, Holland, and Russia in 1854, in Canada about 1863, in Austria in 1865, in Australasia, by the inhabitants of English Salem in 1862, and in Japan in 1877.
The history of fish culture in this country is so familiar to every one who has the slightest interest in the subject that it seems unnecessary to refer to it in this place, except to show that it was largely to the growth of popular interest in the subject that the Fish Commission has owed its original and since increasing support.
The establishment of the United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries in 1871 marked the beginning of a period of great activity and great progress in fish culture, which has been quite without parallel elsewhere. The duties of the Commissioner were thus defined: “To prosecute investigations on the subject (of the diminution of valuable fishes), with the view of ascertaining whether any and what diminution in the number of food fishes of the coast and the lakes of the United States has taken place; and, if so, to what causes the same is due; and also whether any, and what protection, prohibitory or precautionary measures should be adopted in the premises, and to report upon the same to Congress.”
I think I may truthfully assert that very much of the improvement in the condition of our fisheries has been due to the wise and energetic management of our Commissioner, Prof. Spencer F. Baird. Himself an eminent man of science, for forty years in the front rank of biological investigation, the author of several hundred scientific memoirs, no one could realize more thoroughly the importance of a scientific foundation for the proposed work.
His position as the head of that influential scientific organization, given by an Englishman to the United States, “for the increase and diffusion of useful knowledge among men,” enabled him to secure at once the aid of a body of trained specialists.
I wish to emphasize the idea that the work of the Fish Commission owes its value solely and entirely to the fact of its being based upon an extensive and long continued system of scientific investigations, for the purpose of discovering unknown facts, the knowledge of which is essential to the welfare of the fisheries, the economical management of the national fishery resources, the success of fish culture, and the intelligent framing of fishery laws.
The resolution establishing the Commission requires that its head shall be a civil officer of the government, of proved scientific and practical acquaintance with the fishes of the coast—thus formally fixing its scientific character.
The work of the Commission is and always has been under the direction of eminent and representative scientific specialists, acting as heads of its several divisions, and the employes, with the exception of a very limited number of clerks, are trained experts, usually scientific students—so exact and special is the training required even for subordinate positions, that in a majority of cases each man employed is the only man in the country who understands and can perform his own individual work.
Pure and applied science have labored together always in the service of the Fish Commission, their representatives working side by side in the same laboratories; indeed, much of the best work in the investigation of the fisheries and in the artificial culture of fishes has been performed by men eminent as zoölogists.
The work of the Fish Commission is naturally divided into three sections:
1. The systematic investigation of the waters of the United States, and the biological and physical problems which they present. The scientific studies of the Commission are based upon a liberal and philosophical interpretation of the law. In making his original plans the Commissioner insisted that to study only the food fishes would be of little importance, and that useful conclusions must needs rest upon a broad foundation of investigations purely scientific in character. The life history of species of economic value should be understood from beginning to end, but no less requisite is it to know the histories of the animals and plants upon which they feed, or upon which their food is nourished; the histories of their enemies and friends, and the friends and foes of their enemies and friends, as well as the currents, temperature and other physical phenomena of the waters in relation to migration, reproduction and growth. A necessary accompaniment to this division is the amassing of material for research to be stored in the National and other museums for future use.
2. The investigation of the methods of fisheries, past and present, and the statistics of production and commerce of fishery products. Man being one of the chief destroyers of fish, his influence upon their abundance must be studied. Fishery methods and apparatus must be examined and compared with those of other lands, that the use of those which threaten the destruction of useful fishes may be discouraged, and that those which are inefficient may be replaced by others more serviceable. Statistics of industry and trade must be secured for the use of Congress in making treaties or imposing tariffs, to show to producers the best markets, and to consumers where and with what their needs may be supplied.
3. The introduction and multiplication of useful food fishes throughout the country, especially in waters under the jurisdiction of the general government, or those common to several states, none of which might feel willing to make expenditures for the benefit of the others. This work, which was not contemplated when the Commission was established, was first undertaken at the instance of the American Fish Cultural Association, whose representatives induced Congress to make a special appropriation for the purpose. This appropriation has since been renewed every year on an increasingly bountiful scale, and the propagation of fish is at present by far the most extensive branch of the work of the Commission, both in respect to number of men employed and quantity of money expended.
The limits of this article do not permit the discussion of work in connection with the fisheries, or of the scientific investigations which form the bed for the whole current of its activity.
The principal activity of the Commission has properly been directed to the wholesale replenishment of our depleted waters, as is shown by the fact that from seventy-five to eighty-five per cent. of the appropriations have been directed into this channel.
For fifteen or twenty years prior to the establishment of the Commission, popular interest in the fisheries, and a desire for their maintenance had been on the increase, the state of public opinion being doubtless under stimulation from the action of the French government in fostering the still infant art of fish culture.
The publications and experiments of Garlick, Fry, Atwood, Lyman, Green, Stone, Ainsworth, Roosevelt, Atkins, Stady, and others, awakened everywhere a sense of the fact that our rivers and streams were being rapidly cleared out, and the feeling that a similar state of affairs was probably existing in the adjoining ocean. Measures were set on foot for restoration and protection as early as 1605, when Massachusetts appointed the first commission, and prior to 1870 this example was followed by several other states. Nearly all the states and territories now have similar organizations. The United States has distanced all its competitors, as was evinced by the manner in which the prizes were distributed at the recent fishery exhibitions in Berlin and London.
The fertilization of the fish egg is the simplest of processes, consisting, as every one knows, in simply pressing the ripe ova from the female fish into a shallow receptacle, and then squeezing out the milt of the male upon them. Formerly a great deal of water was placed in the pan, now the “dry method,” with only a little water, discovered by the Russian Vrasski, in 1854, is preferred. The eggs having been fertilized, the most difficult part of the task remains, namely, the care of the eggs until they are hatched, and the care of the young fry until they are able to care for themselves.
The apparatus employed is various in principle, to correspond to the physical peculiarities of the eggs. Fish culturists divide eggs into four classes, viz.: (1) heavy eggs, non-adhesive, whose specific gravity is so great that they will not float, such as the eggs of the salmon and trout; (2) heavy adhesive eggs, such as those of the herring, smelt and perch; (3) semi-buoyant eggs, like those of the shad and whitefish (Coregonus), and (4) buoyant eggs, like those of the cod and mackerel.
Heavy, non-adhesive eggs are placed in thin layers, either upon gravel, grilles of glass, or sheets of wire cloth, in receptacles through which a current of water is constantly passing. There are numerous forms of apparatus for eggs of this class, but the most effective are those in which a number of trays of wire cloth, just deep enough to carry single layers of eggs, are placed one upon the other in a box or jar, into which the water enters from below, passing out at the top.
Heavy, adhesive eggs, are received upon bunches of twigs, or frames of glass plates, to which they adhere, and which are placed in receptacles through which water is passing.
Semi-buoyant eggs, or those whose specific gravity is but slightly greater than that of the water, require altogether other treatment. They are necessarily placed together in large numbers, and to prevent their settling upon the bottom of the receptacle, it is necessary to introduce a gentle current from below. For many years these eggs could be hatched only in floating receptacles placed in a river, with wire cloth bottoms, placed at an angle, the motion of which was utilized to keep the eggs in suspension. Later, an arrangement of plunging buckets was invented, cylindrical receptacles with tops and bottoms of wire cloth, which were worked up and down at the surface of the water by machinery. The eggs in the cylinders were suspended in rows from beams which were worked up and down at the surface of the water by machinery. The eggs in the cylinders were thus kept constantly in motion. Finally, the device now most in favor was perfected; this is a receptacle, conical, or at least with a constricted termination, placed with its apex downward, through which passes from below a strong current, keeping the eggs constantly suspended and in motion. This form of apparatus, of which the McDonald and Clark hatching jars are the most perfect developments, may be worked in connection with any common hydrant.[A]
Floating eggs have been hatched only by means of rude contrivances for sustaining a lateral circular eddy, or swirl of water in the receptacle.
The use of refrigerators, to retard the development of the egg until such time as it is most convenient to take care of the fry, is now extensively practiced in the United States, and has been experimented upon in Germany.
In the discussion of fish-cultural economy, the distinction between private fish culture and public fish culture must be carefully observed, and it must also be borne in mind that by public fish culture, or modern fish culture, I mean fish culture carried on at public expense, and for the public good. Public fish culture, to be effective, must be conducted by men trained in scientific methods of thought and work.
The distinction between private and public fish culture must be carefully observed. The maintenance of ponds for carp, trout, and other domesticated species, is an industry to be classed with poultry raising and bee-keeping, and its interest to the political economist is but slight.
The proper function of fish culture is the stocking of the public waters with fish in which no individual can claim the right of property.
The comparative insignificance of the private fish-culture of Europe is, perhaps, what has led to the recent savage attack upon fish culture in general by Malmgren of the University of Helsingfors. European fish culturists have always operated with small numbers of eggs. The establishment of Sir James Maitland at Howieton, near Stirling, Scotland, is the finest and largest private establishment in the world, and yields a handsome addition to the revenues of its proprietor. A description of this hatchery is published as one of the conference papers of the International Fisheries Exhibition, and that the distinction between public and private enterprise in fish-culture may be understood, it should be compared with the following statement by Mr. Livingston Stone, the superintendent of one of the seventeen hatcheries supported by the United States Fish Commission—that on the McCloud River in California.
“In the eleven years since the salmon-breeding station has been in operation, 67,000,000 eggs have been taken, most of which have been distributed in the various states of the Union. Several million, however, have been sent to foreign countries, including Germany, France, Great Britain, Denmark, Russia, Belgium, Holland, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the Sandwich Islands.
“About 15,000,000 have been hatched at the station, and the young placed in the McCloud and other tributaries of the Sacramento River. So great have been the benefits of this restocking of the Sacramento, that the statistics of the salmon fisheries on the Sacramento show that the annual salmon catch of the river has increased 5,000,000 pounds each year during the last few years.”
In the two government hatcheries at Alpena and Northville, Michigan, in the winter of 1883-84, there were produced over 100,000,000 eggs of whitefish, Coregonus clupeiformis, and the total number of young fish to be placed in the Great Lakes this year by these and the various state hatcheries will exceed 225,000,000. The fishermen of the Great Lakes admit that but for public fish culture half of them would be obliged to abandon their calling.
Instances of great improvement might be cited in connection with nearly every shad river in the United States. In the Potomac alone the annual yield has been brought up by the operations of the Fish Commission from 668,000 pounds in 1877 to an average of more than 1,600,000 in recent years.
In 1882, carp bred in the Fish Commission ponds in Washington was distributed in lots of from 20 to 10,000 applicants in every State and Territory, at an average distance of more than 900 miles, the total mileage of the shipments being about 9,000,000 miles, and the actual distance traversed by the transportation cars 34,000 miles.
Public fish culture is only useful when conducted upon a gigantic scale—its statistical tables must be footed up in hundreds of millions. To count young fish by the thousand is the task of the private propagator. The use of steamships and steam machinery, the construction of refrigerating transportation cars, and the maintenance of permanent hatching stations, seventeen in number, in different parts of the continent, are forms of activity only attainable by government aid.
Equally unattainable by private effort would be the enormous experiments in transplanting and acclimating fish in new waters—California salmon in the rivers of the east; landlocked salmon and smelt in the lakes of the interior; the planting of shad in California and the Mississippi valley; and German carp in thirty thousand separate bodies of water distributed through all the states and territories of the Union. The two last named experiments, carried out within a period of three years, have met with success beyond doubt, and are of the greatest importance to the country; the others have been more or less successful, though their results are not yet fully realized.
It has been demonstrated, however, beyond possibility of challenge, that the great river fisheries of the United States, which produced in 1880 48,000,000 pounds of alewives, 18,000,000 pounds of shad, 52,000,000 pounds of salmon, besides bass, sturgeon, and smelt, and worth “at first hands” between $4,000,000 and $6,000,000, are entirely under control of the fish culturist to sustain or destroy, and are capable of immense extension.
Having now attempted to define the field of modern fish culture, and to show what it has already accomplished, it remains to be said what appear to be its legitimate aims and limitations. Its aims, as I understand them, are:
1. To arrive at a thorough knowledge of the life history from beginning to end, of every species of economic value; the histories of the animals and plants upon which they feed or upon which their food is nourished; the histories of their enemies and friends, and the friends and foes of their enemies and friends, as well as the currents, temperature and other physical phenomena of the waters in relation to migration, reproduction and growth.
2. To apply this knowledge in such a practical manner that every form of fish shall be at least as thoroughly under control as are now the salmon, the shad, the alewives, the carp, and the whitefish.
Its limitations are precisely those of scientific agriculture and animal rearing, since, although certain physical conditions may constantly intervene to thwart man’s efforts in any given direction, it is quite within the bounds of reasonable expectation to be able to understand what these are and how their effects are produced.
An important consideration concerning the limitations of fish culture must always be kept in mind in weighing the arguments for and against its success. It is simply this: that effort toward the acclimation of fishes in new waters is not fish culture, but is simply one of the necessary experiments upon which fish culture may be based. The introduction of carp from Germany was not fish culture, it was an experiment: the experiment has succeeded, and fish culture is now one of its results. The introduction of California salmon to the Atlantic slope was an experiment. It has not succeeded. Its failure has nothing to do with the success of fish culture. If any one wants to see successful fish culture in connection with this fish, let him go to the Sacramento River. The introduction of shad to the Pacific coast was an experiment. It succeeded. Shad culture can now be carried on without fear of failure by the fish commissions of the Pacific states.
Shad culture is an established success, so is whitefish culture in the Great Lakes. The experiments with cod and Spanish mackerel were not fish culture, though there is reason to hope that they may yet lead up to it.
Public fish culture, then, scarcely exists except in America, though in Europe many eminent men of science appreciate its importance and are striving to educate the people to the point of supporting it. Germany is at present in the vanguard, and the powerful Deutscher Fischerei Verein is doing all in its power to advance the interests of fish culture.
[A] Trans. Amer. Fish Cultural Association, 1883.
If we could take all things as ordained and for the best, we should indeed be conquerors of the world. Nothing has ever happened to man so bad as he has anticipated it to be. If we should be quiet under our troubles they would not be so painful to bear. I can not separate the existence of a God from his pre-ordination and direction of all things, good and evil; the latter he permits, but still controls.—Chinese Gordon.