In addition, Dr. W. C. Kendall, assistant, Bureau of Fisheries, made observations on the flounder otter-trawl fishery of Cape Cod in November and December, 1912; and Mr. E. C. Johnston, assistant, Bureau of Fisheries, investigated the paranzella-net fishery of San Francisco in September and October, 1912.

With the exception of Mr. Terry, who made but one trip, all of these observers had knowledge of the fisheries, although, with the exception of Mr. Burrows, who had fished on a line trawler out of Gloucester 15 years or more previously, none was or had been engaged in either the trawl-line or otter-trawl fisheries. An effort was made to obtain men capable of understanding and reporting on the matters which came under observation and at the same time as free as possible from prejudice by reason of their vocations and previous associations.

During June, 1912, the observers made three trips on otter-trawl vessels and recorded the data of 101 hauls of the nets. From January to December, 1913, 61 trips were made and 1,532 hauls were observed on otter trawlers; and from June to December, 1913, 17 trips and 90 sets of trawl lines were observed on schooners.

The field investigations were brought to a close in December, 1913, and on February 5, 1914, the Commissioner of Fisheries named for the consideration of the data and the preparation of a report a committee of three, of which Mr. A. B. Alexander was chairman and Messrs. H. F. Moore, assistant in charge of scientific inquiry, and W. C. Kendall, scientific assistant, were members. The orders under which this committee proceeded were as follows:

You are hereby designated a committee charged with the duties hereinafter indicated in connection with the investigation of the American trawlnet fishery, as directed by Congress in the sundry civil appropriation act for 1913, as follows:

"To enable the Commissioner of Fisheries to investigate the method of fish. ing known as beam or otter trawling and to report to Congress whether or not this method of fishing is destructive to the species or is otherwise harmful or undesirable, $5,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary."

Your inquiries will involve, first, a thorough consideration and interpretation of the data collected by the Bureau of Fisheries regarding the steam trawlnet fishery of Boston and New York, the boat trawlnet fishery of New England, the paranzella fishery of California, and other similar fisheries in various parts of the United States, special attention being given to the detailed records obtained by agents of the Bureau while stationed continuously on trawling vessels during the years 1912 and 1913.

For comparative purposes, you will naturally give consideration to the available data showing the present extent and general condition of the trawl fishery in Europe, and the steps that have been taken by the various European countries to regulate, restrict, or abolish the fishery; and the recent history of the fishery in Japan and Canada, and the action of those countries in regulating or abolishing the trawlnet fishery.

It is not my purpose in any way to influence the form and scope of your report, but I venture to suggest that your conclusions cover the following topics, which, with others, will doubtless occur to you:

(a) The general effects of the fishery on the permanency of the fish supply, and a comparison of the relative effects of the trawlnet and other forms of apparatus used in the same waters.

(b) The nature and extent of the destruction of young food fishes.

(c) The destruction or waste of edible fishes that have no present market value.

(d) The extent to which the trawlnet fishery of the United States has contributed to the food supply in fishes, not generally taken with other apparatus. (e) Definite instances, supported by evidence, in which the scarcity of any kinds of fish on given grounds may be attributable to the trawlnet fishery. (f) Interference of the trawlnet fishery with other fisheries.

(9) The necessity for international agreement with Canada, Newfoundland, France, and other countries in order to make effective any restrictive or prohibitory measures that may be determined to be desirable.

It is believed that in drawing your conclusions and making your recommendations you will be guided solely by the evidence afforded by the Bureau's investigations and by the action of other countries having prolonged experience with this method of fishery.

It is desired that the preparation of your report be expedited as much as possible, and that it be handed to me for administrative approval and submitted to Congress not later than April 15, 1914.

The report speaks for itself and no review thereof by me is necessary. I will simply refer to the chapters containing the conclusions and recommendations, and submit them as the official opinion of the bureau. While I was entirely unaware of the results of the inquiries until the completion and signing of the report, I have carefully reviewed the work of the committee, commend their labors, and indorse their findings as justified by the evidence.

Respectfully,

H. M. SMITH, Commissioner.

LETTER FROM BUREAU COMMITTEE TO THE COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES TRANSMITTING REPORT ON THE OTTER-TRAWL FISHERY.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,

The COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES:

BUREAU OF FISHERIES, Washington, January 6, 1915.

We are transmitting herewith our report on the effects of otter trawling on the fisheries, in accordance with your order of February 5, 1914, constituting us a comm for the consideration of the subject. We have been unable to comply with your injunction in regard to the time at which the report was to be rendered for the reason that we speedily found that the data acquired by the field investigations in 1913 were inadequate as a basis for conclusions which would be either just to all interests or commensurate with the importance of the subject. In order to reach any useful conclusions whatever it has been necessary to consider the available facts presented by the history of otter trawling in Great Britain, and we decided that for this purpose it was advisable to go to the original official sources of information rather than to utilize the conclusions arrived at by the various commissions which have investigated the subject, and this has consumed much time, particularly as the inquiry had to be conducted without interference with many other duties.

In reviewing the causes, conclusions, and results of various investigations of trawling in Great Britain, it must be borne in mind that the conditions of the sea fisheries there have always been and still are very different from those in this country. There trawling has undergone a progressive evolution, here it has just begun in a small way at the modern end of that evolution, both in the development of the engines of that method of fishing and the fishes sought.

Therefore the early considerations of the subject of trawling have only a general, if any, application to the question in this country, as. the conditions, until recent date at least, are incomparable and a comparison, to be of much value, must be of synchronous and analogous conditions What was concluded by the Royal Commission of 1863, or any other commission or select committee, or the fact that 40 years ago or at any time prior to the advent of steam trawling, and particularly the otter trawl, a great scientist or other authority made