The Menhaden Barons
Editor Forest and Stream:
Occasions frequently occur to cause your readers to feel thankful for the existence of a paper that takes so timely, outspoken and manly a stand in behalf of our fish and game interests, as does FOREST AND STREAM, a paper whose high tone, intelligent conduct and progressive policy enhance its value to its subscribers and reader more and more. Not given to ill-advised and immature expressions on subjects within its sphere, its words of counsel, advice or warning merit and in fact receive the fullest consideration.
In the brief space of fifteen lines in an editorial column of the issue of the 14th inst., you have given a concise and forcible expression of views on the iniquities of the menhaden pirates in connection with their descent on the Maine Legislature.
Think for a moment! Think of the great State of Maine taking a backward step and receding from her wise course with regard to her shore fisheries and the use of the seine in the interdicted limit. Such action would be suicidal to her fishing interests. May she never subject herself to such a self-inflicted blow.
Not her own citizens alone, but those of her sister States, look with admiration and satisfaction on the course of the State of Maine in the enactment and enforcement of wholesome laws for the preservation of fish and game. Her example is worthy of emulation, and is being followed. Maine has done much and much more remains for her to do in strengthening and providing for the more thorough working of existing laws.
The three-mile limit law now in force in that State was adopted to check the exhaustion of the fish supply which was rapidly going on in her coast waters ten years since. About the same time the menhaden, from known causes, ceased to visit her shores, consequently the seiners had no incentive to violate that law. The season of 1888, however, witnessed the return of the menhaden in great numbers. It was then that these violators of law, when opportunity offered, operated in defiance of the statute.
Commenting on these violations of law the Kennebec Journal remarks that "a member of the U. S. Fishery Commission says he shall have all the State laws removed which regulate seining on the coast." A correspondent in a recent issue of this paper states: "the great Mr. Maddocks, I learn, is going to have the law repealed." Will he do it? He surely underestimates the weight of public opinion in that State and misjudges the temper of the people.
I am informed that Mr. Maddocks operated an oil factory at Boothbay last season, and that he appeared against the State as a witness in a case involving a violation of the law. This is certainly an anomalous position for an employee of the Government to occupy.
Maine knows too well where her best interests lie, to snuff out the light kindled by experience and grope again in darkness. Standing in the front rank as a preserver of fish and game, continually legislating in those interest, having thoroughly competent and active Commissioners, she will not now make a retrogressive move. She receives too much benefit pecuniarily and enjoys too much prosperity directly from her supply of fish and game, to act at the dictation and behest of menhaden seiners.
Massachusetts, in the interest of her shore fisheries, has a law for the protection of Buzzard's Bay. Steamers from Rhode Island went there on several occasions last summer and seined, contrary to law, but were finally forced to retire from the bay. The State of New York, by a recent law, protects Raritan Bay. New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware have taken joint action for the protection of Delaware River. The good work of protection is contagious and is becoming popular. Rhode Island cannot be classed with the States mentioned. She is an unfortunate example of what menhaden pirates can accomplish in the process of extermination. She has able and willing commissioners, but has practically no laws relating to salt-water fisheries. She once was in the lead with famous fishing grounds, as the departed renown of Point Judith, Narragansett, Barrington, Newport, Seaconnet, West Island and Block Island attest. Now her waters are poverty-stricken and depleted. Yet the oil factories at Portsmouth, with their foreign labor, gather in the dollars for their owners, who laugh in their sleeves at anything beyond the chimes of an oil barrel.
The Church steamers of Rhode Island caught 95,000,000 of menhaden the last season after July 1. This almost incredible number produced, in round numbers, 500,000 gallons of oil and more than 3,000 tons of scrap. The latter commodity more than pays running expenses, and to its value is to be added the snug sum realized from the sale of 10,000 bbls. of oil. The Church influence has dominated in Rhode Island for years, and the fishing grounds have been almost wholly ruined. The monetary loss to the State by the decline of the fisheries is many times in excess of any benefit derived from the Portsmouth factories with their imported labor. The menhaden men are represented in the State Legislature by Capt. Nat Church. As an evidence of the oilmen's influence, this is what an admirer says in substance of Capt. Daniel T. Church
"He has fought over legislation on the fish question year after year and always came out ahead. He has won pitched battles in the Massachusetts Assembly and in the courts of Virginia and other states."
In the New York Legislature Capt. Hawkins represents the menhaden men. He vigorously opposed the passage of the Raritan Bay bill and characterized it as infamous.
In the days when sailing gear was the only appliance for the pursuit of menhaden, but little, if any, opposition to the avocation existed. It is the only since the skinning process became possible and prevalent by the exchange of sail for steam power that opposition has developed and it will continue with accelerated power till the menhaden men are subjected to the requirements of just and proper State or national laws.
The menhaden men are as but one to a hundred of those unorganized thousands who pursue for pleasure or profit the food fishes of the Atlantic coast. These men have invested their millions voluntarily in an enterprise once circumscribed by no law, and desolate waters have been the result. Now that laws are slowly and surely crystallizing in the vital interest of the whole people, they squeal and attempt to undo the little that has been done for the general good. In short they violate law and boast that they will effect a repeal.
No law along the line of this article exists or is in contemplation, a syllable of which is other than absolutely just to them and the people. Their rights are not paramount, and their business, when properly controlled, will go on the same as now, bringing gold to their coffers (which is apparently all they comprehend), notwithstanding their pretended fears to the contrary.
No interest whatever can suffer by their subjection to law. The net and twine factories will still find a growing demand for their productions. The tackle dealers will flourish as never before, and the millions in money dispensed by summer sojourners will be doubled. This is not all. There are thousands of deserving fishermen along the entire stretch of coast that would be immensely benefitted by the revival of their once prosperous calling. Why? Because the conditions known to be the best for the preservation and the perpetuation of the food fish supply would be restored to their natural state.
No, Mr. Editor, it is too late in the day for backward steps where such important economic questions are involved. The State of Maine rather than repeal the law referred to, will, if she continues in wisdom, fortify it for her citizens and the strangers yearly attracted within her borders. She, as well as every other State bordering on the Alantic north of Hatteras, should be alive to the fact that those who pursue menhaden for their oil, and those whose dollars are invested in such enterprise, are not safe advisers on the food fish question. They are not vigorous and whole-souled laborers for the restoration and perpetuation of the food fish supply.
At the yearly dinner of the Massachusetts Fish and Game league in Boston last month, Congressman-elect Randall advised the holding of conventions in each State, and then a general convention in the interest of fish laws for the Atlantic coast. Such action would undoubtedly result in much good.
Fish propagation by nation, State or individual must be supplemented by protection to secure the best results. Propagation and protection are properly inseparable. The three-mile limit, as applied to menhaden seiners, supplemented by a close season, will pave the way for the revival of the shore fisheries.
The autocratic and dictatorial methods in vogue with the menhaden men render it imperative that they be legislated in reasonable bounds. They must be made to respect the fact that menhaden are in existence for other and more important uses than that of enriching them at the expense of the people.
If the pursuit of menhaden as conducted with steamers was devoid of harm, the outcry against it would not be voiced. It is by reason of this outcry, wide-spread and determined, that it must be patent to every one that unrestrained seining is productive of ill effects. The warfare is waged to restore that which has been taken from the people by the menhaden barons.
In keeping then, with the spirit of the age, when economic questions and natural resources and possibilities are being investigated and carefully considered, let Maine add to her present law if need be; let Massachusetts do the same and let Rhode Island re-assert herself, throw off the domination of the menhaden barons and place her waters under such wise laws as shall restore their former preeminence.
Uniform laws along the entire coast are much to be desired; these, reenforced by a general law, are confidently looked for in the near future.
ARTHUR MARTIN.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 16.