REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED 2-INCH LIMIT.

Argument might be made in favor of a higher size limit as being still

more favorable to the preservation of the mussels, but it is sufficient

to say that the economic conditions would not justify a higher limit.

At 2 inches a sufficiently severe restriction is placed upon the

fishery, and to go further would be practically to prohibit the pursuit

of shelling in so many localities that excessive hardship would be

caused.

As consideration thus far has been given almost exclusively to the

niggerhead shell, the question may well be raised, Will the same limit

apply to other species of shells? The minimum size of 2 inches

suggested can be taken as an absolute minimum, since there is no

species of any importance for which it would be too high. This minimum

would not, however, give the same degree of protection to the larger

forms, such as the washboard, the bluepoint, and the mucket. Should a

minimum size be fixed with particular reference to any one of these

varieties, it would necessarily be a good deal higher.

In the present paper recommendation is made for this one-size limit

alone, for the following reasons:

1. All conditions considered, it is the most appropriate limit that

could be designated for the niggerhead mussel, which is at present the

most important species of wide distribution, and which is, furthermore,

the species most liable to rapid extermination. This and species

closely like it, as the pigtoe, the pimple-back, and the maple-leaf,

are chiefly those that are now being taken in the very small sizes.

2. The same size applies equally well to the related species just

mentioned, as well as to the "hickory-nut," or "Missouri niggerhead,"

and the "butterfly."

3. The larger species, as the "washboard," "bluepoint," and "mucket,"

are generally so evidently valueless in the small sizes that shellers

do not take them. At least it is not yet of observation that particular

injury is being done to these species in this way.

4. To insure the least trouble of enforcement of the law, it is

necessary that a minimum size be set, below which no shells of any

species may be retained. There are many different species of commercial

mussels, and some of them so intergrade as to make exact determination

a nice matter in some cases. Distinct size limits for the different

species would introduce peculiar difficulties into the practical

workings of enforcement; it would be more troublesome to the sheller to

observe the law voluntarily, and loopholes for evasion would more

easily be found by the offender of wrong intent.

Should conditions in certain States or streams subsequently require a

higher limit for particular kinds of shells, a supplemental limit may

be fixed for designated species; but this could be done without

affecting the application of a 2-inch limit as an absolute or universal

limit below which no shells of any species could be lawfully taken. It

is desirable that few different limits should ever be used, and it

seems expedient to have but one size limit until the first legislation

shall have been tried out.

The Protection of Fresh-Water Mussels · 第 24 / 32 题