diff options
Diffstat (limited to '43177.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 43177.txt | 1545 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 1545 deletions
diff --git a/43177.txt b/43177.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 5c96bae..0000000 --- a/43177.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,1545 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's The Protection of Fresh-Water Mussels, by R. E. Coker - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - - -Title: The Protection of Fresh-Water Mussels - -Author: R. E. Coker - -Release Date: July 10, 2013 [EBook #43177] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ASCII - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROTECTION OF FRESH-WATER MUSSELS *** - - - - -Produced by Sandra Eder and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - - - - - -Transcriber's note: - -Italics is represented with underscore _, bold with the equal sign = -and small caps with ALL CAPS. Everything (including inconsistent -hyphenation and spelling) has been retained as printed, unless stated -below: - -p. 7: "in the Misippi River" Misippi changed to Mississippi. - -Some words were broken up due to line endings. As they only occur once -in the book it's not absolutely clear if they should be hyphenated or -not. This concerns the words: short-sightedness, sand-shell, -head-waters. - - - - - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE - BUREAU OF FISHERIES - - HUGH M. SMITH, Commissioner - - THE PROTECTION OF FRESH-WATER - MUSSELS - - =By R. E.COKER, Ph. D.= - - _Director U. S. Biological Station - Fairport, Iowa_ - - Bureau of Fisheries Document No. 793 - - WASHINGTON - GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE - 1914 - - - - - THE PROTECTION OF FRESH-WATER MUSSELS - - =By R. E. COKER, Ph. D.= - - _Director U. S. Biological Station, Fairport, Iowa_ - - Bureau of Fisheries Document No. 793 - - - - - CONTENTS. - - - Page - Present conditions 3 - The mussel industry 3 - Depletion of the resources 4 - The interests of the community 5 - Artificial propagation of mussels by the Government 7 - Establishment of propagation 7 - Results dependent upon protection 8 - Protection 9 - Essential considerations for effective legislation 9 - Examination of protective measures 10 - Two measures for immediate application 10 - Measures not suited to existing conditions 10 - Size limit--necessity and application 12 - Exhaustive nature of the fishery 12 - Waste illustrated 13 - Size limit in relation to economy 15 - Reasons for the proposed 2-inch limit 16 - Details essential to effective legislation 17 - Closed regions--necessity and application 18 - Injury to spawning mussels and to young 18 - Considerations determining size of closed regions 19 - Practicable division of river systems illustrated 20 - Procedure for establishing closed regions 21 - Enforcement of the law 22 - Summary of recommended legislation 23 - - - - - THE PROTECTION OF FRESH-WATER MUSSELS. - - - By R. E. COKER, Ph. D., - - _Director United States Biological Station, Fairport, Iowa._ - - - - - PRESENT CONDITIONS. - - - THE MUSSEL INDUSTRY. - -The history of the fresh-water mussel industry gives illustration of -the promptness with which an American industry may be developed once -the pathway is found. Undertaken in a small way scarcely more than a -score of years ago, the manufacture of pearl buttons began almost -immediately to assume the proportions of an important national -industry. As early as 1898, when the enterprise was only 6 years old, -there were about 50 factories in more than a dozen towns along the -Mississippi. With improved machinery and methods further expansion -occurred, until within a few years the output approximated 30 million -gross of buttons, with a value of many millions of dollars. The growth -of the industry has continued to the present time, but exact figures -will not be available until the Bureau has completed a statistical -survey now in progress. - -Not less important has been a resultant economic change, or -modification of custom, that has affected practically every person in -the country. Where marine pearl was in rare use, fresh-water pearl, -with its quality and price, came to fill a universal requirement. In -one decade pearl buttons were high in price, used only upon the better -clothing, and commonly saved when clothing was discarded, while in the -most general use were buttons of metal or agate or wood, which rusted -or broke or warped. In the next decade good pearl buttons, neat and -durable, were available to everybody and used upon the widest variety -of clothing. A former luxury had become a common necessity. - -Coincident with the rise of the manufacturing industry, there developed -an important and widespread fishery, directly employing thousands of -persons and indirectly affecting persons and communities of varied -occupation. Commencing on the Mississippi River, the fishery gradually -spread from stream to stream, passing from depleted territory to new -and rich fields, until it embraced practically the entire Mississippi -Basin and a portion of the Great Lakes drainage, from Minnesota to -Louisiana, north and south, and from Ohio, West Virginia, and Tennessee -on the east to Arkansas, Kansas, and South Dakota on the west. - - - DEPLETION OF THE RESOURCES. - -Extension of territory could not be continued indefinitely. While up to -the present time the industry has not failed to obtain shells in -quantity sufficient for the market demands, it has become perfectly -clear that the perpetuation of the industry as one producing a staple -product that is both good and within reach of all people depends upon -successful propagation and effective protection. The supply is now -maintained by regularly invading new territory (and it is scarcely -possible to go farther in this direction), by seeking out the smaller -tributaries of the mussel streams, which could not formerly have been -worked with profit, and in some measure by the devising of methods that -are more effective in capture of mussels. Notwithstanding these -developments, all of which indeed conduce to more exhaustive fishery, -an increasing proportion of very small shells is being taken, the -bottoms are being more thoroughly cleaned, and the price of shell has -advanced to a relatively high figure. - -A high price for shell has, of course, its advantages. It is good for -the fishermen, provided they can find the shells, and it stimulates the -manufacturers to eliminate waste and to use the most economical -methods. On the other hand, if unbalanced by protective restrictions, a -continued rise in price is of disastrous consequence. It impoverishes -the beds by driving the fishermen to the most exhaustive manner of -fishing; even the very smallest shells that can be captured, which -should never be removed from the beds, are taken and marketed, and -this, unfortunately, is the actual case at the present time. (See pl. -I.) Ultimately the higher price of shell becomes an element in the -price of the finished product and is paid by the public at large -without corresponding advantage to a single person connected with the -industry. - -Let it be repeated that a high price to the fishermen is desirable, but -in the present condition they reap no benefit. A higher price for a -disproportionately smaller product brings no added profit. None are so -directly interested in the conservation of mussels as the fishermen -themselves. - -Of what advantage is it to the fishermen of the Wabash River, or to the -State of Indiana, that shells are now more valuable, when a river that -once supported a really important shelling industry is now practically -depleted? Wherein is the benefit to Illinois, when only one fisherman -can engage in shelling to-day where six worked with profit five years -ago? What profit will Arkansas find, when its rivers are now the scene -of the most exhaustive mussel fishery ever known and the future is -being robbed by the removal of infant shells that are shipped to the -markets to be subsequently thrown into the discard by the manufacturers -as too small for any useful purpose? - - - THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY. - -An earlier general interest in the subject would have been awakened had -there been a better knowledge of the importance of shelling industries -to the communities at large. As an illustration, the case of Madison, -Ark., may be mentioned. The town itself has a population of about 300 -and is supported by lumbering, farming, and fishing industries. During -each of the past two years shells and pearls have been marketed at this -place to the value of about $20,000. This was a crop that could be -counted upon regardless of weather conditions during the season, and it -constituted a substantial element in the income of the community at -large. Can this income be counted upon in the future? A dozen years ago -fishermen made their wages when shells brought $4 per ton, and they can -do no better at this time, when they receive $23 per ton. In 1913 they -took 200 to 300 pounds per day, where originally they made daily hauls -of 1,000 to 1,800 pounds. The shells are now, it appears, about -one-sixth as abundant as they were a dozen years ago. This is a rapid -rate of depletion, and it is evident that the future can have little to -offer unless something is done to insure the self-perpetuation of the -mussel beds. - -The town of Black Rock, Ark., which has a population of about 1,000, -offers an illustration where both fishing and manufacture are involved. -It is estimated that approximately $50,000 is brought into the town and -the territory about it each year, of which by far the greater amount is -paid out in the town of Black Rock itself. What does the future hold -for this place? Reliable information shows that while a few years ago a -sheller could take 1,200 pounds or more per day from the Black River at -Black Rock, the daily catches now run from 100 to 200 pounds. Although -shells are bringing about $20 per ton, there is scarcely a daily wage -to be made, and as a consequence the shell fishery immediately about -Black Rock is almost negligible. The shelling is now prosecuted -principally above Black Rock, in the upper waters and tributaries of -the Black River, as about Pocahontas and elsewhere. The process of -depletion is unchecked and the condition is clearly such as to awaken -the enlightened sentiment of the community and the State at large to -support measures that will insure permanent life and prosperity to the -industry. Here is a business that yields a relatively fixed return in -comparison with agricultural industries, which are so generally -affected, favorably or unfavorably, by the vicissitudes of weather -conditions. - -It is of much more immediate concern to the community at large than it -is to the purchasers of shells or to the shellers themselves that the -resources of a particular region should be conserved. It is a -comparatively simple matter for the manufacturer to strip his plant and -to remove his machinery to another locality with undepleted resources; -it is an easy thing for the sheller, with his scant equipment in a -house boat, to float down the river, looking to find another temporary -home where his labors may be more profitable. It is the interest of the -community that is threatened. The loss of a substantial industry -affects the profits and the welfare of innumerable persons who may have -known little of their indirect interest in a business in which they did -not immediately participate. The communities most immediately affected -are those of the river towns which, as a general rule, are too limited -in their sources of fixed income. - -From the standpoint of community economy, an unfortunate feature of the -mussel fishery, as it has been pursued up to this time, has been its -nomadic character. The policy everywhere has been to clean up the beds -of a locality, or of a stream as a whole, and then to move to new -regions. Temporary cutting plants, or "factories," have frequently been -established in the vicinity of active shelling, to move subsequently as -the local fishery passed away. Only the larger and more firmly -established branch plants of the principal factories have maintained a -fixed location. - -It will be brought out later in this report that it does not appear -possible to insure the best condition of the mussel beds, except by -some plan of rotation; but it would be desirable and favorable to the -interest of all for the mussel fishery to be a permanent and dependable -feature of the industrial life of the broader communities, if not of -particular restricted localities. - -The perpetuation of the mussel resources may well receive the best -consideration of every State concerned and of the National Government -as well. It affects the welfare of thousands of shellers, of hundreds -of river towns over the broad Mississippi-Missouri Basin, of -manufacturers and laborers, east and west, and, it might be said, of -every user of pearl buttons, which comprises practically the entire -population of the country. - -The Government and the States can accomplish the desired object by two -principal means--artificial propagation and legislative protection. It -is the province of the present paper to deal primarily with the -subject of protective measures, but it will be advisable to give first -an abbreviated account of the conditions and possibilities of -artificial propagation, especially as the results of propagation will -be greater or less according to the degree of protection extended to -the young mussels. - - - - - ARTIFICIAL PROPAGATION OF MUSSELS BY THE GOVERNMENT - - - ESTABLISHMENT OF PROPAGATION. - -The Bureau of Fisheries has always maintained an active interest in the -development of the fresh-water mussel fishery of America, which, in its -importance and breadth of territory, is entirely unique in the world. -As early as 1897 and 1898, the shell fishery being then only 4 or 5 -years old, the Fish Commission undertook investigations relating to the -various phases of the industry, and several reports were published -dealing with the natural history of mussels, the shell and pearl -fisheries, and the button industry. In a general report on the subject -Dr. Hugh M. Smith then recommended measures for the protection of -mussels. No action followed, and in consequence the scene of the most -important fisheries has greatly shifted since that time. - -Some years later there began a special investigation of the -reproduction of mussels, which resulted in the methods of artificial -propagation as developed by Prof. Lefevre and Prof. Curtis, of the -University of Missouri, in association with the Bureau. The Government -then established the Fairport Biological Station to engage in the -propagation of mussels and the studies of mussel problems, besides -exercising wider activities in fishery investigations. For a number of -years field investigations relating to the distribution, habits, and -conditions of life of the mussels have been prosecuted by the staff and -associates of the Bureau throughout the Mississippi Basin. - -For the first two years at the Fairport station mussel propagation was -carried on in an experimental way, but beginning with 1912 the -practical operations have been conducted upon as large a scale and over -as wide a territory as the available resources permitted. During the -past two years mussels have been propagated chiefly in the Mississippi -River from Lake Pepin, in Minnesota, to New Boston, Ill.; in the Wabash -River in Indiana, and in the White and Black Rivers of Arkansas. During -the year ended June 30, 1913, about 150,000,000 glochidia, or young -mussels, were put out, and in the first half of the present fiscal year -that number is fully equaled. Such figures appear large. It is not -difficult by the methods of propagation to handle considerable numbers -of glochidia; indeed, it is necessary to work on an ample scale, for in -mussel propagation, as in most forms of fish culture, what we can now -do is to aid the young over the most critical period in their life -history, after which they must be left to continue the struggle for -existence by their own efforts. - -We therefore plan to work in such a way that, even with the liberal -discount that nature will surely apply to our returns, there may be -left a real measure of benefit gained without undue cost. Many of the -young will be lost from falling upon unsuitable bottoms and from many -other unfavorable conditions, such as confront every young mussel in -nature with more or less frequency. We would like to remove all of the -unfortunate conditions productive of loss, both to the mussels that we -put out and to those that are propagated entirely by natural means; but -this, of course, is not possible. There are, however, artificial -conditions which do injury to the younger mussels, and it is both -desirable and practicable to prevent such damage as far as can be done -reasonably. - - - RESULTS DEPENDENT UPON PROTECTION. - -In the regular fishery for mussels the beds are continually dragged -over with rakes, tongs, crowfoot hooks, or dredges. It is inevitable -that the young mussels will suffer to some extent from this process. It -is quite unnecessary, however, for the "infant" mussels, many of them -too small for any use at all and many more too small for any economical -or proper use in manufacture, to be entirely removed from the beds. -Mussels are thus uselessly destroyed that might be left to grow to a -size at which they would be both commercially valuable and properly -usable; meantime, too, they might take their natural part in the -reproduction of the species. - -Furthermore, it would be desirable to leave portions of the rivers -entirely undisturbed by the operations of shelling during periods of -some years. This would accomplish a double object--it would leave the -best conditions for the natural reproduction of the remnant of the old -stock and for the growth of the young mussels and at the same time it -would create a series of reserves in which artificial propagation could -be carried on with the best conditions for maximum results. In such -closed regions the young mussels would have to contend against only the -normal unfavorable conditions which all mussels have ever had to -withstand, without an added toll of destruction being taken by the -direct and indirect effect of the operations of men. - -The simple "closing" of a depleted region, if the exhaustion has not -proceeded too far, may be expected to lead to sure betterment, and even -in time, if the closure were for a very long period, to a restoration -of the former condition when mussels were so richly abundant. It will -be advisable, however, to supplement natural processes by the methods -of artificial propagation in order that the replenishment may be -hastened and a greater result gained in a shorter time. We have to -contemplate that the beds that may be closed will have to be reopened -after a definite period, for the fishermen can not afford to work -indefinitely on restricted and depleted areas, and the supply of -available shells must be maintained. A proper solution as fair as -possible to all will be found in a plan of rotation which will give -rest periods to the different portions of a river in succession. Let -this measure be supplemented as far as may be by Government or State -propagation of mussels in the resting regions. - -It is apparent that artificial propagation and protection are -intimately related. Restrictive measures alone will yield benefits, but -these will be greater if the protection is followed up by well-directed -propagation. Artificial propagation pursued independently may be -expected to bring results, but the advantages will be considerably -diminished if no steps are taken to lessen the unnecessary destruction -of the young mussels thus given a start upon life. - - - - - PROTECTION. - - - ESSENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR EFFECTIVE LEGISLATION. - -Although at least 20 States participate directly in the mussel fishery -for the shell trade, only 2 or 3 of these have taken any action of any -kind for the protection of the resources. In some others measures have -been proposed at various times, but without receiving favorable -consideration by the legislative bodies. Indeed, it is probably well -that this is the case, in view of the fact that there has been no -general presentation of the case from all sides to aid in a just -consideration of the matter. The Bureau is prompted to make this report -in the hope that suggestions based upon a long-continued investigation -of the shelling industry in all its phases may be of material aid to -the responsible bodies concerned in the determination of how best to -perpetuate the mussel resources, giving due regard to the local -conditions involved. - -Any legislation to be most effective must fulfill certain general -conditions. It must be based upon just consideration of the welfare of -all classes legitimately interested in the business, including -shellers, buyers, manufacturers, and the public generally. This is -important, not only because fairness demands it but because it is -manifestly impracticable to enforce a law which is framed in disregard -of economic requirements. A law that makes possible the creation of a -monopoly, or one that drives the buyers and manufacturers from the -territory, or that sacrifices the good of the industry to revenue -production to the State, would be so manifestly unsound that further -comment seems unnecessary. - -Nevertheless, the element of sacrifice can not be entirely eliminated. -In this case, as in others, ultimate benefits can scarcely be obtained -without some temporary sacrifice, although it should be aimed to make -the immediate loss felt as little as possible. It is the unwillingness -of individuals to make voluntary sacrifices, independently, for the -good of the mussel beds that makes legislation of any kind necessary. -There is a demand for legislative action only because, in the end, the -welfare of all parties concerned is dependent upon the promotion of -abundant growth of mussels. - -Finally an eminently desirable feature of any legislation is that it -shall be so simple, plain, and undebatable as to minimize the -difficulty of enforcement. Coupled with this there must be not only an -effective penalty but machinery of enforcement that will work simply -and certainly. - -The measures to be proposed will be considered in the light of these -requirements, together with the basic conditions offered by the natural -history and the conditions of life and reproduction of the mussels. - - - EXAMINATION OF PROTECTIVE MEASURES. - - - TWO MEASURES FOR IMMEDIATE APPLICATION. - -As appears from the remarks hitherto made, the restrictions which are -immediately required for the preservation of the shell resources are-- - -(1) The imposition of size limits for the protection of young mussels. - -(2) The adoption of a plan of rotation of closed regions, whereby the -mussel beds may be given the best opportunity for propagation and -growth. - -We do not at this time advocate any other limitations, and it will be -attempted to show that these are so simple to apply and so promising of -effectual conservation that it is strongly advisable not to complicate -the situation by a needless multiplicity of restrictions. These two -measures will be fully discussed in subsequent sections of the paper. - - - MEASURES NOT SUITED TO EXISTING CONDITIONS. - -Two other measures that have been more or less frequently proposed are -the provision of a closed season during certain months and the -restriction of the methods of taking mussels. While it is the purpose -of the present paper to discuss more especially the positive -suggestions that are offered, it is not out of place to give briefly -some of the reasons for exclusion of measures which may have been -suggested by friends of the industry with sincerity of purpose and -which are not upon their face devoid of merit. Always let it have the -first place in our minds that the one object in view is not to hamper -but to develop the mussel fishery. - -_Closed season of months._--The aim in establishing a closed season for -the mussel fishery during a portion of the year is either to protect -the mussels from disturbance during a breeding season or else to -diminish the extent of the fishery by limiting its duration. - -It might be very proper to protect the mussels during the active -breeding season, if such a season could be defined; but, as a matter of -fact, the various species of mussels in any particular stream have -different seasons of breeding. The mussel industry is based upon a -considerable number of species of economic mussels. There is a group -which has a short breeding term during the summer months. Such are the -species known commercially as "niggerhead," "pimple-back," -"monkey-face," "maple-leaf," "blue-point," "three-ridge," etc. The -"washboard" seems to have an intermediate breeding term during the -early fall, though it may be that in some cases it carries its spawn -into the winter. Many of the more important species of mussels have a -long term of breeding; in the latter part of the summer and in the -early fall the eggs are deposited into brood pouches within the shell -of the female, and there, after they hatch and develop, they are -carried over the winter, to be liberated in the spring and early -summer.[A] Of this kind are the "mucket," "sand-shell," "pocketbook," -"butterfly," and others. - -[A] Possibly these mussels liberate glochidia to a limited extent -during the fall and winter; but the general statement is well founded. - - -In view of the variety of commercial mussel species and the diversity -of breeding seasons, it does not appear practicable to determine upon a -closed season that will accomplish its particular purpose. The Illinois -law prohibits the taking of mussels in any navigable water in that -State between the 1st day of October and the 1st day of April; but, as -illustrating how such a measure may apply in a particular case, -practically all of the mussels in the principal river of that -State--the Illinois River--are short term or summer breeders, spawning -some in June, July, and August, others in October and about that time. -Only a few carry the spawn, after its development, through the winter. - -The principal objection to an enforced interruption of the fishery -during a period of months is that it deprives the mussel fishermen of -the right to earn a living by their profession during a portion of each -year. This objection has real weight, and should be overborne only by -decided advantages to be gained from a closed season. - -_Restricting the methods of fishery._--The principal implements for -taking mussels are the crowfoot bar, the rake, the fork, the tongs or -scissors fork, the dip net, and the dredge. These several pieces of -apparatus are variously adapted to conditions of depth, rate of -current, and character of bottom, as well as to the aptitudes and -customs of the fishermen. Before a method should be prohibited it -should be known that it can be replaced by one of the more suitable -methods, or else that it is so positively injurious as to require its -elimination. The only implement of capture against which complaints are -generally made is the crowfoot hook, but this is the only method in -general use which is adapted for taking mussels in the deeper water, -and it is probably in more common use than any other method. Perhaps in -time improvements upon this hook will be adopted to lessen its -injuriousness, or other methods capable of replacing it will be better -known. In the light of present conditions it would work an unnecessary -hardship upon a very large number of fishermen to prevent its use, -especially when it appears that the protection of the mussels can be -accomplished by methods more equitable to all concerned. - -Still other measures have sometimes been advanced looking to the -limitation of the number of shellers to be permitted to work within a -given territory or to the leasing of shelling rights. Since such -proposals have not yet been offered in connection with any properly -worked-out plan by which serious injustice would be avoided and the -interest of the public safeguarded they may be dismissed with the -remark that it is not simply the protection of mussels that is desired -but the protection of the mussels for human use without interference -with common human rights. The absence of inherent wrong in an idea does -not commend it if it carries within itself the seeds of its own defeat -by a method of application, or a want of method, that allows -opportunity for manifestly unjust and intolerable conditions to arise. - -There remains to deal with the necessity for the two measures that are -advocated and to discuss the methods of application. This can be more -adequately done in distinct sections. - - - SIZE LIMIT--NECESSITY AND APPLICATION. - - - EXHAUSTIVE NATURE OF THE FISHERY. - -The necessity for imposing restrictions upon the size of mussels to be -removed from the beds is brought out more clearly by the photographs -than could be done by any lengthy discussion. All of the shells shown -in plates I and II were actually taken for market, sold, and shipped to -the factory. The smallest ones (in the three upper rows on plate I) -were not wanted at any factory; they were bought only because the -fishermen had thrown them into the piles along with the larger shells, -"to add weight." Most of the very smallest shells, those under 1 inch -in length, are subsequently lost in handling, by falling through the -forks or otherwise wasting as they are thrown into the car or from the -car to the bin. None of the shells in the three upper rows of plate I -would ordinarily be used by any manufacturer. It is true that some of -the shells shown have had one blank cut out, and these were actually -cut at a commercial plant, but the instance was a very rare one and was -certainly unprofitable. Even if the manufacturer desired it, the -cutters will not handle shells from which only one blank can be cut, -since the waste of time outweighs the saving of material. - -[Illustration: U. S. B. F.--Doc 793. Plate I. - -SMALL SHELLS ACTUALLY MARKETED. ALL EXCEPT THOSE OF THE THREE LOWER -ROWS SHOULD BE LEFT IN THE RIVERS. - -[About one-half actual size, which is shown in inches at right of -plate.]] - -[Illustration: U. S. B. F.--Doc 793. Plate II. - -LARGER SHELLS MARKETED AND ADVANTAGEOUSLY USED. - -[About one-half actual size, which is shown in inches at left of -plate.]] - -Consequently all shells less than about 1-1/2 inches in length, no -matter what the quality, are thrown into the discard. _There can be no -difference of opinion as to the pure wastefulness of taking shells of -this size._ - -The shells shown in the illustration are not the smallest that could be -found. Some shells observed in the fishermen's boats were only one-half -inch in the greatest diameter. Out of the water these are entirely -without use. The fisherman who saves them, thinking that they add -weight to his heap, would doubtless be surprised to learn that he would -have to handle several times and clean 200 of such shells to add 1 cent -to his earnings, for it would take nearly half a million of them to -make 1 ton. - -The shells in the fourth and fifth rows, counting from the top in plate -II, are used at the factories when received, and are sometimes -particularly favored where the quality is as good as in those from many -Arkansas rivers, and the shells will yield two or three blanks of 16 to -20 lines. Such blanks are of a suitable thickness and work up -economically besides having a good quality. Some of the shells in these -two rows show how blanks of 18, 16, and 14 lines are worked out, a -"line" in button measure representing the fortieth part of an inch. - -The use of shells taken between 1-1/2 and 2 inches in greatest diameter -does not, therefore, like the marketing of those under 1-1/2 inches, -represent absolute waste, but it does denote relative waste or real -short-sightedness from the economic point of view. Shells of this size -will average about 30,000 pairs to the ton, while mussels of such a -practical size as 2-1/2 inches will average only 15,000. The number of -blanks obtained from a ton of shells of the latter size would be just -the same as from a ton of the smaller shells, notwithstanding that only -half as many shells are handled. _We are thus, when using the smaller -shells, depleting the mussel beds at twice the necessary rate without -any corresponding advantage._ - - - WASTE ILLUSTRATED. - -There is given below a table that will repay careful examination as -illustrating the wastefulness of using the small shells. While the -figures must be understood to be only approximate, they are based upon -careful weights and counts of a number of shells from several -localities. The shells were all "niggerheads" and were all obtained -after shipment to factories. - -The first two columns show the limits of size for each lot used, the -greatest diameter being the basis of measurement. - -The third column shows the approximate number of pairs of shells -composing a ton, the unit of purchase; multiplying this number by 2 -would give the number of single shells per ton. - -In the fourth column there is given, in the case of the critical sizes, -the number of 18-line blanks readily taken from a single shell (which -is one-half the number yielded by a pair of shells, or an individual -mussel). - -The fifth column indicates the number of gross of blanks, by -computation, yielded by a ton of shells. This computation is based upon -the cutting of 18-line blanks (not the larger 20-line blanks that have -been taken from some of the larger shells in the illustration). Some of -these shells are cut excessively close to the tips, on account of -taking too many larger line blanks. It must be understood that -different sized shells are adapted for different lines of buttons. The -data herein is for comparative purposes only. - - TABLE OF SIZES, WEIGHTS, AND BUTTON PRODUCTION FOR NIGGERHEAD SHELLS - (APPROXIMATE FIGURES). - - +-------------------+----------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ - | Longest dimension.| Number of| 18-line | Quantity | | - +-------------------+ mussels | blanks | of blanks | Refer to | - |Greater Less | per ton. | per single| per ton. | illustration. | - | than-- than-- | | shell. | | | - +-------------------+----------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ - | Inches. Inches. | | | Gross. | Plate I-- | - | | | | | | - | 3/4 1 | 174,000 | | | 1st row. | - | 1 1-1/4 | 110,000 | | | 2nd row. | - | 1-1/4 1-1/2 | 55,000 | | | 3rd row. | - | 1-1/2 1-3/4 | 33,000 | 2 | 917 | 4th row. | - | 1-3/4 2 | 26,000 | 3 | 1,008 | 5th row. | - | 2 2-1/4 | 20,000 | 4 | 1,111 | 6th row. | - | 2-1/4 2-1/2 | 15,000 | 5 | 1,042 | 7th row. | - | 2-1/2 2-3/4 | 10,500 | 6 | 875 | 8th row. | - | | | | } | { | - | 2-3/4 3 | 8,500 | [B]7-8 | }Gradually | {Plate II-- | - | 3 3-1/2 | 6,200 | [B]10 | }diminishing| {1st row. | - | 3-1/2 4 | 4,000 | [B]12 | }to less | {2nd row. | - | 4 | 3,200 | [B]14 | }than | {3rd row. | - | | | | }650 per | {4th row. | - | | | | }ton. | { | - +-------------------+----------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ - - [B] At the time of making this table only a few of the larger-sized - shells were available, so the estimates of blanks are less accurate. - -It may be seen from the table that a marketable ton of niggerheads -could be composed of the shells of 3,200 or of 33,000 mussels, -according as the shells were 4 inches in length or only 1-1/2 inches. -As a matter of fact, no marketed ton is ever composed of mussels of an -exactly uniform size; furthermore, the extremely large niggerhead -shells are very rare and generally not very desirable on account of -inferior quality and disproportionate waste. A ton of shells from a -region of depletion will also include a number of the smallest and not -strictly marketable shells. - -Now, let us take a concrete illustration: Several counts of mussels -gathered by shellers in the white River near Clarendon, Ark., were made -in October, 1913; from these an average was taken that fairly -represents the catches being made at that time in that region. It was -found that 60 per cent by number of the shells taken were of a size -less than 2 inches in greatest dimension; also that a ton of shells -comprised 20,500 pairs, of which 12,300 were less than 2 inches. Now, -it is evident that if these smaller shells were returned to the bed we -would be depleting the bed less than one-half as fast as at present. -This would be the substantial advantage that such a size limit would -have to the mussel beds; and any advantage to the mussel beds is an -ultimate advantage to the fishermen, manufacturers, and all others in -any way dependent upon the perpetuation of the mussels. Under the -working of a 2-inch size limit, 60 shells out of every 100 then being -taken on the niggerhead beds of that vicinity would have been thrown -back. This seems to be asking a good deal, but not so much as at first -appears, for the undersized shells constitute only 38 per cent of the -weight or selling value of the shells taken. - -On the other hand, both sheller and manufacturer would be saved the -trouble of handling over and over again an unnecessarily large number -of shells. A ton of shells (from the same locality) comprising only -those above 2 inches in greatest dimension would contain about 13,000 -pairs, or 37 per cent less than the number now found in a ton (20,500), -while these shells, the smallest ones being eliminated, would produce -at least 10 per cent more buttons of corresponding sizes. - - - SIZE LIMIT IN RELATION TO ECONOMY. - -The figures given above are, of course, based upon counts and -computations of shells from a particular locality and must not be -assumed to have any general application, but the facts and principles -derived do have a universal bearing. If such a size limit as 2 inches -is adopted, the saving to the mussel beds and to the future of all -interested parties is out of all proportion to the immediate loss to -any party; and even the immediate loss is to some extent compensated by -the saving resulting from having to do with a lesser number of shells -that yield a greater number of buttons per ton. - -Undeniably some temporary sacrifice is entailed, but unless it be -admitted that temporary sacrifice will be accepted, it is useless to -consider any manner of restriction for ultimate benefit. - -There is one point that is brought out in the table on page 14 that -merits attention from the broad standpoint of economy. In all shells -there is a proportion of unavoidable waste, since the entire weight of -the shell can not be transformed into buttons. In very small shells we -may expect an undue waste, on account of the fact that only one or two -blanks can be cut out, leaving a larger bulk of shell in proportion to -the number of blanks gained. On the other hand, in very large shells a -high degree of waste is involved because of excessive thickness, which -must be ground from the blanks, and because of the extra weight of the -discarded portion. Somewhere between these extremes is the size of -shell that yields the largest number of blanks as compared with the -waste or the weight of shell that does not go into buttons. As shown by -the data in the fifth column of the table, the shells a little above 2 -inches in size are those (for this species) that make the best yield -per ton for the small lines for which there is the greatest general -demand. - - - 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. - - DETAILS ESSENTIAL TO EFFECTIVE LEGISLATION. - -In concluding this section emphasis may be laid on the value of certain -details of legislation. - -_Allowable margin of undersized shells._--While it may seem desirable -that no undersized shell at any time should be taken away, nevertheless -it is necessary to make allowance for a margin of unintentional error. -Only if the shellers and buyers were to apply an instrument of measure -to each individual shell would all possibility of error be eliminated. -The sheller will naturally, after a few measurements, come to judge by -the eye, and it is desirable that the law should be somewhat liberal, -rather than too stringent in the allowance for mistakes. There should, -accordingly, be a supplemental provision that if not more than 5 per -cent of the shells by number (not by weight) of any bushel are found to -be below the size limit, the law shall not be presumed to be violated. - -_Illegal possession._--To be practicable of enforcement, the law should -be so worded as to make it illegal not only to bring ashore or to offer -for sale, but also to have in possession, fresh-water mussels or clams -of a size less than 2 inches in greatest dimension. This one provision -will obviate much unnecessary expense, as well as undesirable -complications in the detection of violations and the prosecution of -offenders. Furthermore, since buyers of the shells would be equally -liable to prosecution, the effect would be to destroy the market for -undersized shells, and thus in the most effective way to restrain the -shellers from taking them. - -_Method of measuring mussels._--It will be noted that the method of -measure is stated as "in greatest dimension," with a view to -eliminating every possibility of uncertainty or difference of opinion. -Mussels are sometimes measured in length or width or height, but on -account of the irregular form of mussel shells these dimensions are not -always interpreted in the same way. In testing the blank-making -capacity of a shell, commercial men sometimes measure the "width on the -face"; that is, between the lateral hinge tooth and the lower margin of -the shell. This measure can of course only be taken from an open shell, -and therefore could not serve for our purpose. It is worth while to -call attention to the fact that a 2-inch shell as measured in greatest -dimension would be a good deal smaller than a 2-inch shell in -commercial measurement. - -An inspector would need to be equipped with an ordinary rectangular -caliper. If a shell should be found to measure more than 2 inches in -any linear direction it would be considered as above the size limit. - - - CLOSED REGIONS--NECESSITY AND APPLICATION. - -In addition to the provision of size limits it is strongly recommended -that certain portions of the rivers be closed for rest periods covering -several years. It might be thought that in regions of extreme depletion -the operation of a size limit would, by making the fishery less -profitable, have the effect of causing a practical rest period, but -this can not be expected, for, stimulated by the high price of shells -and the ever-present hope of making a pearl find, the local shellers -will hardly ever desist entirely from the fishery. - -No better way of giving protection to mussels can be found than that of -entirely stopping the shelling upon a series of beds, although the plan -must be applied in such a way as not to reduce the supply of mussels -unduly and suddenly and with as careful regard as possible to the -established interest of communities. - - - INJURY TO SPAWNING MUSSELS AND TO YOUNG. - -Some of the conditions that make a system of closed regions -particularly advisable for the conservation of fresh-water mussels may -be briefly mentioned: - -1. It has been previously stated that some of the mussels are spawning, -or with spawn, during any period of the year. Many of the most -important species are spawning during the late spring, early and mid -summer; other equally important species form their eggs in the late -summer, when they become fertilized and develop into the glochidium -stage, but the mother clam retains them in marsupial pouches within her -shell during the entire winter and even into the summer. All species of -mussels carry the eggs in the marsupial pouches during the process of -development to the glochidium stage or longer, whether the period be -for a few weeks or for a few months. In this condition the mussels are -said to be gravid. It is readily observed that when gravid mussels are -disturbed they frequently discharge the young, regardless of whether -these are mature enough to be liberated from the parent or not; certain -species, such as the niggerhead, are particularly likely to do this. - -In the commercial fishery, therefore, not only is much spawn destroyed -when large gravid mussels are captured, but it is quite probable that -other mussels, disturbed on the bottom, though not captured, are caused -to abort the young in an immature stage when they are entirely unable -to complete the development without the parent. - -2. In the stage of existence immediately after liberation from the -parent, the young mussels are parasitic upon fish. We are not here -concerned with them during this period of the life history. When they -are dropped from the fish many of the young mussels do not at once take -up life in the sand or mud of the bottom, but we find them forming -delicate threads by which they hang from plants or sticks or stones or -from clam shells, and thus are kept from being washed away or smothered -in the mud of the bottom. We may imagine the harm to these little -mussels that is unavoidably wrought when the beds are continually -dragged over. In like manner, the little shells that are just beginning -to take hold in the bottom may be torn out by the rake or hooks, to be -smothered or washed away to less favorable bottoms. It will be -remembered that when mussels first begin life in the thread stage or in -the bottom if the thread stage is omitted, they are too small to be -found without a microscope. - -3. One of the principal methods of capturing mussels is with the bar -and hooks dragged over a large area of mussel bed in taking a -relatively small number of shells. There is chance for these hooks to -injure many little shells when each drag, requiring a period of only a -few minutes, covers a space of bottom 16 feet wide and several hundred -feet long. Nevertheless, it is not certain that there is any method to -take its place, and any implement used will accomplish some injury to -the very youngest mussels. - - - CONSIDERATIONS DETERMINING SIZE OF CLOSED REGIONS. - -In planning for the closing of portions of rivers for periods of years -consideration should be given to community needs as well as to general -economic and biological conditions. On the one hand, the closure will -be more effective in result, as well as easier of enforcement, if the -regions of closure are made very large; while, on the other hand, -making the closed regions smaller might cause less economic -inconvenience. If, for example, the entire Illinois River should be -closed to mussel fishery for a period of several years, there might be -a substantial uncompensated loss to some communities, where there are -factories employing labor to cut shells derived from that river. On the -other hand, should we divide the river up into small sections of 2 or 3 -miles in extent, some of which would be open while others would be -closed under the law, it is apparent that such a plan would be almost -impossible of enforcement. To prevent shelling from being carried on in -all these little, closed areas would require a force of wardens and an -expense entirely incommensurate with the object to be gained. - -It is held advisable to divide a river within a single State into some -four or six sections for the purpose of establishing closed regions. -One-half--that is, two or three--of these sections, taken in -alternation, could be ordered closed for a period of five years, during -which no mussel fishing at all should be allowed in the closed -sections, although it would be regularly prosecuted in the alternate -portions of the stream. It would be convenient to break a river at -points where there was a substantial community interest in the -shelling. - - - PRACTICABLE DIVISION OF RIVER SYSTEMS ILLUSTRATED. - -For example, let us apply this method of dividing a stream to the White -and Black Rivers in Arkansas. Starting from the head-waters of the -Black River, we find the first center of economic interest at Black -Rock, another on the White River at Newport, and a third at Clarendon. -Now, the river might properly be broken at these points, forming four -main sections. The fishery might then be entirely prohibited for -several years from the mouth of the river to Clarendon, while permitted -from Clarendon to Newport, and again prohibited from Newport northward -to Black Rock on the Black River, and to Batesville or other suitable -point on the upper White, while permitted from Black Rock and -Batesville northward on all the tributaries. We would have the river -system divided into four sections, which would be probably as nearly -equivalent as could be expected. Furthermore, none of the three towns -mentioned would be cut off from the local supply of shells, except in -one direction. - -The shellers, generally speaking, would be little affected, since, with -their house boats, they could move from one portion of the river to -another. Those shellers who do not use house boats, but are local -residents and go out only by day from their homes, would be most -affected, and it is these generally who are most in favor of closing -portions of a river. They recall how much more easily shells were taken -in past times when the shells were abundant, and they would be willing -to do something else meantime in order that the beds may be given a -rest and the shells again become numerous. Shelling has no attraction -over any other form of crude labor when the shells are so scarce that a -wage can scarcely be made. - -Taking the St. Francis River in Arkansas as another illustration, the -river might be broken at Madison, Parkin, and Marked Tree. It is true -that there are not many mussels, according to report, above Marked -Tree, but the region between Madison and Parkin has beds which may well -balance the remainder of the river. - -The Wabash River, Ind., is one in which the need for protection is most -evident; and this stream could be divided at Vincennes and two other -points selected with reference to their economic interest in shelling -and with regard to an equitable division of the river system. - -It might seem that an ideal method of rotation would be based upon the -division of a system into six portions, only one of which should be -worked in any one year; a new portion would be opened each year, while -each territory would enjoy a rest period of five years between -successive "open" years for that particular territory. It will be -evident that such a scheme, however correct in theory, would be -entirely impracticable. The plan of keeping certain regions closed for -periods of years while other regions are worked continuously during a -corresponding period of years may have some imperfections, but it is -probably the best that can be worked out without practically suspending -the industry. Undoubtedly the plan will work most efficiently if a -proper discretion is used in its application. - - - PROCEDURE FOR ESTABLISHING CLOSED REGIONS. - -The law should plainly stipulate and establish the principle of the -closure of the rivers by regions or sections, but the determination of -which specific sections are to be closed should be left for -determination after investigation by properly qualified authorities. - -A comparatively simple plan may be suggested under which the most -careful consideration could be given to the local conditions involved -as well as to the rights of the State as a whole. The legislature could -authorize and instruct the proper State authorities, as the State fish -commission, to give due consideration and study to the needs of the -mussel industry and determine what portions of the streams of the State -should be closed to the mussel fishery for a period of years. It could -be further provided that, after the preliminary determination of plans -for closure, due advertisement should be made in all regions affected -and opportunity given for public hearings in such regions, after which -the commission should submit its final recommendations to the governor -of the State, who should then issue a proclamation ordering the entire -interruption of a mussel fishery in the regions selected for closure. -The original legislative act should provide that the proclamation so -made should have the full effect of law, and should specify the -penalties that would be incurred by violations. It is desirable also -that the governor, upon recommendation of the commission, should have -power to reopen the closed regions when such action was judged -necessary. - - - ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW. - -_Powers of officers._--It is necessary not only that the duty of -enforcement of the law be assigned to specified State officers, but -also that they be expressly given the right to inspect and examine -mussels or shells in the boats or on land and be empowered to seize -mussels or shells held in violation of the law. It is practically -impossible to bring about convictions when the opportunity is allowed -for destruction of the evidence between the time of detection and the -date of trial. - -_Permits for special cases._--In cases where for the purposes of -investigations it may be necessary to take small mussels, the State -officers charged with the enforcement of the law should have by law the -right to issue special permits for the taking of undersized mussels for -scientific uses and not for sale. - -_Expenses of mussel protection._--The plans which have been advanced in -this report can be carried out with a minimum of expense. The -simplicity of the measures would reduce the trouble and cost of -inspection to the smallest practicable figure. The assignment of the -duties of enforcement to existing State commissions or boards which -already have field deputies or wardens obviates the creation of any -special offices for execution of the mussel laws. - -The question of whether steps should be taken to raise special funds on -account of the additional burdens that would be placed upon the present -boards is one that would be determined by each State in the light of -its own conditions and established customs. It would be very -undesirable to create a burdensome tax; to do so would only react -against the State, and in the end the tax would be paid by the -shellers, who are now making only a meager living, for the local -shellers would have to sell in competition with the shellers from -States where more liberal conditions prevail. - -It is another matter, however, to require a nominal license fee for the -privilege of working upon the public mussel beds. Such a fee need not -be greater than $1 or $2 per season, an amount which could be paid by -anyone who wished to shell seriously. Perhaps the idea of a fee of any -kind would arouse some antagonism among a certain class of shellers who -would enjoy the public stores without return of any kind. Some shellers -favor such a license system, and the writer believes that they must all -eventually come to see that it works to their own particular advantage -in many ways. It tends to create a class of professional shellers, -besides providing the necessary means for promoting the abundance of -shells. - - - SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED LEGISLATION. - -The legislation recommended for protection of mussel beds, based upon -the considerations discussed in the preceding pages, may be summarized -as follows: - - I. (_a_) A single size limit should be fixed as applicable to - all shells taken. The minimum size here proposed is 2 inches. - - (_b_) The method of measuring the shell should be defined as - "in greatest dimension." - - (_c_) Possession of undersized shells, whether or not sold or - offered for sale, should be illegal. - - (_d_) There should be an allowable margin of undersized - shells for unintentional violation. - - II. (_a_) Alternate portions of rivers or river systems - should be closed for a period of years, to permit - recuperation of mussel beds. - - (_b_) The units of division of a river system should be large - enough to make enforcement practicable with least expense. - - (_c_) The river would conveniently be broken at the few - points where there is most community interest involved in the - shelling. - - (_d_) Approximately five-year periods of closure are - recommended, with some discretion allowed to executive - officers as to duration of period. - - (_e_) Closed regions should be established by proclamation of - the governor of the State, after expert examination of the - mussel beds and after public hearings on the subject in the - communities affected. - - III. (_a_) Officers charged with enforcement of the law - should be empowered to examine mussels or shells in boats or - on land and to seize the catch in case of violation, as well - as to arrest or cause arrests to be made. - - (_b_) Provision should be made for the issue of permits for - the taking of mussels of any size or in any region for - scientific uses and not for sale. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Protection of Fresh-Water Mussels, by -R. E. Coker - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROTECTION OF FRESH-WATER MUSSELS *** - -***** This file should be named 43177.txt or 43177.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/4/3/1/7/43177/ - -Produced by Sandra Eder and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at - www.gutenberg.org/license. - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 -North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email -contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the -Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |