Pass ^HH5 Book r 'A v Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from The Library of Congress http://www.archive.org/details/discussionofcampOOmary /■' DISCUSSION OP THE Campbell Oyster Culture Bill AS AMENDED BY THE PRICE OYSTER PLAN PROVIDING FOB Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars ALONG WITH Oyster Culture on Barren Bottoms Essential Features op the Cahpbell-Pbice Bill. 1st. Stringent regulations protecting the 215.852 acres of nat- ural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the Maryland Oyster Survey. 2d. Provisions for increasing revenues through encouraging the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by granting certain privileges to oyster planters necessary for the profitable cultivation of oysters. 3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster bars through reshelling and cultivation by providing for the equal division of the revenue received from oyster planting between a "Special Eoad Fund" and a "Fund for the Conservation of Nat- ural Oyster Bars." Published by the MARYLAND SHELL FISH COMMISSION February, 19»2. ■m? > Vw *1> \ |V\, v y 1 ^ , A "sV c\\ $p Ai e^ DISCUSSION Campbell Oyster Culture Bill AS AMENDED BY THE PRICE OYSTER PLAN PROVIDING FOR Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars ALONG WITH Oyster Culture on Barren Bottoms Essential Features of the Campbell-Price Bill. l=t. Stringent regulations protecting the 215.852 acres of nat- ural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the Maryland Oyster Survey. 2d. Provisions for increasing revenues through encouraging the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by granting certain privileges to oyster planters necessary for the profitable cultivation of oysters. 3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster bars through reshelling and cultivation by providing for the equal division of the revenue received froru oyster planting between a "Special Road Fund" and a "Fund for the Conservation of Nat- ural Oyster Bars." Published by the MARYLAND SHELL FISH COMMISSION February, J9J2. ^ * tf \ CONTENTS. Analysis and Index to the Campbell-Price Bill .... 3 Present Status of the " Maryland Oyster Question " . . 5 The Campbell-Price Bill 7 Discussion of — Protection of natural oyster bars 23 Taking oysters from leased bottoms 17 Reduction of rentals 11 Conservation of natural oyster bars 30 Division of revenue from leased bottoms .... 22 Increased areas opened for leasing 10 Collection of fines and rentals for unlawful use of barren bottoms 26 Notes relating to the Development of the Oyster Resources of Maryland : Cross Reference 32 Notes .35 Extracts from printed interviews or public addresses of Governor Goldsborough, Senator Campbell, Senator Price, Senator Goslin, Senator Milbourne and a reprint of a clipping from the Easton Star-Democrat 47 *<" 7\ ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAMAN OYSTER CULTURE LAW OF 1906 AND CAMPBELL-PRICE AMENDA- TORY BILL OF 1912. Hainan Law, 1906. Campbell-Price Bill, 1912. Areas. Ten acres permitted to be leased by individ- uals in county waters ; one hundred acres else- where. $1 Rentals. to $5 per acre in sliding scale beginning at date of lease. Period of Priority oj Riylds to Lease. Riparian owners four months; oystermen six months. Cultivating and Taking Oysters. No practical method of cultivating or taking oysters allowed plant- ers on the leased oyster farms. Protection of Natural Oyster Bars. No adequate provi- sion. Areas. Thirty acres permitted to be leased by individuals in county waters; one hundred acres in Tan- gier Sound; five hundred acres elsewhere. Rentals. $1 per acre to April 1, 1918, and then $1 tu J5 per acre in sliding scale. Provision that a report is to be made to next Legislature on advisability of establishing some method of assessing rentals ac- cordlng to the value of bottoms. Period of Priority of Rights to Lease. Riparian owners 30 days; oys- termen 80 days. Cultivating and Taking Oysters. Practical methods permitted for taking and cultivating oysters on leased oyster farms on week days between sunrise and .sunset from September 15th to June loth of the following year, but notice of such intention must be given police offi- cials after close of dredging season. Protection of Natural Oyster Bars. Penalties and protective meas- uies are : 1st. House of Correction three months to one year. 2d. Forfeiture of boatand tackle, or fineof $100 to $500. 3d. Denied the right to take out license for three years after convic- tion. 4th. Notice must be given to police officials by planters taking ousters after close of dredging season. Section of Bill. 98 100 110 98 100 102 112 112 112 A 116 ANALYSIS— Continued. Hainan Law, Campbell-Price Bill, Section of 190C. 1912. Bill. Collection of Fines and Collection of Fines and Rentals for Reyitalsfor Unlawful Unlawful Use of Barren Bottoms. L'ae of Barren Bottoms. Penalty of $50 for each offence. No adequate provi- 105 sion. 115 A Division of Revenue. Division of R< w nm . All to "Special Road Divided equally between a " Spe- Fund." cial Road Fund " and a " Fuud for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars." llts Conservation and lie- Conservation and Reshelling of 119 A shelling of Natural Natural Oyster Bars. HOB Oyster Bars. Provision for use of "Fund for 119 C No provision. Conservation of Natural Oyster 119 D Bars" in reshelling and restocking 119E Natural Oyster Bars. 119 F 5 PKESENT STATUS OF THE " MARYLAND OYSTER QUESTON." Natural Oyster Bars : In compliance with the provisions of the Hainan Oyster Culture Law, the Maryland Shell Fish Com- mission in co-operation with the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey and the United States Bureau of Fisheries has surveyed, charted and legally defined 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars which are reserved for all time for the sole use of Oystermen. Leasable Bottoms: The Maryland Oyster Survey, although carried on primarily for the purpose of surveying public natural oyster bars, also developed the fact that the State of Maryland, — outside of t lie 215,852 acres of public oyster bars reserved for oystermen — owns 300,000 acres >f barren bottoms where oysters do not now groiv but on ivhich experts and practical oystermen say oysters can be made to groio. Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars : The history of the growth and decline of the industry of baking oysters from the natural oyster bars of Maryland shows that these bars produced an average of 12,000,000 bushels during the fifteen years of 1873-8S, and that now by reason of a lack of remedial legislation providing /or the practical conservation of these vast oyster resources, these same natural oyster bars only produce 4,000,000 bushels. Expenses of Protecting Natural Oyster Bars : The State of Maryland has for years been compelled to make direct appro- priations aggregating at this date over $100,000 in excess of oyster revenues that could be utilized for the expenses of the State Fishery Force in protecting the Natural Oyster Bars. In view of the preceding fact, it is not reasonable to sup- pose that the Governor and the Legislature will consent to make additional direct appropriations of the $25,000 that ought to be expended annually for the purpose of restoring the natural oyster bars of the State. Revenue from Leasing: Experts say that fully 100,000 acres of the so-called barren bottoms of Maryland are of the best order for the cultivation of oysters; and that with reasonable and practical oyster culture laws such as are in force in all progressive oyster culture states, these 100,000 acres ivill yield the Slate a large revenue in the near future. Campbell-Price Bill: In consequence of the facts stated it is now proposed in the Camjibell-Price Bill to provide for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars along with Oyster Culture on Barren Bottoms by : 1st. Stringent regulations protecting the 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the Maryland Oyster Survey. 2d. Provision for increasing revenues through en- couraging the leasing of barren oyster bottoms by granting certain privileges to oyster planters neces- sary for the profitable cultivation of oysters. 3d. Conservation and restoration of natural oyster bars through reshelling and cultivation by providing for the equal division of the revenue received from oyster planting between a "Special Road Fund " and a "Fund for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars." Maryland Oyster Controversy : Those actively interested in the oyster question of Maryland seem to be divided into three classes, as follows : 1st. Oystermen and oyster packers interested in the restoration of the 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars reserved for the use of the public by the Mary- land Oyster Survey. 2d. Oyster planters and oyster packers interested in the development of the 300,000 acres of barren bottoms pointed out by the Maryland Oyster Survey as bottoms where oysters can be made to grow profit- ably by cultivation. 3d. Those who earnestly believe with the Crothers Oyster Commission in both the restoration of public natural oyster bars and the cultivation of barren bot- toms, but who feel that the better manner of accom- plishing these objects is to so change, by new laws, the plan of the state administration of the oyster forces of Maryland, that an unpaid Board of Fish- eries will take over the functions of both the Shell Fish Commission and the State Fishery Force and also have restricted discretionary power to carry on the conservation and cultivation of the oyster re- sources of Maryland by such means as they find best suited to the interests of all concerned. The only comment necessary on this phase of the question is the obvious one that the Campbell-Price Bill unites the objects of the first and second classes, and at the same time in no way clashes with the aims of the third class. THE CAMPBELL-PRICE BILL. Explanation. A discussion of each proposed amendment to the Haman Oyster Law is boxed in lines and appears immediately under the corresponding change in the wording of the original law, and consequently the text of the bill itself need not be used except for pur- poses of technical reference. 9 All words added to existing oyster laws have l>een typed in CAPITALS. All words "struck out" from existing oyster laws have been printed in [italics and i nclosed in parenthesis.) A BILL ENTITLED AN ACT TO AMEND AN ACT EN- TITLED "AN ACT TO ESTABLISH AND PROMOTE THE INDUSTRY OF OYSTER CULTURE IN MARY- LAND, TO DEFINE AND MARK NATURAL OYSTER BEDS, BARS AND ROCKS LYING UNDER THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, TO PRESCRIBE PENAL- TIES FOR THE INFRINGEMENT OF THE PRO- VISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND TO ADD NEW SECTIONS TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TO FOLLOW .SECTION 82, AND TO BE DESIG- NATED, RESPECTIVELY, AS SECTIONS 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 AND 119 ", BY REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING WITH AMENDMENTS SECTIONS 98, 100, 102, 105, 110, 112, 116 AND 118 OF ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS (EDITION 1904), AS ENACTED IN CHAPTER 711 OF THE ACTS OF 1906, AND BY ADDING EIGHT NEW SECTIONS TO SAID ARTICLE 72, ONE TO FOLLOW SECTION 112, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SEC- TION 112 A, ONE TO FOLLOW SECTION 115 AND BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 115 A, AND SIN OTHERS TO FOLLOW SECTION 119 AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS 119 A, 119 B, 119 C, 119 D, 119 E AND 119 F. SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERA/. ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND, THAT SECTIONS 98, 100, 102, 105, 110, 112, 116 AND 118 OF ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, AS EN- ACTED IN CHAPTER 711 OF THE ACTS OF 1906, ENTITLED "AN ACT TO ESTABLISH AND PRO- MOTE THE INDUSTRY OF OYSTER CULTURE IN MARYLAND, TO DEFINE AND MARK NATURAL OYSTER BEDS, BARS AND ROCKS LYING UNDER THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, TO PRESCRIBE PENALTIES FOR THE INFRINGEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND TO ADD NEW SECTIONS TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TO FOLLOW SECTION 82, AND TO BE DESIGNATED RESPECTIVELY AS SECTIONS 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 1J6, 117, 118 and 119," BE AND THE SAME ARE HEREBY REPEALED AND RE-ENACTED WITH AMENDMENTS, SO AS TO READ AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 98. After the survey provided for herein shall have been completed, it shall be the duty of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners to lease, in the name of the State of Mary- land, tracts or parcels of land beneath the waters of this State, whether within the limits of the counties or elsewhere, in the area to be opened for oyster culture, according to the provisions of this act ; provided that no tract so leased, if situated within the territorial limits of any county in this State, shall contain less than one acre of hind, and if situated in any other place, no tract so leased shall contain less than five acres. It shall be the duty of said board to require that the tracts so leased shall be as nearly rectangular as is convenient. It shall be the duty of the said board to demand from each lessee payment of the rent each year in advance. No person shall be permitted, by lease, assignment or in any other manner, to acquire a greater amount of laud than (Jen) THIRTY acres situated within the 10 territorial limits of any of the coup ties, or (ewe) FIVE hundred acres in any other place ; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT AN INDIVIDUAL MAY ACQUIRE A TRACT NOT EX- CEEDING ONE HUNDRED ACRES OF LAND BENEATH THE WATERS OE TANGIER SOUND, Discussion: The preceding amendments to exist- ing laws indicated bv words in CAPITALS pro- vide for an increase in the maximum area which may be leased by any one person. The greatest possible profits from planting oys- ters on barren bottoms of the limited acreage per- mitted by existing laws are too small to warrant the purchase of the necessary equipment for culti- vation of oysters on such areas, or to warrant the cost of the equally necessary equipment and ser- vices required for private police protection. The increase in Tangier Sound is made desirable by the fact that its waters are practically "open waters." This part of the amendment is made necessaiy by reason of a legal interpretation which classifies waters of Tangier Sound as being "within territorial limits." (Section 98, continued) : Leases of such lauds shall be made only to residents of Maryland. The term of such leases shall be twenty years, and the annual rent reserved to the State shall be one dollar per acre for each of the first two years of said term of twenty years ; two dollars per acre for the third year; three dollars per acre for the fourth year ; four dollars per acre for the fifth year; and five dollars per acre during the remainder of the term; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT ON ALL LEASES WHICH HAVE HERETOFORE BEEN .MADE, OR MAY HEREAFTER BE MADE HEREUNDER, THE ANNUAL RENT PAYABLE TO THE STATE THERE- il UNDER AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO APRIL 1st, 1918, SHALL BE ONE DOLLAR PER ACRE, AND THE IN- CREASE IN ANNUAL RENTALS HEREIN PROVIDED FOR THE THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH AND SUBSE- QUENT YEARS DURING THE TERM OF ANY LEASE SHALL NOT SOONER BECOME EFFECTIVE THAN FOR THE FIRST, SECOND, THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE PORTION OF THE TERM OF SUCH LEASE SUBSEQUENT TO THE 1st DAY OF APRIL, 1918. Discussion: Tbe above amendment provides for decreased rentals to $1.00 per acre until April 1, 1918. It is proposed in response to a strong demand from prospective oyster planters who state they should be given a reasonable opportunity for build- ing up their business before being charged a rental which they now consider prohibitive. It is so worded that the Stat>- does not in auy way give up any existing rights to ultimately in- crease the revenues which it can reasonably hope to obtain from the State-owned barren oyster bottoms. (Section 98, Continued) If any part of the rent reserved under such lease shall remain unpaid foi more than six months after the same becomes due, such lease or leases may, at the option of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners, he declared void, and in that event the land shall revert to the State, and may be leased again iu accordance with the provisions of this Act. The said Board may, at the request of any lessee, if it shall appear equitable so to do, upon cause shown iu writing, cancel his lease as to the whole or a part of the lands leased. THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO SUBMIT A PLAN TO THE NEXT SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND 12 PROVIDING- FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF RENTALS FOR LEASED BOTTOMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VALUE OF THESE BOTTOMS FOR THE CULTIVA- TION OF OYSTERS. Discussion: The preceding amendment provides for a report to be made to the next legislature on the advisability of establishing some method of assessing rentals according to the value of tin- leased bottoms. It has been added in compliance with the suggestions of certain prominent officials who feel that while some areas may not be worth the yearly rental of one dollar per acre that there is much other land worth at least ten dollars per acre. Section 100. For a period of (four months) THIRTY DAYS after the said survey shall have been completed, or after any area shall have been opened to leasing under the preceding sections, citizens of Maryland, residing in any part of the State, who, at the time of the completion of said survej% or at the respective times of the opening for oystor culture of the several areas, as the case may be, may be owners of land having a water front upon any part of the said areas so opened to oyster culture, shall have the exclusive right to rent anj r hind opened to oyster culture under the provisions of the act, adjacent to their lands. And for an additional period of (six mouths) THIRTY DAYS after the expiration of the said period of (four months) THIRTY DAYS all boatmen, residents of this State, who shall be engaged in the business of dredging, scraping or tonging for oysters at the time of the completion of the said survey, or at the respec- tive times of the opening for oyster culture of the several areas, or if said survey shall be completed, or the said anas shall be opened to oyster culture during the closed season for dredging, scraping or tonging, as the case may be, then the person so engaged at the end of the last dredging, scraping or tonging 13 season shall have the like exclusive right in the order of their respective applications, as the same may be received and opened by the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners to rent any adjacent lauds ; provided, that in no event shall any such landowner, boatman or any other person be permitted to rent or acquire more than (ien) THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or (one) FIVE hundred acres, as the case may be, dependent upon the situation of the land which is leased or acquired ; and pro- vided, further, that no such riparian landowner, as is mentioned in this section, shall be entitled to rent the amount of (ten) THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or (one) FIVE hundred acres, as the case may be, unless the water front of the land so owned by him, if fronting on water within the terri- torial limits of a county, be at least two hundred yards, or if front- ing on waters in any other place, be at least seven hundred yards. The owners of land having a less water front than is mentioned above shall be entitled to rent a proportionately less amount of land, dependent upon the length of the front upon water within county limits or elsewhere. Discussion : The preceding amendments in rela- tion to the period within which certain classes of individuals have priority of rights to lease barren bottoms will be only effective in Talbot and Dor- chester couuties which have not yet been opened for leasing. They are not essential amendments except in so far as they will permit Talbot and Dorchester coun- ties to obtain full rights of leasing before the open- ing of the next oyster season. The above amendments in relation to acreage that may be leased are only necessary as a pa»rt of similar provisions in Section 98 and discussed under that heading. 14 Section 102. Wben the period of (ten months), SIXTY DAYS shall Lave elapsed after said survey shall have be< Q completed, and after the lands beneath the waters of any area shall have been opened to leasing under Section 90 of this Act, the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners shall endeavor to lease the remaining portions of land so open to oyster culture under the provisions of this Act to applicants, who shall be residents of Maryland, in the order of their applications received and opened by said Commissioners. Discussion: The above amendment in relation to the period within which certain classes of indi- viduals have priority of rights to lease barren bot- toms is only necessary as a part of a related pro- vision in Section 100 and discussed under thai heading. SECTION 105. The relation of landlord and tenant stated in Section 10-1 shall have all the incidents attaching to that rela- tion as the same exists under the laws of Maryland, excepting only the following particulars : (First: The only remedy of the State for non-payment <>/' the rent of oyster lands shall be the strict enforcement of the provi- sions set forth in Section 98 of this Act. Upon the non-pay- ment of any rent for the time therein mentioned it shall he the duly of the Board of Shell Fish Commissioners, after a writU n notice of not less than ten days In lite lessee, I" declare the lease vacated by stamping the word " Void" in distinct letters aci-oss the description in the register.} (Second) FIRST : Laud leased under this act shall lie used only for the purpose of planting and cultivating oysters ; (Third) SECOND: No right shall exist to redeem or pur- chase any laud of the State so leased ; 15 (Fourth) THIRD : Any other modification caused by the provisions of this act. Discussion : The above amend mei ts are con- nected with the proposed new Sec- tii m 115 A, which relates to the collection of rent a is, and they are discussed under that heading. Section 110. No assignment or transfer of any interest acquired by this Act shall be valid for any purpose if made to a non-resident of this State. If any such assignment is attempted to be made, all interest of the grantor, or assignor, shall revert to the State as if no lease had ever been made. If any assignment of any interest created by this act is attempted to be made to any corporation, or joint stock company, all the interest of the grantor or assignor shall revert to the State as if no lease had ever been made. If any assignment or any inter- est created by this act is attempted to be made to any person in such a way that the assignee shall become the. holder of more than (ten) THIRTY acres, ONE HUNDRED ACRES, or (one) FIVE hundred acres, as the case may be, according to the location of land leased under this Act, all interest of the grantor or assignor, in ease of such an assignment, shall revert to the State as if no lease had been made. Discussion : The preceding amendment is only necessary as a part of the amendments proposed to Section 98 for the increase in acreage of State- owned bottoms that may be leased by one indi- vidual, and is discussed under that heading. Section 112. It shall not be necessary for any holder of oyster land under this Act to take out any license for dredging, scraping or tonging oysters on any laud so held by him ; and oysters on such land ma}' be taken in such manner as may be 16 desirpcl by the holder of such land, and at such times as may be desired by the holder of such land, BETWEEN SI'NUISK AND SUNSET OF ANY WEEK DAY BETWEEN THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER IN ANY YEAR AND THE FIFTEENTH OF JUNE IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR (as allowed by the existing laws of this Stale). IT IS. HOWEVER, SPECIALLY PROVIDED THAT IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR ANY HOLDER OF LAND UNDER THIS ACT TO TAKE UP OYSTERS FROM THE LAND SO HELD BY HIM DURING THE CLOSED SEA- SON FOR THE DREDGING OF OYSTERS FROM THE NATURAL BARS OF THIS STATE, UNTIL AFTER HE HAS GIVEN A WRITTEN NOTICE OF AT LEAST THREE DAYS OF HIS INTENTION SO TO DO, TO THE OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF THE NEAREST POLICE BOAT, IN WHICH NOTICE HE SHALL NAME THE WEEK DAY OR WEEK DAYS AND THE HOURS BETWEEN SUNRISE AND SUNSET OF SUCH WEEK DAY OR W r EEK DAYS IN SUCH CLOSED SEASON DURING WHICH HE MAY INTEND TO TAKE OYS- TERS FROM SUCH LAND, AND IT SHALL BE UN- LAWFUL FOR THE HOLDER OF ANY SUCH LAND TO TAKE UP OYSTERS FROM THE LAND HELD BY HIM AT ANY OTHER TIMES THAN THOSE NAMED IN SUCH NOTICE. ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANY COUNTY OF THIS STATE, OR IN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE PENALTIES PROVIDED IN SEC. 24 OF THIS ARTICLE FOR TAKING OYSTERS UNLAWFULLY WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF CER- TAIN SECTIONS THEREIN REFERRED TO. 17 Discussion : The preceding amendments permit- ting the taking and cultivation of leased oyster plantations on the same practical basis existing in all the progressive oyster states which have been increasing their oyster industries while those of Maryland have been decreasing, are the very "key- stone" of the whole Campbell-Price Bill. To fail to enact the essential features of this Section, is to fail to provide that which is abso- lutely necessary for a real oyster culture that will actually mean anything to the oyster industry of the State. Such a failure to enact the essential features of the preceding sections means further that no rev- enue of any importance can be expected from the lease of the immensely valuable barren oyster bot- toms of the State, and therefore it also means that the "Fund for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars" established in other sections of the Camp- bell-Price Bill will be ineffective, if not actually non-existent as far as money is concerned. This matter is of extreme importance to those interested in the development of the oyster indus- tries of Maryland, and consequently in support of this contention there is quoted below a carefully prepared statement from Dr. H. F. Moore of the United States Bureau of Fisheries, who has a world-wide knowledge and practical experience in all phases of the "oyster question." Doctor Moore writes : " As I view the case, the amendments asked for represent the irreducible mimimum necessary to perfect the law and make it effective. The elimination of any part of the amendments will be against the interests of the 18 State, oyster culture and the oyster industry as a whole, and will seriously retard the assumption of the position to which Maryland's natural advan- tages entitle, her. The amendments were proposed sifter careful consideration, all not absolutely essen- tial was eliminated, and there was nothing inserted for the purpose of trading or compromise." "I do not believe that your Commission can afford to acquiesce, even under stress, to measures which will militate against the interests entrusted to your care. I do not understand that you even contemplate such action, but feel that my connec- tion with the Maryland survey makes it obligatory, in justice to myself, to express myself frankly. Should an unsatisfactory compromise be accom- plished, the odium of its failure as a practical measure must fall on all who acquiesced in its perpetration. If the recommendations of the Commission be rejected, the responsibility will lie on those who opposed them, and we who have eudeavored to give the subject our best study will be absolved." The existing laws have been construed to pro- hibit oyster planters from taking their cultivated oysters from leased oyster beds by any means not permitted in taking oysters from the natural oyster bars of the same locality. Which construction of the law should be contrasted with the facts that the oyster planter must pay rental to the State, must prepare the leased bottoms for planting, must purchase and plant seed oysters, must cul- tivate the oysters when planted, and provide pri- vate police protection, while on the other hand the competing oystermen using the neighboring nat- ural ovster bars are under no such expense. 19 The preceding amendments remove certain of these restrictions on oyster planting for certain months of the year ; and then only for week days (not Sundays) between the times of sunrise and sunset; and they also stipulate that notice of such intention must be given certain oyster police offi- cials after the close of the dredging season. The use of tongs for gathering oysters is a slow and expensive method, and can be profitably em- ployed only in case the bottom is closely stocked with oysters ; hence lessees of oyster lots in local- ities where dredging is prohibited are compelled to plant their oysters so thickly upon the bottom that the available supply of oyster food in the water is not sufficient to provide for their proper nourishment and growth. The numerous failures in oyster culture which are due to such overplant- ing can be largely avoided when the right to gather planted oysters with a dredge has been granted. Planters will then be able to take into account the oyster food supply and distribute their oysters ac- cordingly, for no matter how scatteriugly oysters may be distributed over the bottom, they can be rapidly and economically gathered with proper equipment. The sudden scarcity or abundance of a food sup- ply increases or decreases its value a correspond- ing amount. Oysters are no exception to this rule, and the use of economical equipment for quickly- gathering cultivated oysters from a known supply- on leased bottoms is one absolutely essential re- quirement for profitable oyster farming. It is partly through such profits as come from prompt delivery of oysters at the best market price that an oyster planter is enabled to compete with the 20 natural bar oystermen who have no extra expenses of rental, shelling of bottoms, purchase of seed, policing of property, and so forth. The granting of the privileges permitted by the proposed amendments to Section 112 are opposed chiefly on the ground that oyster planters will take a criminal advantage of these rights to steal oys- ters from the natural oyster bars. As a matter of fact, all know that the real danger is quite the re- verse, and that an oyster planter with his vested interests in his oysters on his leased beds has the more to fear when it comes to "appropriating" oysters from the oyster-producing waters of Mary- land. Retaliation by natural-growth oystermen for the misuse of privileges by the oyster planter would be only too easy. While on the other hand there is no way by which the planter can punish the " natural growther " except to catch him " red- handed." However, in spite of these facts, and as a further answer to the objections raised against the grant- ing of the proposed privileges, there has been added a new section (112 A) which provides ample and effective means for conviction and punishment of any planter so short-sighted as to attempt steal- ing of oysters from public oyster bars. For addi- tional comments on this phase of the amendments see the discussion under the heading of Section 112 A. 21 SECTION 116. In addition to other penalties herein pro- vided, any person convicted of a violation of this act under either of the (three) SIX preceding sections (SECTIONS 112-A to 115-A, BOTH INCLUSIVE), shall be and is hereby denied the right to take out any license to dredge, scrape or tong for oysters in any waters of this State for the period of three years after said conviction. Discussion: The amendments to the preced- ing section are only made for the technical legal reason of making its penalties applicable to violators of the law under Section 1 12 and the two following new Sections 112 A and 115 A. Section 118. The revenue arising from the operation of this Act shall be applied in the following manner: First : To the payment of all (salaries) expenses (surveys, out- lays) and disbursements authorized by this Act. Second: The balance to be paid at the end of each year into the Treasury of the State (leaving, however, a balance of Ten Thousand Dollars icith the Hoard of Shell Fish Commissioners to be applied to the current expenses of its office for the ensuing year. All moneys so paid aforesaid info the Treasury of the State shall be placed to the credit of a special fund called the "Special Road Fund"), TO BE PLACED TO THE CREDIT OF, AND DIVIDED EQUALLY BETWEEN TWO SPECIAL FUNDS THE FIEST TO BE KNOWN AS THE -SPECIAL ROAD FUND," AND THE SECOND TO BE KNOWN AS A "FUND FOR THE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYS- TER BARS." 22 Discussion : The preceding amendments provide for the Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars through reshelling and restocking by establishing a fund for that purpose equal to one-half of the net revenue received from the leasing of oyster plantations on barren bottoms. The omitted portions of Section 118 of the existing law are no longer necessary as the Mary- land Oyster Survey is now complete, and no fur- ther money is required for that purpose. In connection with these amendments, it is per- tinent to state that it is estimated the revenue which will be received from leasing of barren bottoms within the nest five years will net at least §50,000 a year, and that riltimately the revenue from this source should reach some hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. PROVIDED, THAT LAWS PERMITTING OTSTEE PLANTING ON A PRACTICAL BASIS SUCH AS EXIST IN PROGRESSIVE OYSTER CULTURE STATES BE ENACTED BY THE MARYLAND LEG- ISLATURE. SEC. 2. AND BE IT ENACTED, THAT THE FOL- LOWING SECTION BE AND IT IS HEREBY ADDED TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS", TO FOLLOW SECTION 112, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 112-A: SECTION 112 A. ANY PERSON WHO, BEING A LESSEE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, SHALL DREDGE OR OTHERWISE TAKE OYSTERS FROM ANY OF THE NATURAL BEDS OR BARS IN THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, IN VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE LAWS OF THIS STATE, SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT 28 COUKT FOE ANY COUNTY OF THIS STATE, OR IN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE PENALTIES PROVIDED IN SECTION 24 OF THIS ARTICLE FOR TAKING OYSTERS UNLAWFULLY WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF CERTAIN SECTIONS THEREIN REFERRED TO. Discussion : The preceding amendments provide for the punishment of any lessee of oyster bottoms who is foolish enough to violate the laws of the state by dredging oysters from natural oyster bars. It is held by opponents to oyster culture in Maryland that the government of the State of Maryland is unable to protect itself against the assumed criminal oyster planters, and therefore the preceding amendment would not be effective. Such an assumption that oyster planters are criminals and that the State of Maryland has nut the power to protect herself against such crim- inals is unreasonable, a slander on the people of Maryland, and on the administration of the gov- ernment of Maryland, and it is unbelievable that such an assumption will lie permanently accepted as a truth by the law-abiding people of Maryland. As a matter of fact, two honest police officials located on shore with telescopes and a speed motor boat nearby, could easily capture any criminal oyster planter violating the laws of the State. And the conviction of one or two such planters, with the attending disgrace of criminal punish- ment and the penalties provided for under the preceding section would go far towards creating a public seutiment and fear that would protect the public oyster bars from such marauders. 24 Section 24 referred to in the preceding section 112 A is as follows : (1894, ch. 380, sec. 23.) 24. ANY MASTER OR PERSON IN CHARGE OF ANY VESSEL WHO SHALL VIOLATE ANY OF THE PRO- VISIONS OF THE PRECEDING SECTIONS FROM 19 TO 21 INCLUSIVE BY TAKING OYSTERS UNLAW- FULLY SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF A MIS- DEMEANOR AND UPON INDICTMENT AND CONVIC- TION IN ANY CIRCUIT COURT IN THIS STATE, OR IN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE, BEFORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE SENT- ENCED TO THE HOUSE OF CORRECTION FOR A TERM NOT LESS THAN THREE MONTHS NOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR AND THE BOAT OR VESSEL USED IN SUCH VIOLATION, TOGETHER WITH THE PAPERS, FURNITURE AND TACKLE ON BOARD OF SAID BOAT OR VESSEL AT THE TIME OF SAID VIOLATION SHALL BE FORFEITED, BUT SHALL BE RELEASED UPON THE PAYMENT OF NOT LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS NOR MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND COSTS AND EX- PENSES FOR EACH AND EVERY VIOLATION OF THE PRECEDING SECTIONS, IN THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT. SEC. 3. AND BE IT EN AG TED, THAT THE FOL- LOWING SECTION BE AND IT IS HEREBY ADDED TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS", TO FOLLOW SECTION 115 AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SECTION 115 A : 25 SECTION 115 A. It SHALL BE UNLAWFUL EOE ANY PEESON OTHER THAN A LESSEE UNDER THIS ACT, OR FOR ANY LESSEE UNDER THIS ACT, WHILE HE SHALL BE IN DEFAULT IN PAYMENT ON RENT, TO APPROPRIATE TO HIMSELF FOR ANY PURPOSE ANY OF THE BARREN BOTTOMS UNDER THE WATERS OF THIS STATE WHICH ARE, BY THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, SUBJECT TO LEASE, OR TO USE ANY SUCH BARREN BOTTOMS IN ANY WAY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEDDING, PLANTING OR CULTIVATING OYSTERS, AND ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, AND UPON INDICTMENT AND CONVICTION IN ANY CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANY COUNTY IN THIS STATE, OR IN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, BE- FORE WHICH SUCH CASE IS TRIED, SHALL BE FINED THE SUM OF FIFTY DOLLARS FOR EACH VIOLATION THEREOF. EACH DAY DURING WHICH OR IN WHICH ANY OF THE ACTS PROHIBITED BY THIS SECTION MAY BE PERFORMED SHALL CON- STITUTE A SEPARATE VIOLATION OF ITS PRO- VISIONS. IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE STATE'S ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY HAVING JURISDICTION, OR OF BALTIMORE CITY AT THE REQUEST OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COM- MISSIONERS, TO PROSECUTE ANY ONE VIOLATING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION. THE NET PROCEEDS OF FINES COLLECTED UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE APPLIED AS FOLLOWS : ONE- HALF OF THE SAME SHALL BE PAID TO THE INFORMER, IF ANY, AND THE REMAINDER SHALL BE APPLIED ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 118 OF THIS ARTICLE. 26 Discussion : The preceding section together with section 105 as amended provide for the collection of rentals for use of State owned oyster bottoms, be they leased or otherwise appropriated without a lease. From the standpoint of the State there is one serious defect in the law as originally enacted, whereby it has been found to be impossible to col- lect the rents due for the use of lots leased from the State for the purpose of oyster culture or to prevent individuals from appropriating and using oyster lands for oyster-planting operations without having first leased them from the State. A very considerable number of lots are now held and used for oyster-planting purposes by planters who pay no rent to the State. Some of these lots have been surveyed, records have been made of the surveys, and leases have been issued to the holders, but others are being held and used with- out any formality having been entered into be- tween the holders and the State. The State, having expended a considerable sum of money in perfecting the conditions under which oyster culture may be successfully carried on, should now take the necessary steps to prohibit tin- use of ground for oyster culture by persons who do not hold leases to the ground or who are delin- quent in the payment of rent. 27 SECTION 4. AND BE IT EXACTED, THAT THE FOLLOWING SIX SECTIONS BE AND THEY ARE HEREBY ADDED TO ARTICLE 72 OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC GENERAL LAWS, TITLE "OYSTERS," TO FOLLOW SECTION 119, AND TO BE DESIGNATED AS SECTIONS 119 A, 119 B, 119 C, 119 D, 119 E AND 119 F : Note: The following six sections relate to the "Price Oyster Plan" for the "Conservation of Natural Oyster Bars,'' and are discussed in that part of this publication immediately following Sec- tion 119 F. SECTION 119 A. IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS TO TAKE SUCH MEASURES AS IN ITS JUDGMENT SHALL SEEM BEST CALCULATED TO INCREASE THE PRO- DUCTIVITY OF ANY PART OF THE NATURAL OYS- TER BARS DEFINED AS SUCH BY RECOHDS AND CHARTS FILED WITH THE COURTS OF THIS STATE; AND THE EXPENSE OF SO DOING SHALL BE PAID OUT OF THE "FUND FOR THE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS," UPON REQUISITION MADE BY THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMIS- SIONERS, ENDORSED BY THE COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE. SECTION 119 B. ANY NATURAL OYSTER BAR OR BARS, OR PARTS OF BAR OR BARS, WHICH THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS MAY DESIGNATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING CULTI- VATED AND RESTORED MAY BE EXEMPTED BY THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS FROM ALL RIGHTS OF TAKING OYSTERS IN ANY 28 MANNER BY ANY PERSON WHATSOEVER FOR \ PERIOD TO BE SPECIFIED IN A NOTRE OF SUCH INTENTION TO BE PUBLISHED IN LOCAL PAPERS THIRTY DAYS PRIOR TO SUCH ACTION; PROVIDED THAT SAID PUBLISHED NOTICE SHALL BECOME VOID AND OF NO EFFECT AT ANY TIME DURING THE PERIOD OF THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE PUB- LICATION OF SAID NOTICE BY THE FILING OF A PETITION WITH THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COM- MISSIONERS SIGNED BY TWENTY-FIVE LICENSED OYSTERMEN ENTITLED TO TAKE OYSTERS FROM THE BARS OR PARTS OF BARS DESIGNATED BY THE SAID NOTICE. SECTION 119 C. FOR THE PURPOSE OF PER- FORMING THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS BY SECTIONS 119 A AND 119 B, THEY MAY EMPLOY A SUPERIN- TENDENT OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS, OR DESIG- NATE ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS TO ACT AS SUCH, AND IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF SUCH SUPERIN- TENDENT, UNDER DIRECTION OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS, TO GIVE PERSONAL SUPERVISION TO THE WORK OF CULTIVATING AND RESTORING THE NATURAL OYSTER BARS DESIG- NATED FOR THAT PURPOSE BY THE ORDER OF THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS. SECTION 119 D. THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH C< >M- MISSIONERS, IN ADDITION TO TAKINO SUCH MEAS URES OF CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS AS IN ITS JUDGMENT SEEMS ADVISABLE, SHALL PURCHASE FROM THE LOWEST RESPONS] BLE BIDDER, SHELLS OR OYSTERS AT SUCH 29 PLACES AND IN SUCH QUANTITIES AS MAY BE NEEDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESTORING THE NATURAL OYSTER BARS, AND IN INVITING PRO- POSALS FOR SUCH SHELLS OR OYSTERS THEY MAY PRESCRIBE THAT THE SHELLS OR OYSTERS SHALL BE DELIVERED AT A CONVENIENT PLACE FOR SHIPMENT, OR THEY MAY REQUIRE THAT THE SAID SHELLS OR OYSTERS BE DELIVERED AND DISTRIBUTED BY THE SELLERS THEREOF ON SUCH PARTICULAR NATURAL OYSTER BARS, OR PARTS OF BARS, AS THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS MAY BE ENGAGED IN CUL- TIVATING AND RESTORING, AND THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO CAUSE SUCH SHELLS OR OYSTERS TO BE PROPERLY DISTRIBUTED ON THE DESIGNATED NATURAL OYSTER BARS, OR PARTS OF BARS UN- DER THE DIRECTION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS. SECTION 119 E. FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIS- CHARGING THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON IT BY THE FOUR PRECEDING SECTIONS OF THIS ACT, THE BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS SHALL HAVE THE SAME CONTROL AND DIREC- TION AND BE TO THE SAME EXTENT OVER THE STATE FISHERY FORCE, AS IS GIVEN TO SAID BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS BY SEC- TION 97 OF THIS ARTICLE. SECTION 119 F. THE SAID BOARD OF SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS SHALL IN NO CASE CON- TRACT ANY OBLIGATION OR INCUR ANY INDEBT- EDNESS FOR THE RESTORING AND RE-SHELLING OF NATURAL OYSTER BARS IN EXCESS OF MONEY AT THE TIME OF THE INCURRING OF SAID OBLI- 30 GATION OR CONTRACTING OF SAID DEBT, IN Till STATE TREASURY TO THE CREDIT OF THE " FUND EOR CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OYSTEB BA] Discussion: The preceding six new sections 119 a to 119 f inclusive, provide in accordance with the "Price Oyster Plan" I'm- conservation and restoration of the 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the Maryland Oyster Survey. Tin- money for this purpose to be obtained through revenues thai ivill be received from the fens/;/;/ "/' oyster planta- tions on barren bottoms as soon as lairs are pasted by the. Maryland Legislature permitting oyster cul- ture on the same practical basis existing in thosi progressive oyster culture states which an- mur rapidly talcing atcay the better pari of the oyster trade once held by Maryland. The history of the growth and decline of (he industry of taking oysters from the natural oyster bars of Maryland shows that these oyster burs produced an average of 12,000,000 bushels during the fifteen years of 1873-88, and thai now by rea- son of a lack of remedial, legislation providing for the practical conservation of these vast oyster resources these same oyster bars only produce 4,000,000 bushels. Stating the preceding paragraph in another way, the oystermen of Maryland have been permitted to so rob themselves since the fifteen years ending in 1888, that it is conservatively estimated on the basis of present prices that they have made ust less over thirty million dollars of their own oyster prop- erties. 31 In the face of these facts the need of the conser- vation of the natural oyster bars of Maryland can not be honestly questioned, or can it be open to doubt in the face of other facts stated in other parts of this pamphlet that the leasing of oyster plantations on barren bottoms will provide the necessary revenue for this purpose, provided oyster laivs are passed by the Maryland Legislature per- mitting oyster culture on the same practical basis existing in progressive oyster culture States which have increased their production of oysters by 8,000,000 bushels during the same period in which the production of oysters in Maryland teas decreased by the same amount. SECTION 5. AND BE IT ENACTED, THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ITS PASSAGE, AND THAT ALL ACTS, OR PORTIONS OF ACTS, INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, SHALL BE ^ND THE SAME ARE HEREBY REPEALED. 32 NOTES RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION OF THE OYSTER RESOURCES OF MARYLAND- (Cross-References to Notes.) Advance of oyster industries in other States. Notes': 4, 9, 12, 21, 22, 23. Area that may be leased. Notes': 14, 31, 34, 37. Barren bottoms available for oyster planting under practical oyster culture laws. Notes : 10, 15, 21, 34, 37. Benefits of oyster culture and conservation t<> oystermen. Notes: 8, 17, 21, 23, 28, 30. Conditions for oyster culture in Maryland different from other States. Notes : 4, 7, 9, 16, 18, 21, 22, 26, 35. Connecticut. Notes : 7, 9, 16, 21. Conservation of natural oyster bars. Notes : 8, 13, 19, 23, 28, 29, 30, MS. Corporations can not engage in oyster culture. Notes : 14, 33, 34. Danger of monopolj- from oyster culture. Notes : 14, 31, 34, 37. 33 Danger of monopoly from dredging under existing laws. Note: 37. Decline of Maryland's oyster industries. Notes : 13, 23, 28, 29, 38. Destruction of the natural oyster bars. Notes : 8, 13, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38. Essentials for success in oyster culture in Maryland. Note : 15. Expenses of the Maryland Shell Fish Commission. Note: 39. Expenses of the State Fishery Force. Notes : 19, 30. Glut of oysters. Notes : 23, 35, 36. Greatness of the oyster industry of the United States. Notes : 3, 25. Growth of oyster industries of United States while those of Maryland have decreased. Notes : 9, 13, 21, 23, 35. History of the growth and decline of Maryland's oyster indus- tries. Notes : 8, 13, 3S. Is oyster culture a theory ? Notes : 4, 9, 12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 22, 24, 35. Kellogg on the oyster in politics. Note: 26. Loss due to a lack of remedial legislation. Notes : 1, 8, 10, 19, 23, 26, 28, 29, 38. Maryland Oyster Survey. Notes : 2, 6, 10, 11, 27, 39. 34 Maryland's rank as an oyster producing State. Notes : 3, 18, 21, 26, 38. Natural oyster bars irrevocably reserved for tbe oystermen of Maryland. Notes : 2, 6, 11, 21, 27. New York. Notes : 9, 18. Non-residents. Notes : 14, 32. Opportunity for individual oystermen to become oyster planters. Note: 17. Oyster legislation. Notes : 1, 10, 15, 26. Quantity of cultivated oysters in tbe United States. Notes : 12, 23, 35, 38. ■*> "") W) Rbode Island. Notes : 5, 24. Revenue to State government from oyster planting. Notes : 5, 24, 39. Starfisb and otber enemies to oyster culture. Note: 7. Total production of oysters in tbe United States. Notes : 3, 12, 23, 25. Virginia. Notes : 4, 22. Value of cultivated oysters in tbe United States. Notes : 12, 18, 23, 35. Will oyster culture reduce prices? Note: 36. 35 NOTES RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OYSTER RESOURCES OF MARYLAND. 1. The aim of future oyster legislation iu Maryland should be to develop her vast 03'ster resources, and then to so manage them that they will produce a large revenue for the benefit of the entire State. For more than thirty years all oyster legis- lation has been directed toward preventing the destruction of natural oyster bars, but this legislation has done nothing more than to retard this destruction. And now greatly to the discredit of Maryland's administrative capacity, her oyster industries have not only degenerated to one-fifth of their known possibili- ties but they have also become an expense to the State instead of a source -of great revenue. 2. The State and Federal governments combined have expended over two hundred thousand dollars and over five years of time in surveying the more than two hundred thou- sand acres of the natural oyster bars of Maryland so that they could be accurately charted for the purpose of irrevocably reserving them for the sole use of oystermen. 3. It is estimated that in 1910-11 the total production of oysters in the United States was 35,000,000 bushels and that Maryland only supplied one-tenth of this total. 4. Just on the other side of the imaginary Maryland-Vir- ginia boundary line in the county of Accomac, in the State of Virginia, there are thousands of acres of oyster bottoms under cultivation as contrasted with tens of acres in the adjacent county of Somerset in the State of Maryland. 5. In Rhode Island one oyster planter alone pays the gov- ernment of that State $27,000 each year for the rental of 4,700 acres of barren bottoms where oysters never grew before they were cultivated. 36 6. The Hnman Oyster Culture Law provided that an accu- rate survey of the natural oyster bars should he made, and its provisions for this purpose have proven to be most practical and satisfactory. As a result of this survey 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars have been charted and reserved for the sole use of oystermen. This area greatly exceeds any estimate made previous to the survey. And this fact should convince all fair-minded oystermen that the State has no thought of sac- rificing their interests for the benefit of oyster planters. 7. In Connecticut and many other oyster-culture States the oyster planters have to expend large sums of money in protect- ing their oysters against destruction by star fish and other ene- mies of oysters. In Maryland the 03'sters are practically free of such enemies, and this one thing alone gives the oyster planters of Maryland a great advantage over many of their competitors in other States. 8. The oystermen of Maryland have so robbed themselves since 1884, that it is conservatively estimated on the basis of present prices that they have made useless over thirty million dol- lars worth of their own oyster properties and at the same time prevented for all those years the development of other oyster properties of fully equal value. 9. By oyster culture methods Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware have greatly increased both the quantity and the value of their oysters, while on the other hand during Hie same period Maryland has greatly deer< ast d both the quantity and the value of her oysters. 10. The Maryland Oyster Survey has shown that, in addition to 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars, the State of Maryland owns and absolutely controls 300,000 acres of bottoms which can produce oysters but which are now barren. And it has been clearly demonstrated that the Hainan Oyster Culture Law in 37 its present form fails to provide the necessary foundation required for the practical development of oyster culture on these 300,000 acres of the state-owned oyster bottoms. 11. The State and Federal governments combined have published and filed with the courts of Maryland over two thou- sand printed pages of technical records, and forty-four large charts, for the sole purpose of defining and securing to the oystermen of Maryland all their ancient rights of free fishery on over two hundred thousand acres of public oyster bars. 12. In 1908 forty-four per cent of all oysters produced in the United States were cultivated oysters, and their value was sixty-five per cent, of the total. 13. Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Virginia have greatly increased their production of oysters while Maryland has decreased her production of oysters from fifteen million of bushel in 1884-85 to three and one-half million of bushels in 1!) 10-11. 14. If the Hainan Oyster Culture Law is amended as pro- posed by the Campbell-Price Bill, it will still say that " no cor- poration, or joint stock company, shall be permitted to lease or take up, or to acquire by assignment, or otherwise, any lands of the State for oyster planting or cultivation ;" that the " term of all leases shall be twenty years ; " that " leases shall be made only to residents of Maryland ; " and that " no person shall be permitted, by lease, assignment, or in any manner, to acquire a greater amount of land than thirty acres situated within terri- torial limits of the counties, or five hundred acres in any other place." 15. Maryland has stopped short of offering sufficient induce- ments to her citizens to cultivate oysters on barren bottoms. 38 She has withheld certain rights and privileges which are recog- nized by all progressive oyster States as being absolutely essential to success in oyster planting operations, and it is folly to expect, and wrong to urge Maryland's citizens, to lease any portion of her 300,000 acres of state-owned barren oyster bottoms until her laws are so amended as to provide the rights and privileges demonstrated to be essential to suc- cess in culture of oysters on bottoms where oysters do not 16. One oyster culturist in Connecticut plants over fire hun- dred thousand bushels of clean shells each year to catch "oyster spat" for seed, while in Maryland nature provides each year many hundreds of thousands of bushels of seed oysters which are killed each year by freshets, and are thns wasted unless illegally taken up for steaming or selling to oyster planters of Connecticut, Virginia and other States. 17. Oyster planting not only benefits the oyster planter but idso benefits the oystermen in many ways, as for example : establishing brands for oysters that increase the reputation and value of all oysters of the State including those taken from the natural oyster bars ; increasing the number of " spat " likely to "set" on the natural oyster bars; increasing the demand and consequently the price of small oysters only- fit for planting ; supplying opportunities for employment in cultivation of oyster farms during closed season ; increasing the demand and consequently the price of shells ; and in addition to these benefits the Maryland oyster culture laws furnish every oppor- tunity for the individual 03'stermau to become an oyster planter. 18. In 1908 Maryland produced two and one-fifth times as many bushels of oysters as New York, yet in the same year New York received fourteen per cent, more money for her oysters than did Maryland. 39 19. The people of the whole State of Maryland are now paying the oyster police officials of Maryland nearly fifty thou- sand dollars each year for the purpose of protecting the ancient privileges of oysterruen to state-owned oyster properties that experts say will some day pa} - a net income of ten per cent, on over one hundred million of dollars ; and this, too, in the face of the fact that these properties have been so depleted by these same oystermen that they do not now pay the oystermen more than ten per cent, on twenty million of dollars. 20. The last edition of the Encyclopedia Britanica states that not over seven per cent, of all European oysters are gath- ered from natural oyster bars. 21. Nature only provided Connecticut with one thirty-sev- enth of the area of natural oyster bars she gave to Maryland, and yet in 1908 through cultivation of her oyster resources, the value of the oysters sold by Connecticut was fourteen per cent, greater than the value of oysters sold the same year by Maryland. 22. A report of the U. S. Census Bureau states that in 1908 the leased areas of Virginia contributed fifty-seven per cent, of the value of all her oysters. 23. Oystermen of other states have managed their oyster resources so as to increase the total production of the United States by about ten million of bushels during the last twenty- five years while Maryland's oystermen during the same period have so managed their oyster resources as to decrease the pro- duction of oysters in Maryland bj" the same ten million of bushels of oysters ; and the question is, who lost and who gained the money paid for those ten million bushels? 24. In the small State of Rhode Island, the net oyster rev- enue received from 19,000 acres of leased bottoms formerly barren of oysters is over one hundred thousand dollars each year. 40 25. Kellogg says in liis book on Shell Fish Industries : "Our attention is often called in a deprecating manner to the enthusiastic admiration of many Americans for big tilings possessed by their country." "But possibly it will do no harm to make the statement for the benefit of such enthusias- tic Americans, that nowhere do oysters grow so rapidly, nowhere are they so abundant, nowhere may they be so easily cultivated, and nowhere is the oyster area of such vast extent as on our shores." "In truth, here is very much the largest thing of its kind in the world." 26. Kellogg says in his book on Shell Fisli Industries : "Of late years it has everywhere become the habit to refer to the upper Chesapeake as the dead goose that laid golden eggs. When modern oyster laws are being demanded in other states, Maryland is exhibited as the horrible example of faulty legis- lation on the oyster industry." "An American from any other part of the country knows without being told that such a state of affairs is probably to be explained by what is the fact in this case — that the Maryland oyster is deeply involved in politics." 27. In Maryland the State and Federal governments com- bined have made over one hundred and eighty thousand sound- ings and chain readings covering a distance of over three thou- sand miles ; have examined the oysters on the bottom at eleven thousand oyster investigation stations ; and have permanently secured the location of this information by establishing eleven hundred triangulation landmarks on shore marked by monu- ments weighing a total of two hundred thousand pounds ; all for the purpose of determining and defining for all time the boundaries of the more than two hundred thousand acres of natural oyster bars reserved for the sole use of oystermen by the terms of the Hainan Oyster Culture Law. 41 28. During the fifteen years of 1873 to 1888 nature gave the oysterrnen of Maryland an average of twelve million bushels of oysters for each of these fifteen years, and yet in the face of this fifteen years' demonstration of the capacity of the waters of Maryland to produce oysters, nature only gave the oystermen of Maryland some three and a-half million of bushels of oysters in the season of 1910-11. 29. The United States Census Bureau states that " the value of the oyster products of Maryland decreased twenty-three per cent, during the eleven years from 1897 to 1908, which con_ trasts sharply with an increase of forty-seven per cent, in the aggregate value of all other fishery products in that State dur- ing the same period." 30. The State of Maryland now expends thousands of dol- lars each year to keep oyster dredgers from robbing the 03-ster tongers, and to keep both the tougers and dredgers fiom rob- bing themselves by taking half-grown oysters. 31. If any one oyster planter in Maryland should lease the maximum of five hundred acres permitted by the Hainan Oys- ter Culture Law as amended by the Campbell-Price Bill, and if this five hundred acres was made to produce the average amount of oysters taken from a similar area of Maryland's natural oyster bars, this oyster planter would only increase the output of oysters in Maryland by one four-hundredth part. Or stating it more broadly and accurately this oyster planter under the conditions described would only increase the total output of oysters in the United States by one part in four thousand. This indicates very clearly that neither a monopoly or a glut in oysters is likely to result from oyster planting under the rigid restrictions provided by the Hainan Law as it is pro- posed to amend it by the Campbell-Price Bill. 42 32. Section 110 of the amended Human Oyster Culture Law says: "No assignment or transfer of any interest acquired by this Act shall be valid for any purpose if made to a non-resi- dent of this State." 33. Section 110 of tbe amended Hainan Oyster Culture Law- says : "If any assignment of any interest created by this Act is attempted to be made to any corporation or joint stock com- pany, all the interest of the grantor or assignor shall revert to the State as if no lease had ever been made." 34. Section 110 of the amended Haman Oyster Culture Law says : "If any assignment of any interest created bj' this Act is attempted to be made to any person in such a way that tin- assignee shall become the holder of more than thirty acres, one hundred acres, or five hundred acres as the case may be, according to the location of the land leased under this Act, all interest of the grantor or assignor, in case of such assign- ment, shall revert to the State as if no lease had been made." 35. In Maryland it is said that if oyster culture is not a theory that it will cause an over production of oysters which will reduce their price, and that it is not more oysters that are needed in Maryland but higher prices ; yet it is estimated that in the season of 1910-11, Maryland only supplied one-tenth of all the oysters produced in the United States, and it is known that Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware have through oyster culture methods increased both the cpuantity and price of their oysters ; while ou the other hand during the same period Maryland has greatly decreased both the quantity and the price of her oysters. 36. The real answers to the statement that "an increase iu the production of oysters in Maryland will mean a loss to the oyster industries of the State by reason of low prices due to a. 'glut ' of oysters," are as follows : 43 1st. Oyster culture is the only method by which a periodical " glut " of oysters can be prevented. This fact is borne out by the history of oyster culture in all real oyster culture states. On reflection the reasons for this truth are man}-. One of them is the fact that the storage of marketable oysters on private oyster plantations is automatically increased through self-inter- est of the oyster planters when the prices of oysters are low, and likewise for similar reasons the quantity of marketable oysters on private oyster beds is decreased when the prices are high, thus maintaining a steady supply and the best market prices such as are paid for oysters in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware. 2nd. Another reason is that the demand for oyster and other tish foods of all sorts is increasing throughout the world by reason of growth of population and better facilities of trans- portation while the production of oysters in Maryhind is decreasing; and incidentally in this connection it should be noted that other oyster culture states, unlike Maryland, believe that they can make more money by supplying this demand than they can by raising prices through restricting the produc- tion. 3rd. In fact, when it is remembered that Maryland only pro- duces one-tenth of all the oysters of the United States, which oysters are of even less relative value, any attempt of Maryland to increase prices through monopoly of oysters is not only a hopeless undertaking but is also a policy that means an annual net loss to the industries of Maryland of one to three millions dollars each year. 37. It is stated that 500 acres of bottoms in the exposed open waters of Chesapeake Bay is too great for any one man to lease for purposes of oyster culture because it would mean a monopoly. Yet it is a fact that )/ one firm in Maryland should 44 happen to own only one per cent, of all the dredging bonis of Mary- land that this one firm would receive an amount of oysters from the free public natural oyster bars of Maryland equivalent to the production of 500 to 1,000 acres of these natural oyster bars. No one who is familiar with the existing conditions dominat- ing the oyster controversy iu Maryland can doubt, that if one firm does not now own or control five to ten per cent, of the dredging boats of Maryland, that such a firm is likely to become a reality in the near future, and it ought to be known that such ownership or control of ten per cent, of the dredge boats of Maryland would mean that these owners would receive a quantity of oj T sters from the free public natural oyster bars of Maryland equivalent to the average production of 5,000 to 10,000 acres of natural oyster bars of a far better character than can be leased by an oyster planter. However, even the control of the product of 10,000 acres of natural oyster bars would not constitute a dredging monopoly, because this would only mean that this assumed firm of oyster packers or dredgers owning the assumed dredging boats con- trolled something less than one-twenty-fifth of the production of oysters in Maryland, and that would mean in the final analysis that this one firm would only control one two hun- dred and fiftieth part of the total oyster production of the United States. If the preceding statement of what may happen in Maryland under existing conditions of the oyster industry of that State, is contrasted with the fact that in; oyster planter in Maryland is permitted by the Campbell-Price Bill to lease an area which will produce more than one four-thousandth part of the pro- duction of 03'sters in the United States, it becomes evident that there need be no fear of an oyster planter monopolist who is confined to 500 acres of barren bottom, which he must cover with shells, must plant with seed oysters, must cultivate, must protect against thieves, and for which he must pay the State an annual rent of $500. 45 38. The history of the rise and fall of the production of oysters in Maryland is most instructive in showing the hope- lessness of expecting that unaided nature will again restore Maryland to its rank as the greatest oyster state of the country. Commencing with 1850, we find the quantity of oysters pro- duced in that year was about 1,000,000 bushels ; twenty years later in 1870 it was 10,000,000 bushels; in another five years in 1875 it reached 14,000,000 bushels ; and in the year 1885 its marvelous growth attained its highest point of 15,000,000 bushels. From 1885 to 1888, the production of oysters in Maryland declined to 10,000,000 bushels, the last date marking the end of a fifteen year period in which the natural oyster bars yielded to the oystermen of Maryland an average of 12,000,000 bushels a year. In 1897 the quantity of oysters produced by Maryland was something less than 6,000,000 bushels, and in 1910-11 it is conservatively estimated that the natural oyster bars of Maryland only yielded 4,000,000 bushels. Accepting the figures as stated, the decline of Maryland's oyster industries since 1885 is represented at this date by a loss of 10,000,000 bushels of oysters each year. The statistics from which the preceding facts were obtained are the best that are available ami there is no more reason to suppose that the actual decline in the production of oysters in Maryland, u-as less than has been stated than there is reason to assume that it was greater. But nevertheless, assuming that the figures of 15,000,000 in 1885 were too great by twenty-five per cent., and we still have nearly 12,000,000 bushels which is the same as the average given for the fifteen consecutive years of 1873 to 1888. And also assuming that the figure for 1910-11 is twenty-five per cent, in error, but in the opposite direction, 46 which is giving the "doubter" twenty-five per oi nt. leeway in his favor at both ends of the argument, and we still have only 5,000,000 bushels for the quantity of oysters now produced in Maryland. These figures and facts speak for themselves, and it is only saying what is obvious, when we slate that the 215,852 acres of natural oyster bars of Maryland should be looked after, not only in some manner different from that which has bi i □ applied in recent years but that also they should be restored to. their former productivity of 12,000,000 bushels a year which we know they can and will yield under practical laws of conser- vation and restoration such as is provided by the " /'■ Oyster Plan," 39. The Maryland Oyster Survey has cost the State and Federal governments combined more than two hundred thou- sand dollars. This survey is now completed and the expenses of the work will have entirely ceased by June 30th of this year. From now on the cost of the administration of the Maryland Shell Fish Commission should not exceed §7,000 a year, an amount that will undoubtedly be more than covered the first year by revenue received from the leasing of oyster plantations. The second year the reveuue should be doubled, and within ten years there is no reason to suppose that it will be less than $100,000 annually and constantly growing larger. Provided that the amendments to the Haman Oyster Culture Lair ,,/' V.mr, contained in the Campbell-Price Bill are enacted by tin General Assembly of Maryland. 47 EXTRACTS FROM PRINTED INTERVIEWS OR PUBLIC ADDRESSES OF GOVERNOR GOLDSBOROUGH, SENATOR PRICE, SENATOR CAMPBELL, SENATOR GOSLIN, SENATOR MIL- BOURNE, AND A REPRINT OF A CLIPPING FROM THE EASTON STAR-DEMOCRAT. Extract From Address of Governor Goldsborough Before a Coneerence of Those Interested in the Oyster Indus- try Called by Him to Meet at Annapolis on February 2, 1912. (From Hi" Baltimore NEWS of Feb. 2. 1012). Governor Goldsborough opened the meeting with a short address, in which he said that the oyster industry in Maryland vvus languishing and thai something should be done to improve conditions. As be came from an oyster-producing county, whatever measure of su icess he bad met with was due to the oystermen, and therefore their welfare was dear to his heart. Favobs Oyster Cclti-re. lie said the needs of the tongers and the dredgers were the greatest and should lie looked alter by the State. lit declared that he thought oyster culture desirable, but that it should not In- accomplished al the expense of the men who for genera- tions have earned their livelihood on the water. Me thought that the interests of those engaged in the various branches of the industry ought not to clash. The Governor expressed the view that if any revenue is derived from the leasing of the barren bottoms not more than half should go to the roads, as is now provided, but that half should be devoted tu a system of replenishing the natural beds and bars. He thought it wise to put the shells on the bars to improve the quality and the quantity of the product. He declared the oyster question the greatest problem now before the people of the State. 48 The "Pkice Oystek Plan" as Developed by an Inter- view with Senator Price. (From the Baltimore SUN of Jan. 31, 1912.) Senator Price, of Wicomico, the President of the Senate, is always interested in oyster legislation, representing as he does a large number of people engaged in taking and dealing in oysters. Besides this he is a Marylander and an active and Successful business man. and is anxious to aid in any legisla tion which will upbuild the state, add to its wealth and give profitable employment to the people. Discussing the Campbell Oyster Planting Bill today. Senator Price said: "The decreasing productiveness of tin 1 oyster bars of the Chesapeake and the increasing difficulty thai the oystenncn have in making a living warns the Legislature thai something must be done to revise the great oyster industry of the State. I am advised that the annual catch of oysters has declined from something like 15,000,000 bushels a year down to r!.500.00O. That means that a great number of people who formerly made their living by tonging. dredging and in the packing houses have been forced out of the business and have bad 1" seek other employment, and that those who are still engaged in taking oysters do not make as good a living as they formerly did. How Benefits Mat T'.e Shared. "Still a large number of our people remain in the business of taking oysters, and I think that tin' mistake thai has been made in the bills for oyster planting thai have come before the legislature is that the tongers and dredgers have not been sufficiently considered. They have felt that their rights were ruthlessly invaded. Perhaps they were mistaken, hut that is the way they have felt, and I. for one, cannot blame them. In my judgment it is absolutely essential to the complete success of the planting industry to have the assent and good will of the oystering people. How can this be attained? "By making them share in the benefits of the planting law. This can be done in two ways: "First, by applying at least hall' of the revenues from the leased bottoms to shelling the natural beds for the benefit of tongmen and dredgers. "Second, by offering every inducement to the oyslernien to engage in planting. This latter 1 understand is contemplated in the Campbell bill. This hill reduces the rentals fur a number of years to $1 an acre per annum ami gives oystermen prefer- ence over others in leasing grounds. 49 Would Make Babs Pboductive. "It is pretty certain that, it oyster shells were liberally scat- tered on the natural bars as clutch, those bars would soon become as productive as ever. Many of the bars have been scraped so clean that there is nothing for the spat to catch to. and the result is that most of them are greatly depleted, and some of them are now regarded as barren bottoms. It has long been the desire of the oyster people to restore these bars to their former productiveness, but they have never been able to accomplish it. In 1010 a law was enacted providing for reshelling the natural beds, and a tax was levied upon oysters to provide funds. That tax was declared invalid by the courts and nothing could be done. Industry Mist Be Rescued. "I am advised that the members of the Shellfish Commission have said that they had information that from 20.000 to 40.000 aires of barren bottoms would be leased within 18 months after the Campbell bill passes. This would give at the proposed rental of $1 an acre a revenue of from $20,000 to $40,000 a year. I believe that, if (he Campbell bill were amended so as to give half this revenue to reshelling the natural beds, it would reconcile the oystei'ing people to the bill by showing that their rights and interests are being fairly considered. As for me. I could not bring myself to vote for any oyster measure which I did not consider beneficial and lair to the oystering people. If the Campbell Mil can be so amended as to take care of the natural bars. I could fairly and freely support it. The time has come when the oyster industry must be rescued from destruction, and some one must take the bull by the horns and do something." Discussing the terms of the Campbell bill. Senator Price said he thought that, while the penalties put upon planters who would invade natural beds with their dredges are severe, (hoy might be [yioperly made more so by making the forfeit- ure "I" (be oysters a part of the penalty. The sentiment in th