Tons of Fishing
Web Directories And resources!

Just as it had on the eastern seaboard of the United States, the rapid settlement and economic development of the British North American colonies in the first half of the nineteenth century had the effect of markedly diminishing the salmon fishery. Early nineteenth-century colonial economies were based primarily on agriculture, lumbering, and fishing. Clearing land for farming and driving timber down the rivers compromised the optimal balance of cool, clear water conditions and consistent water levels necessary for fish spawning. The building of hundreds of sawmills and mill dams in the three provinces, particularly after 1830, also damaged river fisheries, as few mill owners bothered to adhere to regulations regarding fishways and the dumping of refuse into rivers and Most importantly, the rapid increase in population resulted in more pressure on resources both at a subsistence and commercial level. Alone, the addition of thousands of families splitting and salting a few barrels of salmon for food during the winter constituted a significant strain on the salmon population. Added to this pattern was the growing importance of salmon as a commercial product, as improved steamer service and processing technology allowed for the growth of a canning industry and a trade in fresh fish packed in ice to cities on the eastern seaboard of the United

Environmental changes and the enthusiastic pursuit of the Atlantic salmon by an ever-growing population produced a resource crisis by the middle of the nineteenth century that prompted colonial administrations to bolster efforts aimed at conservation. In the 1850s, more stringent fishery laws were passed in New Brunswick (1851), Nova Scotia (1853), and Quebec (1855).11 The new acts created a single set of regulations that could be applied colonywide and put in place the basic structure for modern fisheries administration. Many regulations contained in the acts were simply lifted from existing local acts; however, there were two new regulations that eventually would have a major impact on resource users who fished for Atlantic salmon above the head of tide on the region's rivers. First, in all three provinces the new acts singled out spearing and netting of salmon on spawning beds as the major cause of resource depletion and prohibited these practices. Second, the Quebec and New Brunswick acts provided for the leasing of exclusive fish ing rights on the fluvial portions of rivers where adjacent land remained un-granted by the

These new provisions reflected the growing influence, even at this early date, of sport fishing interests over the development and administration of salmon regulations. American historians have long recognized the importance of sportsmen and sporting organizations to the late-ninetecnth-century wildlife conservation movement. As John Reiger has pointed out, sporting organizations had the knowledge, wealth, and political connections to direct fish and game commissions and state governments to implement the "sportsmen's code," which was adopted from the practices of British and European aristocrats and combined scientific and moral arguments to justify "sporting" methods of hunting and The salmon fishery was the first wildlife resource in Canada and, arguably, in North America to come under a regulatory regime inspired by this new ideology of resource management. The Quebec and New Brunswick fisheries acts in the 18505 were preceded by commissioned reports undertaken by prominent In the 1850s and 1860s, the process of accommodating sporting interests was driven by colonial officeholders and British military officers garrisoned in British North America. New Brunswick Lieutenant Governor Arthur Hamilton Gordon, for example, was an ardent sportsman, as was Governor General Sir Edmund Head, "to whom New Brunswick and Canada (were much indebted for the interest he took in the fisheries." In Nova Scotia the new salmon fishing regulations were most strongly advocated by the Society for the Protection of Game and Inland Fisheries, which was founded in 1858 by British officers stationed at the Halifax By the early 1860s, these British officials were joined by a few elite American sportsmen, such as Charles Lanman and Robert Barnwell Roosevelt, uncle of President Theodore Roosevelt and a founding member of the influential Boone and Crockett

Within this small elite sporting fraternity there was a consensus of opinion regarding the need to end spearing and netting on salmon spawning beds and on the beneficial effects of leasing rivers and streams to sportsmen. Richard Nettle, the fishery commissioner for Lower Canada (Quebec), expressed the common moral revulsion against taking salmon on the spawning beds when he remarked that, "[t]he practice of capturing salmon by torch light and spear is justly held to be the most pernicious ... Practiced during autumn and periods of reproduction, as is still more frequently the case, it becomes indescribably bad-it is the crowning act of extirpation." While Robert Barnwell Roosevelt wondered why "[t]hese villainies are not at present punished with death or imprisonment for life," the proposed solution to eliminating such practices was to lease rivers to "responsible persons." The commissioned reports and writings of sportsmen frequently contained favorable comments on experiments in Ireland with leasing rivers to sportsmen. The renowned sportsmen and naturalist Moses Perley, who reported on the fisheries for the New Brunswick government, noted that in "nearly exhausted" Irish rivers that were leased to sportsmen, "the salmon have increased most wonderfully." It followed, Perley believed, "that by this arrangement, the fisheries of rivers flowing through un-granted wilderness lands, which are now being destroyed in the most wasteful and reckless manner, might be preserved and rendered profitable."17 Out of the relatively discrete experiments in Ireland, the idea of leasing exclusive river fishing rights to sportsmen in Canada was born; in the 1860s the leasing system took hold and eventually was introduced on virtually all of the productive salmon rivers in New Brunswick and Quebec.

The new fishing regulations produced mixed results up to the time of Canadian Confederation. Government studies in New Brunswick (1863) and Nova Scotia (1867) revealed that fishing practices remained difficult to control and that the salmon fisheries continued to Underlying the lack of progress, noted the new federal fisheries inspector for New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, W. H. Yenning, in 1868, was a weak commitment to administration and From all indications, Lower Canada made greater progress in the decade before Confederation. The central reason was that by 1867 more than two dozen rivers had been leased to sportsmen, as opposed to only one in New Brunswick. The government of the United Canadas also made concerted efforts to set up a leasing system to enforce regulations among the commercial net fishers on the tidal waters of the salmon-rich rivers running into the Baie de

Upon assuming control of the fisheries, the Canadian federal government embarked on a program of fisheries management, which included management of the dwindling Atlantic salmon resource. The three overlapping objectives of the program-rehabilitation, regulation, and enforcement-were set out in "An Act for the regulation of fishing and protection of the Fisheries" in 1868. In large part the act was a mirror image of the existing fishery legislation in Quebec and Ontario, which had been standardized between the united provinces in the Most of the principal measures included in the act already were part of the local and provincial fisheries legislation in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. However, reflecting the political uncertainties over the division of provincial and federal powers in the young dominion, allowances were made for a substantial number of regulations and customary practices in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia that diverged from those in the central provinces. The two Maritime Provinces, for example, were exempt from the regulation that prohibited net fishing above the head of tide on rivers and With so much local practice and legislation left to stand, it would be two decades before the Maritime Provinces were fully integrated into the federal fisheries program.

By nineteenth-century standards, the Canadian federal salmon program constituted an unprecedented and impressive effort at environmental management. The jewel of the program to rehabilitate the Atlantic salmon resource was artificial propagation, as Canada quickly became a world leader in this field after 1870. In 1874, the first salmon hatchery was opened on the Restigouche River, and by 1890 the program had expanded to thirteen hatcheries in New Brunswick, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward In the late 1860s and early 1870s the department also spent a considerable amount of money digging channels through sand bars that inhibited the progress of migratory fish species and disassembling the derelict dams of mills that were no longer in use. At this time the Department of Marine and Fisheries also began to ban all fishing on some rivers where the salmon run had been seriously depleted or eliminated; the bans often were undertaken at the behest of local sporting promoters and met with hostility and resistance from other residents. A much larger and more difficult task was convincing or forcin g owners of operating mills to maintain fishways and refrain from throwing refuse into the streams. The principal offenders of the fishway and mill-waste regulations were, of course, the lumber operators, who openly defied the efforts of fishery officers and continually used their political connections to gain exemptions. Steady progress was made over the course of three decades, particularly with regard to the building of fishways, but, as Gilbert Allardyce has shown, even in 1900 some sawmill owners continued to successfully defy the environmental regulations set out in the fisheries

The most important changes bought by the advent of federal administration of the fisheries were financial and administrative. A hierarchical bureaucracy was set up for the first time, with full-time officers sworn and accountable to upholding their duty. By the mid-1870s, the federal government had a staff of more than three hundred fishery officers in the three provinces. One-quarter of these men were overseers and inspectors, armed with powers of search, seizure, and arrest; the remaining three-quarters were wardens, who worked seasonally under the overseers. Achieving the efficient regulatory regime mandated in the regulations was difficult, however; it involved prohibiting tens of thousands of residents who had fished for salmon on thousands of miles of rivers before 1867 from participating in the harvest as they had for generations. In lieu of the ability to protect the salmon in all places at all times, the department sought to educate the public-to convince people in rural areas of the logic and benefits of proper resource management. Increasingly, after 1870, the Department of Fisheries also relied on assistance from the emerging sport fishing industry.

In the decades after Confederation, the implementation of the federal fisheries policy was influenced greatly by the flowering of an elite sporting culture in northeastern North America. Under the program of leasing riparian rights on the fluvial portions of rivers running through Crown land, the most productive salmon rivers of eastern Canada were literally colonized by individual sportsmen and salmon clubs. Indeed, the "King of the Game Fish" attracted some of the most powerful commercial and political elites of North America. The Vanderbilts, for example, had a lodge on the Restigouche River that was designed by Stanford White, the prominent New York architect; railway magnate J. J. Hill was first a member of the "wealthy and aristocratic" Restigouche Club and later leased his own river on the North Shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence; the Cascapedia River was reserved for the governor generals of Canada, until the lease was bought out by a group of wealthy Americans in By 1890 there were close to one hundred such leases in New Brunswick and Quebec. Most of the best Atlantic salmon waters adjacent to ungranted land thus came under the control of sporting Angling clubs came to play an important part in protecting the rivers from poaching because hiring private guardians during the fishing season was a condition of all the lease agreements in New Brunswick and Quebec. On some rivers private guardians were made special wardens of the Federal Department of Fisheries, which meant that they drew their pay from the salmon clubs but also were given the magisterial powers of search, seizure, and arrest. The scores of private guardians on duty each year "protected" the salmon on the upper sections of rivers, which were often beyond the jurisdiction of federal fishery

The importance of the sporting fraternity to the regulation of the salmon fishery extended beyond the practical matter of lending assistance to government wardens. Sporting organizations, Richard Judd has noted, "linked arms with state fish and game commissions and helped turn the conservation movement in the direction of sporting as opposed to commercial and subsistence activity."28 Elite sporting clubs had access to the highest levels of the provincial fisheries commissions and the federal Department of Marine and Fisheries. Federal and provincial politicians and fish and game administrators were often members or guests of fish and game clubs, and the socializing of officials and sportsmen fostered a set of common ideas regarding wildlife management. The relationship between the groups was furthered by sportsmen's exhibitions in places like New York and Boston and high profile conferences on fish and game protection, which became more frequent in the

The influence of the sporting fraternity on fisheries administration was strengthened in the early 1880s, when the provincial governments of Quebec and New Brunswick wrested control over the leasing program from the federal Attracted by the money generated from angling leases and enamored of the potential economic benefits of sporting tourism, the provincial fishery commissioners became enthusiastic and unapologetic supporters of the sport fishery. Yet the provincial governments played little role in the actual enforcement of fisheries regulation. In 1895, for example, the New Brunswick government employed just one warden, compared to fifty-nine private guardians engaged by the leaseholders. The commissioner of Crown Lands in Quebec commented in 1885 that "[i]t is considered advisable that the waters containing fish should be largely under private control, rather than that the provincial government should undertake the work of protection. The Commission of Crown Lands is therefore desirous," he continued, "of encouraging the formation of angler's associations and granting them five year leases of lakes and rivers, or a portion of rivers."31 Provincial fisheries commissioners functioned more as landlords and tourism promoters. The annual reports of the New Brunswick fisheries commissioners in the 1880s and 1890s were glorified sportfishing tracts-compiled from seasonal visits to some of the best angling clubs-with a bit of moralizing against spearing and netting thrown in for effect. In Nova Scotia, construction and administration of fish and game laws was left in to the Society for the Protection of Game and Inland Fisheries, which was essentially a sportsmen's organization. Indeed, written into the provincial game laws was a provision that the society receive one-half of the monies generated by Salmon anglers engaged in a large-scale colonization of the region's salmon rivers with the full cooperation of the provincial governments.

SETTLERS AND SOCIAL CONFLICT

IT IS CLEAR that the federal and provincial fisheries administrations, in conjunction with their sport ing allies, achieved the most basic goal of preserving the Atlantic salmon fishery. This was something of an achievement considering that the salmon fishery had been destroyed from the Hudson River in New York all the way up to the most northern rivers in Maine by 1850. The combination of regulation and enforcement, habitat rehabilitation, and artificial propagation, combined with relatively low levels of population density and industrialization in the region, at least stemmed the rate of decline of the salmon fishery. To some extent, the fisheries administrations were aided in their efforts by the support of people living along the rivers of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Quebec. For a variety of reasons, it is difficult to gauge the exact level of public support for the salmon program. Merchants involved in provisioning anglers and hunters, hotel owners, and local sport-fishing enthusiasts were certainly supportive of the new regime. Indeed, there was a distinct (but not exclusive) middle-class character to the constituency in favor of the salmon laws. Upriver settlers and commercial salmon fishers supported the regulations to the extent that they restricted the fishing of their traditional rivals; similarly, residents of European descent expressed few objections to restrictions placed on Native

Yet violation of the fishing regulations was endemic on nearly all salmon rivers and streams in the three provinces. Traditional harvesting patterns and methods persisted among residents in the vicinity of non-tidal waters into the twentieth century. Spearing salmon at night by torchlight, a method that white settlers learned from Native peoples, continued to be practiced throughout the region. Another common practice among settlers above the head of tide was sweep netting or "sweeping." This mode of fishing involved paddling two canoes against the current while dragging a net along the river bed. After 1880, dynamite also was employed to great effect when thrown into salmon pools. This practice seems to have been most prevalent in Among farmers with river-front lots, the use of stationary stake nets was the most common harvesting method. By simply extending a gill net a few hundred feet into the river, farmers could integrate fishing with other activities.

The frequency and pattern of poaching varied between localities and depended upon a wide variety of factors. The fish population in the river was, of course, important, as it determined whether the reward of setting a net or tossing a stick of dynamite was worth the risk of prosecution for a fishery violation. Local custom, the geography of rivers, the density of population and the potential market for selling fish also shaped poaching patterns. The opening of the Intercolonial Railway in the late 1870s, for example, stimulated an illegal trade in salmon in some districts of New Brunswick and Of primary importance was the level of protection exerted by fishery officers and angling clubs. On the most prestigious rivers, such as the Restigouche and Cascapedia, poaching was kept to a minimum by the large number of private guardians on patrol during the fishing season. The efforts of the guardians was supplemented by the practice of buying waterfront property near salmon pools and even compensating some residents for not fishing in front of their farms. Illegal fishing also could be curbed by targeting trouble spots and placing "special fishery guardians" on duty, as was done on some rivers in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in the early 1890s. It was well-recognized by this time that politically appointed regular wardens, "whose pay was but nominal," did not always "give the necessary attention to the protection of the fisheries in their respective districts."36 Cooperation between private guardians and federal fishery wardens also could keep a lid on poaching.

Even the best efforts of the government and the angling clubs could not guarantee that salmon fishing regulations would be honored by local residents. From the outset, fishery officers in many districts in the three provinces noted a "very determined opposition to the law" and "generally a strong desire to evade the law."37 In large part, illegal salmon fishing activities were furtive and benign; that is, they involved one or a few persons spearing fish by torchlight late in the evening or setting out a stake net after dark. But they also could be well organized and sometimes included monitoring the activities of fishery officers. A Miramichi River officer voiced a common complaint when he reported that the "independent poor" in his district "club together"; "some of them are detailed to keep watch on every approach an officer can make, while the rest stop the channel with their nets. They play it so fine now, that it is impossible to catch them."38 The fishery inspector for New Brunswick conceded in 1886 that, in general, "[p]oachers and dealers have the business well organized and between them they can watch the officers more effectively than the officers can watch them."39 When wardens and overseers did happen to find nets or catch perpetrators in the act, taking action could be dangerous.

The annual Atlantic salmon run produced a series of confrontations each season between anglers, private guardians, government wardens, and local fishing populations from 1867 to 1914. The weapons of resistance employed on the rivers of the eastern provinces of Canada had clear similarities to those used by rural people protesting the closing of common property resources at least as far back as the early eighteenth century in Great Verbal insults and physical confrontations between private guardians, government wardens, and poachers sometimes ensued over attempts to confiscate fish and equipment. Fishery officers reported on a regular basis that rocks were thrown at them or that their canoes and other equipment were destroyed. Threatening anonymous letters were sent to fisheries officers. More often letters, both signed and unsigned, were sent to the department, alleging that particular officers were guilty of political favoritism, nepotism, or ethnic bias (in mixed Francophone-Anglophone districts) in the enforcement of

Fishery officers frequently were the target of intimidation or revenge from local residents who shot at them from the banks of rivers. Such was the case on the Tusket River in Nova Scotia in 1894, when the federal Department of Fisheries placed additional officers on the river to curb illegal fishing. "On three separate occasions your special guardian on the Tusket River has been fired at from the shore," J. R. Kinney, the fishery overseer for Yarmouth, informed the Deputy minister. "The inhabitants along the banks of the stream are as a rule notorious poachers. I am taking extreme measures for the enforcement of the regulations, particularly as to the salmon, hence the open hostility for the officer." Kinney requested that the department post a reward and remarked, with an air of resignation, that "I can hardly hope for a conviction but the offer may to a certain extent assist the guardian as much as it would make it known that the Department would protect its officers to the extent of paying a reward." The Yarmouth overseer was informed that it was not the policy of the department to post rewards and that "it would be better to engage a good detective."42

Poaching gangs were the most brazen and frequent opponents of the federal salmon program. On the tributaries of the Saguenay River in Quebec there were persistent problems with organized groups of poachers. As a result the Department of Marine and Fisheries, at the behest of salmon leaseholders, dispatched an armed patrol steamer in 1897. On the Ste. Marguerite River, the local fishery officer noted, "they club together, a few, 4 - 5 or 6 with masks even in daylight, and dare the guardian who would be powerless if alone, but if they see a large vessel or stronger force they scramble to the woods in no time. They are settlers or their sons who live along the rugged banks."43 The continual poaching and intimidation of fisheries officers on the Wallace River in Cumberland County, Nova Scotia, finally prompted the department to offer a reward for information on a particular group of local settlers (see Figure 1).44 Even the salmon hatchery opened on the Dunk River in Prince Edward Island in 1875 was dogged by poaching gangs. In 1881, the fishery inspector for the province reported that "[i]t gives the other officers and myself pleasure to state that ... an organized gang of poachers, armed and disguised," who "habitually harassed the river and defied the Wardens ... has, finding its occupation gone, broken up voluntarily."45 The pleasure of the officers was no doubt tempered by the fact that the activities of the gang had compromised efforts to reintroduce a salmon fishery to Prince Edward Island's slow moving and shallow Subsequently, organized poaching resumed on the Dunk River when conditions were favorable, as in 1890 when "[t]he abundance of fish increased their audacity, and setting all law at defiance, they made the most determined effort to take them, coming in collision with wardens on more than one occasion."47

These collisions with poaching gangs could have devastating consequences for the fishery officers. Occasionally, wardens' homes were burned by poaching gangs. Guy Carr, a fishery overseer on the Quebec side of the Restigouche River, lost his barn and livestock to fire on 28 April 1899, but managed to save his house. The incendiaries returned on 20 May and burned down the house and a shed. Carr made an unsuccessful appeal to the department for compensation and shortly thereafter left the In November 1908, Oliver Robichaud, an overseer in Gloucester County, New Brunswick, ran afoul of members of a "rough gang" of poachers who were in the habit of setting nets across the span of a bridge on the Pokemouche River and taking salmon, trout, and other spawning fish. After a failed attempt to break into Robichaud's barn to retrieve confiscated nets, the perpetrators returned two nights later and set fire to his home and barn. Only a few pieces of furniture were saved. In this case a departmental investigation led to charges against three men, which "aroused a good deal of local feeling." They were released when a grand jury found "no bill" against them in June 1909. The prosecuting attorney insisted that the case was strong and complained that the "duty of summoning the jury was not altogether done free from political bias." Unlike Guy Carr, Overseer Robichaud eventually received compensation from the federal

Resistance to the salmon laws was greatest on rivers where stake netting was practiced above the head of tide. When the original federal fisheries act was passed 1868, officials decided to allow this practice to continue in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, perhaps in recognition of the potential difficulties with prohibiting thousands of farmers from fishing in front of their property by blanket proclamation. During the 1870s and 1880s, the department gradually imposed a stake netting ban with varying degrees of The last two rivers to be placed under the ban were the St. John and Miramichi in New Brunswick, which were two of the largest and most productive rivers in the region; they also had the most stake netting above the head of tide. Widespread resistance to the stakenetting ban on the Miramichi, which came in 1889, was apparent in departmental correspondence in the 1890s. A department official reported that, "Overseer Boyle has about 70 nets on hand and Overseer Hogan about as many seized within the last year, while officer John Robinson, Jr. of Newcastle has 39 taken during this spring, they have been seized when no one was present (owners having got out of the way) to claim them." By this time the officers on the Miramichi had resigned themselves to making periodic rounds of their districts at daybreak to collect nets that had not yet been taken up for the day, thereby avoiding the trouble and potential danger of prosecuting violators. In this instance they were ordered to burn the nets; however, in recognition of the controversial nature of the fishing regulations, they were told that "it should be done quietly with as little publicity as possible."51 New Brunswick Fishery Commissioner D. G. Smith admitted the difficulties in the imposing the ban on the Miramichi River at a meeting of the North America Fish and Game Association in 1900. "|T]he effect of that prohibition was to make every resident on that river either a poacher or a sympathizer with poachers, so now they have a system of signals along that river. If there is an officer on the train, the engineer will toot the whistle so that they know he is coming along." Smith further cautioned the conference participants that, "we must not overdo the thing, and we must not manufacture poachers ... we have to consider that we have to go up against privileges which may have existed for a long time, and we may find that if we strain public sentiment, that we may make poachers of people who would never have thought of such a thing."52 This was an unusually candid recognition of the fundamental problems with the salmon fishing regulations.

The stubborn culture of resistance transcended a simple refusal to abide by the salmon laws or withholding assistance to attempts to prosecute poachers. In many places, resistance also became embedded in local political structures. While sport-fishing interests were highly successful in shaping the salmon regulations in Ottawa and the provincial capitals, they were engaged on more equal footing in the upriver communities of the region. One of the central problems with implementing the salmon regulations in the field was that many local magistrates and politicians sympathized with the poachers. The comment of the lawyer in the Robichaud house burning case-that the "summoning of the jury was not altogether done free from political bias"-was indicative of the widely held view that justice was not blind to the perceived inequities in the fishery laws in some localities. Dean Sage, a leaseholder on the Restigouche watershed, likewise voiced a common complaint when he noted that "the sympathies of the magistrates are uniformly with their friends and neighbors who may be unfortunately apprehended; the law on the subject holds many loopholes for the escape of violators and is always construed in favor of the defendants."53 The experience of North West Miramichi Overseer John Kingston was typical of the frustrations endured by the field staff of the federal fisheries department. On the morning of 1 June 1898, Kingston was shot at from the banks of the river in the Parish of North Esk. The officer brought charges against John Hare, from whom he had confiscated a net less than an hour earlier. Kingston testified that Hare had warned him that "if you take up that net you will never go away alive." Several neighbors came forward and testified that Hare was a man of upstanding character and that he did not own a gun. Because Kingston did not actually see the shooter, the case was dismissed and Hare, according to the local newspaper, "returned to his home rejoicing, accompanied by the congratulations of many of his friends." Generally, fisheries officers knew the identity of the men in black face, the individuals shooting from the banks, and the people who put out nets in the evening. However, the sympathies of magistrates, combined with the intimidation of witnesses, made the prosecution of poachers difficult in many Indeed, the statement of J. R. Kinney, who felt that he could "hardly hope for a conviction," even though he had been shot at repeatedly, reflected a common belief among officers.

The administration of the fishery regulations in the field also was complicated by the pervasive patronage system in Canadian politics during the period. For the most part, fishery overseers were political appointees and were not always physically qualified or inclined to put forth a serious Even for the most competent and diligent officers, their employment was less than secure. Most notable in this regard was the election of the Wilfred Laurier Liberals in 1896, which ended three decades of Conservative Party domination at the federal level and resulted in the purging of hundreds of overseers and On a day-to-day basis fishery officers also depended upon the approval of members of the federal House of Commons and local patronage committees for their jobs; the necessity of serving local political masters could have a significant impact on the vigor with which officers administered the regulations in localities where the politicians were sympathetic to the local fishers. David Morehouse, a justice of the peace on the Miramichi River, alluded to the impact of local politics in Northumberland County, New Brunswick, when he complained to the minister of Marine and Fisheries that "under Committee rule hundreds of salmon are killed weekly opposite my home." "[A]s long as the Committee chooses wardens it will be no better," he suggested, as "a great many wardens has the idea if they are hard on the fishermen they will lose their office."57

Even when convictions were obtained, Members of Parliament and other local political elites regularly called upon the ministers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries to return seized boats and equipment, suspend fines and otherwise deal leniently with loyal constituents. Often, as demonstrated by the discussions surrounding the case of eight Acadian men from Cheticamp, Nova Scotia, caught spear ing salmon, these appeals for leniency were made on the basis of both party loyalty and the poverty of the convicted parties. In successfully appealing for the fines of the Cheticamp men to be set side, their lawyer, a professed Liberal party supporter, remarked: "They have considerable pluck these poor Cheticamp Grits and care should betaken not to injure their feelings ... Of course if there were any possibility of acquitting them altogether or, in the alternative further reducing the penalty, you would by obtaining such, gain the eternal gratitude of these men, of their liberal friends, and of no small wing of the Conservative Party in that neighborhood." Although the responsible officer, A. G. Bertram, insisted that he had taken the "poverty of the offenders ... fully into consideration" and warned that further consideration would undermine the authority of officers in the field, he was told to take "no action" with regard to collecting the

Yet the political pressure on fisheries officers was not just for leniency. They also were pressured by political elites, salmon leaseholders and local supporters of sport fishing to intensify efforts to prosecute poachers, which added to the precarious nature of the job. Complaints by anglers and sporting advocates were particularly frequent during seasons when the salmon run was small; and they were taken seriously, as the wealth and status of leaseholders and other anglers often gave them a direct line to the upper levels of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, if not the minister. A. G. Bertram, the same inspector who prosecuted the Cheticamp men in 1896, found himself under criticism in 1909 for failure to prevent illegal netting and spearing on the Margaree River, which had been plagued by poaching gangs for decades. In this case the movement for more effective protection of the river began with a report from an unidentified angler who, dissatisfied with his catch, made a report to the governor general of Canada, who forwarded the report the minister of Marine and Fisheries and the lieutenant governor of Nova Scotia. In the end, Bertram was able to satisfy his superiors that his district was understaffed and troublesome, and an extra guardian was assigned to the Complaints did not always travel through such elite channels. However, the constant reminders to department officials from sporting interests that a lax enforcement of regulations compromised the protective efforts undertaken by anglers, as well as the financial benefits they brought to the rural economy, provided a countervailing tension to the appeals for leniency coming from upriver communities.

To a significant extent, the fishery officer was the conduit through which the low-level, localized political struggles over the salmon laws were played out over the course of decades. The administration of fisheries regulations for field officers was a matter of understanding and balancing opposing political tensions unique to each locality. The successful fishery officer was one who understood the relationship between the local angling leaseholders and the provincial and federal fisheries departments, the sympathies of local politicians and patronage committees, and the likelihood that the other fishers in his district would take hostile action if he became zealous in the enforcement of regulations. The contradictory political and social forces acting on fishery officers were, in large part, responsible for producing a regulatory regime that was uniform in statute but highly uneven in implementation.

At the root of the on-going problems in legitimizing the federal salmon fishing laws in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Quebec was the nature of the program itself and the deep ideological divide between sporting interests and state administrators and the rural population. Efforts to "educate" the people to the "wisdom" of the new regulations never yielded the anticipated results, because they were transparent in favoring the interests of anglers over other groups. In essence, the people along the rivers were being told by the federal and provincial governments that it was in their best interests to discontinue fishing practices which had been pursued, in some cases, for generations-that there was more to be gained from attracting tourist anglers than from harvesting salmon. At the same time, the provincial governments were leasing an ever-increasing portion of the salmon waters to angling clubs.

The early struggles of upriver settlers for a share of the river fisheries had by Confederation been refined and hardened into a sense of entitlement to local natural resources, particularly in the many rural districts where foraging was still an important component of the economy. Most of the upriver settlements in Nova Scotia, Quebec, and New Brunswick were poorly endowed with arable farmland, and the entire region was burdened by a short and unpredictable growing season. Thus many, if not most, families who ventured upriver to open new lands could not succeed solely as farmers. Economic life in upriver settlements had always been characterized by seasonal rounds of farming, laboring, timber cutting, and other means of scratching out a In many localities the river fisheries were an important part of the cycle of subsistence. In the century before Canadian Confederation, upriver settlers appealed for a regulatory regime which recognized their common right to a share of the salmon and other migratory fish runs. They also enforced community norms of harvesting. When the passing of jurisdiction from local to federal control resulted in a regulatory regime that favored anglers and, to a lesser extent, commercial net fishers, a culture of resistance grew in upriver communities, many of which already were feeling the strain of rural out-migration by the

This sense of entitlement to fish and game resources, as Richard Judd has noted, was rooted in the notion that those engaged in extending farm settlement into upriver regions were entitled to access to the fish, game, and forest resources which could aid the process of Again and again fisheries officers and anglers made statements to the effect that local residents "have always looked upon the habit of illegal fishing by net and spear as a privilege that was an inheritance of their fathers," and that in the case of "[s]ettlers, who from childhood, have been accustomed to draw on the water at all seasons for all the fish they needed ... it is difficult to bring before their minds that the fish of the streams are not feroe naturoe but are either public or private property and as such are amenable to protection in like manner as any other property."63 The system of leasing exclusive rights to many of the best salmon waters, often to Americans, intensified the sense of injustice. An "old settler" on the Restigouche River no doubt expressed the view of many that, "[i]t is hard to see the wealthy for sport, take at our very doors, what is a necessity for our little ones and ourselves. Drag as we may through the long cold winter; bear without murmur the burden of taxes imposed upon us, and if need be shoulder arms in defence of a country which fails to protect us ... Such treatment is encouraging to our young men not to settle."64 There were deep suspicions, particularly in New Brunswick, against the "boodlers and corruptionists" in the provincial governments who allegedly leased salmon waters to political favorites for a nominal fee and tolerated the sub-letting of rights for "fabulous figures."65 Undoubtedly, the fact that Thomas G. Loggie and Charles A. Bramble, both deputy surveyors of Crown Lands in New Brunswick, sub-leased fishing rights on behalf of Miramichi angling clubs out of their government offices in Fredericton helped fuel suspicions of political The frustration and anger over the salmon laws and the leasing system was best expressed, in a public manner, in 1888 following a tragic incident on the Tobique River in New Brunswick.

"MURDER MOST FOUL"

SUSAN HOWE, her husband Major Charles Howe, and their four children, residents of Brookline, Massachusetts, were regular visitors to New Brunswick. In August 1888, the major obtained permission from the New Brunswick Railway Company to fish on a stretch of the Tobique River in Victoria County, on which the company held exclusive fishing rights. While there on a fishing expedition, the family encountered Frank Trafton and Henry Phillipine, local residents of the Town of Plaster Rock. On the evening of Saturday, 18 August, Trafton and Phillipine were out illegally spearing salmon by torchlight, when they unwittingly maneuvered their canoe to a pool within a few hundred yards of the camp occupied by the Howe family and the Maliseet guides Ambrose Lockwood and John Thomas. Led by the major, a Civil War veteran, the Howe party chased the two poachers off the river. Young Claude Howe, a son, reportedly fired warning shots over the canoe of the local men.

The following morning, Frank and Henry set out in search of the Howe's with the intention, they informed Henry's sister Annie, of giving them "a ducking." When they located the Howe party, the two men opened fire. Susan Howe was shot in the head and died ten minutes later. "Murder Most Foul" the local headlines screamed, as news of the death of thirty-six year-old Susan Howe spread through the There was little drama in terms of locating and arresting the suspects. Frank Trafton and Henry Phillipine were apprehended on the following Monday. The Sr. John Globe reported that the "people of the Tobique turned out en masse to arrest the parties and held them awaiting the arrival of the sheriff. The temper of the people is very near lynching point."68 Trafton and Phillipine pleaded not guilty, setting the stage for a dramatic trial in October 1888.

Within a week of the death of Susan Howe, public perception of the two suspects and their actions changed dramatically. Indeed, the first hint of a potential change in public opinion was contained in the same newspaper article that described the lynching mood of the crowd. The St. John Globe reporter noted that there "was an intense feeling among some of the settlers respecting the manner on which the fishing rights on the river are disposed of ... They feel that the fish in the stream which flows past their doors should be as free as the air they breath."69 The feelings against sport fishers were particularly intense during the 1888 fishing season as the provincial government had granted an exclusive lease to the Tobique Salmon Club to fish on a large stretch of the river. The club compounded the animosity by posting signs on the river informing local residents that anyone fishing illegally would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. As the local fishery officer remarked in his annual report, "The parties claiming to have charge undertook to frighten the settlers by putting up notices along the river forbidding fishing. All this had the reverse effect, and brought out spearing implements that had not been used for years. The result was a most deplorable tragedy, by which an estimable and unoffending lady was killed by a rifle bullet."70

The hostility toward the sport-fishing clubs, which was lost in the excitement of the moment, resurfaced quickly as the full details of the incident became clearer. On 25 August, five days after the death of Mrs. Howe, the St. John Globe published a letter from the Rev. Leo Hoyt of Andover. After expressing his most deeply felt condolences to the Howe family, Rev. Hoyt defended the people along the river and condemned the action of the Howe party. "An impression should not be left on the public mind that the settlers on the Tobique are a lot of border ruffians of whom such things might be expected. During the last summer they have been irritated beyond measure and have suffered in silence. Their riparian rights have been violated. ... The term 'poachers' applied to those fishing on their own ground or that of their neighbors by consent is a needless insult. The firing at persons spearing salmon is as illegal as the spearing itself and firing in the air is not much better. People are not dogs that they should be fired at, nor crows that they should be frightened from mischief by the smell of powder."71 Subsequent letters to the local papers were more emphatic. One correspondent remarked that "i[t] is a Godless law which takes away the poor man's substance and gives it to wealthy foreigners who treat the settlers like they were brutes with their threats and their shots, who spend the Sabbath fishing and shooting, who by their recklessness are known to have shot horses in the vicinity of the murder."72 The facts that the Howe party had fired the first shots and that they were fishing and hunting on Sunday became central themes in the public reexamination of the case.

Within two weeks of the incident the phrase "Tobique murder" had all but disappeared from the local newspapers. Instead, people usually wrote about the "Tobique tragedy," an unfortunate accident rather that the despicable act of cowardice that had first been reported. Editorial writers and correspondents to the newspapers agreed that the accused must be punished if found guilty, but also demanded that leniency be shown, in consideration of the circumstances under which the incident took place.

The response of the people in communities in the upper St. John River valley was similar to that of the people in other communities subject to fish-and-game regulations. In Washington County, Maine, residents aided and abetted George Magoon in his effort to elude authorities after killing a warden in 1884, at the height of the "Down East Game War." Similarly, the Megantic Outlaw, Donald Morrison, received support from the Highland Scots immigrants of the St. Francis region of eastern Quebec after a land dispute escalated and resulted in Morrison killing a deputy in 1888. Trafton and Philippine were apprehended almost immediately after the Tobique killing and, therefore, did not achieve the "social bandit" status accorded Magoon and Morrison. However, the similarities in public comment on these three incidents suggests a broad and deeply held bitterness in the struggling rural communities of northeastern North America during the late nineteenth century toward the growing concentration of land and forest resources in fewer hands and the closing of access to fish and game resources that traditionally had been part of the seasonal rhythm of

The prosecution understood the shift in public opinion. In his opening ad dress in Victoria County Court on 29 September, the attorney general for New Brunswick, Andrew Blair, a leaseholder himself, launched into a spirited defense of the fishery laws that, judging from the transcript, lasted for fifteen minutes. He acknowledged the widespread dissatisfaction with the fishery laws but concluded that it was "too late in the day for anyone to make a grievance out of such regulations" and that there was "no foundation for the feeling which since this sad affair occurred has been excited in the community."74 The evidence against Trafton and Phillippine was overwhelming. The testimony of Annie Philippine-in which she recounted the breakfast conversation with Henry, the appearance of Trafton and their subsequent departure-was the most damning. Henry had informed her of Susan Howe's death and admitted to firing two shots, and he also indicated that Trafton did not stop firing until the rifle was wrestled from his hands. Other residents along the river had seen the accused traveling to and from the scene of the George Gregory, the attorney for the accused, focused on creating a sympathetic portrait of Henry and Frank. Gregory's description of Henry Phillippine as a young man who had lost his parents and was fishing simply to feed his younger siblings was said to have brought tears to the packed courthouse gallery. Angling for a lesser verdict than capital murder, Gregory further argued that even if the two men did fire the shots, Susan Howe's death was an accident-the act was committed with no forethought or malice toward the

With the testimony complete, Judge Wetmore gave instructions to the jury on 2 October 1888. "A case involving the life of two of their fellowmen was a painful one," he remarked, but "such sympathy must not interfere with either the judge or jury in the discharge of their duty." After reviewing the evidence, the judge concluded that, "[t]he act would seem to show a wanton, cruel, barbarous and reckless disposition, entirely regardless of the taking of a human life and if the jury found this to be true, this would be sufficient evidence of malice to make the crime willful murder. If no death ensued and the prisoners had been indicted for firing with intent to kill or to commit grievous bodily harm, would not there be sufficient evidence to convict them of these offences? If so the crime they were guilty of was willful murder."77

The jury retired to deliberate on the afternoon of 2 October. The conclusions of Judge Wetmore could not have been encouraging for Frank Trafton and Henry Phillippine, as they pondered the prospect of an appointment with the hangman. The jury came back in the evening unable to reach a verdict and was again sent away to deliberate. The following morning they delivered a verdict of manslaughter, rejecting the murder charge. In his sentencing comments to Trafton and Phillippine, Judge Wetmore expressed skepticism at the verdict and alluded one last time to the fishery dispute from which the crime emanated:

The evidence was such as to have justified, almost compelled any jury to have found you guilty of the greater charge and you have had a very narrow escape indeed. The difference in the enormity of the offences rests wholly upon your intent, and the jury have given you the benefit of all of the evidence in your favor, and of every doubt that might exist as to intent. Whatever was your motive, whether relying on a feeling of discontent, knowing the sentiment of the people on the Tobique respecting the fishing rights, and hoping to be heroes or martyrs of the occasion, or merely to commit an act of heedless folly, the result has been very awful

Later that day the Judge sentenced Trafton and Phillipe to fifteen years in Dorchester Penitentiary. The debates over the wisdom and justice of the salmon fishing laws continued for

In the wake of the trial public discussion continued in the province's newspapers. The prevailing feeling in rural communities along the rivers of the province was reflected best in a letter to the Carleton Sentinel, by a correspondent identified only as "New Brunswick." In response the attorney general's defense of the salmon regulations, New Brunswick remarked that "Mr. Blair and his colleagues have handed over for a mere pittance all of the fishing rights of the province to monopolists ... and what was the result? These wealthy men come in here with an exaggerated sense of their rights, [and] backed by great wealth and the power of our own Government, they trample upon our own people and assume to execute our laws, with the sad and awful results which have taken place on the Tobique." The writer concluded, "[t]his law tends to retard the opening up and development of this country by promoting the settlement of the land along the rivers," because it "places the right of the many exclusively into the hand of the few."80 The attack on the leasing system as unfair class legislation that hindered agrarian development intensified in the early 1890s, as salmon leases in New Brunswick came up for

CONCLUSION

THE ATLANTIC SALMON conservation program was the earliest and most comprehensive program by the federal and provincial bureaucracies and their sporting patrons, to create the mythical "sportsmen's paradise" in eastern Canada. It was the first step by the urban elite in what would be a large-scale reconceptualization of the regional landscape as a wilderness preserve, rather than a venue for the development of market-oriented agriculture and industry. With the encouragement of the federal and provincial governments, sporting interests colonized the most productive upriver salmon waters in the region, engaged in a continuous political campaign to extend their rights, and set in place a private police force to protect their interests. Ironically, the intimate relationship between the state and elite sporting interests did result in a much higher level of protection for the salmon population than in the United States. However, to the extent that salmon anglers were able to create the sporting paradise of their dreams, it was more by force than by consent.

An examination of the Atlantic salmon fishery demonstrates that the politics of conservation in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries extended far beyond (or below) the level at which elites gathered to discuss the preservation of selected wildlife species. When politicians and sportsmen met in public forums or spoke privately, the implementation of a conservation regime built on exclusive access to wildlife resources and collaboration between "responsible persons" and the state seemed reasonable and even natural; it also had the added advantage of bringing economic activity to cash-poor rural communities, an argument pursued with vigor by the sporting fraternity. However, people in the upriver settlements of the region were loath to abandon their own vision of a landscape dominated by neat prosperous farms occupied by independent yeoman. They were loath also to view as rational policies that reduced their fishing rights, which had been guarded jealously for generations as an important element in sustaining communities in the pioneer phase of settlement and beyond.

Opposition to the salmon fishing regulations quickly became woven into the fabric of local politics after 1870 and showed few signs of abating on the eve of the First World War. Settlers engaged the political system from the bottom up-pressuring local members of the provincial and federal legislatures, magistrates, and fisheries officers-in an effort to preserve their rights and influence the administration of salmon laws. Thus, the local politics of wildlife management made the implementation of salmon regulations a political and social process, which was driven by the relative power of anglers and their supporters and dissenters within each upriver community. When local fishers believed they could get no satisfaction by employing conventional modes of local political action, or even beforehand, they voted with their spears and nets. Ritualized forms of illegal harvesting, intimidation and social violence were taken up both out of necessity and as a means of protest-asserting the traditional rights of settlers to a share of the river fisheries. The disjuncture between the elite politics of policy making and the local politics of administration was instrumental in the slow and highly uneven implementation of federal salmon fishing regulations in the half-century after Canadian Confederation. While the ideology of modern wildlife resource management quickly achieved a powerful and lasting hegemony in the corridors of power, it had limited success in penetrating the countryside.

NOTES

1. On the traditional interpretation of the wildlife conservation movement in the late nineteenth century, see John Reiger, American Sportsmen and the Origins Conservation, 2nd ed. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1977). For recent reinterpretations, see Richard Judd, Common Lands, Common People: The Origins of Conservation in Northern New England (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997); and Karl Jacoby, Crimes against Nature: Squatters, Poachers, Thieves, and the Hidden History of American Conservation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001).

2. Bill Parenteau and Richard Judd, "More Buck for the Bang: Sporting and the Ideology of Wildlife Management in New England and the Maritime Provinces, 1870-1900," in New England and the Maritime Provinces: Comparisons and Connections, ed. Stephen Hornsby and John Reid (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, forthcoming).

3. The four main resource-user groups were not entirely distinct. In particular, some upriver residents participated in the commercial net fishery. However, the breakdown of the groups in this paper follows the distinctions made in the colonial and, especially, the federal salmon regulations. The distinction "settler" is also not entirely without problems, but it is the term most frequently used both in government correspondence and among the uprivor residents themselves.

4. Statutes of New Brunswick (1793), 33 George III, ch. 9; R. W. Dunfield, The Atlantic Salmon in the History of North America (Ottawa: Department of Marine and Fisheries, 1985)- 53-54, 73-75; "Statement of the Seigniors of Rimouski and Metis: In Reference to Their Rights of Fishing in the Rivers Rimouski and Metis," (Quebec: C. Darveau, 1877); Statutes at Large Passed in the Several General Assemblies Held in His Majesty's Province of Nova Scotia, 1753-1804 (Halifax: John Howe, 1805).

5. Statues of Nova Scotia (1761), 2 George III, ch. 2 (in Statutes at Large Passed . . . in Nova Scotia, 1753-1804, 89).

6. Statutes of New Brunswick, 26 George III, ch. 33.

7. "Petition of the Several District of the Southwest, Northwest and Middle Districts of Miramichi," 23 January 1799, RG 24, Legislative Assembly: Sessional Records, S 13, P1, Provincial Archives of New Brunswick (hereafter, PAN B). For examinations of early conflict in the river fisheries of the United States and, particularly, the use of petitions as a means of influencing fishery regulations, see David J. Grettler, "The Nature of Capitalism: Environmental Change and Conflict Over Commercial Fishing in Nineteenth-Century Delaware," Environmental History 6 (July 2001): 451-73; Gary Kulik, "Dams, Fish, and Farmers: The Defense of Public Rights in Eighteenth Century Rhode Island," in The Countryside in the Age of Capitalist Transformation: Essays on the Social History of Rural America, ed. Stephen Hahn and Jonathan Prude (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985).

8. R. Louis Genticore, ed., Historical Atlas of Canada, Volume II: The Land Transformed, 1800-1891 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993), 28-31. An excellent compilation of fishery laws passed in the British North American colonies in the period 1800-1850 was produced in conjunction with an examination of the river fisheries by Governor General Sir Edmund Head, a prominent sport fishing advocate. Colonial Office, "Laws and Regulations Now in Force in the Undermentioned Colonies Relative to the Fisheries" (S. 1, s. n., 1856).

9. Dunfield, Atlantic Salmon; Douglas Wilson, "Report on the Salmon Fisheries in Certain Rivers of New Brunswick, 1862," in Journals of the New Brunswick House of Assembly, 1863, appendix, 1-30; Wynn, Timber Colony: A Historical Geography of Early Nineteenth Century New Brunswick (Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1981), 93-95; Gilbert Allardyce, "The Vexed Question of Sawdust: River Pollution in Nineteenth Century New Brunswick," Dalhousie Review 52 (1972): 171-90; James McGregor, Historical and Descriptive Sketches of the Colonies of British America (London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown and Green, 1828); Richard Nettle, The Salmon Fisheries of the St. Lawrence (Montreal: J. Lovell, 1855); Thomas F. Knight, The River Fisheries of Nova Scotia (Halifax: A. Grant, 1867); W. Agar Adamson, Salmon Fishing in Canada: By a Resident (London: Longman, Green, Longman and Roberts, 1860); Moses Perley, The Sea and River Fisheries of New Brunswick (Fredericton, .: J. Simpson, 1851).

10. For an excellent description of the development of the export trade in the 1840s, see Perley, The Sea and River Fisheries of New Brunswick. On the trade in fresh fish, see Dunfield, Atlantic Salmon; and Alexander Monro, New Brunswick with a Brief Outline of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island (Halifax: R. Nugent, 1855).

11. New Brunswick Acts (1851), 14 Victoria, ch. 31; Statutes of Nova Scotia (1853), 16 Victoria, ch. 17; Major W. Ross King, The Sportsman and Naturalist in Canada (London, 1866), 248-9.

12. Ibid.

13. Reiger, American Sportsmen and the Origins Conservation; see also, James Tober, Who Owns the Wildlife? The Political Economy of Conservation in Nineteenth Century America (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1981).

14. Nettle, The Salmon Fisheries of the St. Lawrence; Perley, The Sea and River Fisheries of New Brunswick. On Perley, see Peter Thomas, The Lost Land of Moses: The Age of Discovery on New Brunswick's Salmon Rivers (Fredericton, .: Goose Lane Editions, 2001).

15. Arthur Hamilton Gordon, Wilderness Journey in New Brunswick in 1862 and 1863 (St. John, .: J. and A. McMillan, 1864); King, The Sportsman and Naturalist in Canada, 248; Knight, The River Fisheries of Nova Scotia. On the interest of British colonial military and government officials in sporting pursuits and the preservation of fish and game, see also Robert Day, "The British Garrison at Halifax: Its Contribution to the Development of Sport in the Community," in Sport in Canada: Historical Readings, ed. Morris Mott (Toronto: Copp, Clark, Pittman, 1989); Parker Gilmore, Accessible Field Sports: The Experiences of a Sportsman in North America (London: ., 1869); Colonel Sir J. E. Alexander, "Fishing in New Brunswick and etc.," (.), in Adamson, Salmon Fishing in Canada.

16. Reiger, American Sportsmen and the Origins Conservation; Robert Barnwell Roosevelt, The Game Fish of the Northern States and British Provinces (New York: Carleton, 1869); Charles Lanman, Adventures in the Wilds of the United States and British North American Provinces (Philadelphia: J. W. Moore, 1856). The observations of Roosevelt, Lanman, Head, Gordon, and other pioneering American and British sportsmen are discussed in Thomas, The Lost Land of Moses.

17. Nettle quoted in Adamson, Salmon Fishing in Canada, 327; Roosevelt, Game Fish, 13; Perley, The Sea and River Fisheries of New Brunswick, 23.

18. Wilson, "Report on the Salmon Fisheries," appendix, 1-30; Knight, The River Fisheries of Nova Scotia.

19. "Report of R. H. Venning, Inspector of Fisheries for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick," in Canada, House of Commons, Sessional Papers, 1868, #12, appendix 3, 18 (hereafter, Sessional Papers).

20. "Annual Reports of Pierre Fortin, Commander of the Expedition for the Protection of the Fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence," 1857, 1861-62 and 1864-65 (Quebec: Hunter, Rose, various years).

21. That the primary objective of federal administration was to bring New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in line with legislation in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec was openly stated in the earliest reports of the Department of Fisheries. See, for example, "Mr. Venning's Report" (Southern New Brunswick) and "Mr. Miller's Report" (Northern New Brunswick), in "Reports of the Fisheries of the Dominion, 1867," appendix, in Sessional Papers, 1867, #43. On the fisheries law in the united provinces, see Nettle, The Salmon Fisheries of the St. Lawrence River.

22. Canada, Statues of Canada, 31 Victoria, 1868, ch. 60, 179-80, 190-2.

23. "Report on Fish Breeding in the Dominion of Canada," in Sessional Papers, 1882, #5, no. 4, 46.

24. See Allardyce, "The Vexed Question of Sawdust."

25. See Gary Hughes, "Beaux-Arts in the Forest? Stanford White's Fishing Lodges in New Brunswick," Journal of the Society for the Study of Architecture in Canada 26 (2001); James Whalen, "A Viceregal Kettle of Fish," Legion Magazine (March/April 1999): 3-8; Edward Weeks, The Miramichi Fish and Game Club: A History (Fredericton, .: Unipress, 1984). For a discussion of the elite salmon angling clubs on the Restigouche River watershed and the Gaspe Peninsula, see Dean Sage, The Restigouche and Its Salmon Fishing, with a Chapter on Angling Literature (Edinburgh: D. Douglas, 1888).

26. See the list of leaseholders for Quebec in Charles G. D. Roberts, The Canadian Guide Book: A Guide to Eastern Canada and Newfoundland (New York: D. Appleton, 1898), 264-67; for New Brunswick, see Annual Report of the New Brunswick Crown Land Department (Fredericton, ., 1896), 26.

27. Theoretically, the jurisdiction of the federal government was restricted to the sea fisheries, which ended at the head of tide. However, federal officers sometimes patrolled the entire rivers.

28. Judd, Common Lands, Common People, 283.

29. On meetings between sporting interests and fish and game administrators, see, for example, Fish and Game Committee of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Quebec, "Evidence Deduced Before the Committee and Replies Received" (Quebec, S. I, s. n., 1893); The North American Fish and Game Protective Association, Minutes of the Proceeding of the First Meeting(Qucbec: Darveau, 1900). On the professional boost that fish and game commissioners got from attending sporting shows, see "Report of the Chief Game Commissioner for New Brunswick," 1898, in Annual Report of the New Brunswick Crown Land Department (Fredericton, ., 1898), 114-16.

30. The change in jurisdiction came as the result of a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case "the Queen vs. Robertson." The motivations of the provinces (Quebec and New Brunswick) were, in large part, to gain control over the money generated from salmon leases. See Province of Quebec, Department of Crown Lands, "Information Concerning the Inland Fisheries of the Province of Quebec: The Queen vs. Robertson: Extracts from the Federal Fisheries Laws and Regulations Made Thereunder" (Quebec: Department of Crown Lands, 1885); "Report of W. F. Whitcher, Dominion Commissioner of Fisheries," Sessional Papers, 1883, 117, lxxii-lxxiii.

31. Quebec, Department of Crown Lands, "Information Concerning the Inland Fisheries of the Province of Quebec."

32. See Constitution and By-Laws of the Game and Inland Fisheries Protection Society of Nova Scotia (Halifax: J. Bowes, 1889); "Report of secretary, Garne and Inland Fisheries Protection Society of Nova Scotia" (Halifax: J. Bowes, 1894). For a Quebec example, see the promotional pamphlet written by the Superintendent of Fisheries and Garne for the Province of Quebec. L. Z. Joncas, The Sportsman's Companion, Showing the Haunts of Moose, Caribou, Deer, also of the Salmon, Ouananiche and Trout, in the Province of Quehec and How to Reach Them (Quebec: S. 1., s. n., 1899).

33. On the experience of Native people, see Bill Parenteau, "'Care, Control and Supervision': Native People in the Canadian Atlantic Salmon Fishery, 1867-1900," Canadian Historical Review 79 (March 1998): 1-35.

34. Fish and Game Committee of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Quebec, "Evidence Deduced before the Committee and Replies Received." The original act in 1868 did not contain any regulations pertaining strictly to fishing with dynamite. The prohibition on the use of explosives in 1876 may have indicated a growing practice. Canada, Statues of Canada, 39 Victoria, 1876, Order-in-Council dated 20 April 1876. Fora detailed discussion of the practice, see "Report of Various Poaching and Dynamite Cases taken by the Riparian Association (Matapedia), Dnring the Season of 1905," RG 23 Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 274, file #2060, National Archives of Canada (hereafter, NA).

35. The completion of the ICR also made it possible for net fishers on the Miramichi and Restigouche to send fresh salmon packed in ice to the Montreal and Quebec City markets, considerably increasing the pressure on the resource. See Napoleon Lavoie, "Report of the Cruise of the Steamer 'Lady Head,'" in Sessional Papers, 1878, in, no. 9, 19.

36. "Annual Report of the Deputy Minister of Fisheries, for 1891," in Sessional Papers, 1892, #11, xvi.

37. "Report of W. H. Venning, Inspector of Fisheries, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia," in Sessional Papers, 1872, #5, appendix N, 118.

38. "Report of Overseer Freeze, Doaktown," in "Report of W. H. Venning, Inspector of Fisheries, New Brunswick," in Sessional Papers, 1880, # 9, appendix 13, 236. See also, for example, Napoleon Comeau, Life and Sport on the Lower St. Lawrence (Quebec: Daily Telegraph Printing House, 1909), 110-13.

39. "Report of W. H. Venning, Inspector of Fisheries, New Brunswick," in Sessional Papers, 1886, #11, appendix 4, 157.

40. See, for example, E. P. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origins of the Black Act (London: Allen Lane, 1975); and Douglas Hay, ed., Albion's Fatal Tree: Crime and Society in Eighteenth Century Britain (New York: Pantheon Books, 1975). On similar patterns of resistance in the United States, see Edward D. Ives, George Magoon and the Down Fast Game War: History, Folklore and Law (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988); Judd, Common Lands, Common People; and Jacoby, Crimes against Nature. For theoretical discussion of rural resistance to authority, see James Scott, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985); James Scott, "Everyday Forms of Resistance," Journal of Peasant Studies 12 (January 1986): 5-36; Andrew Turton, Patrolling the Middle Ground: Methodological Perspectives on Everyday Peasant Resistance," Journal of Peasant Studies 13 (January 1986): 55-71.

41. The overseer and guardians in Pictou County, Nova Scotia, for example, received anonymous letters in 1895 which contained "threats of shooting mother and threats of burning barns." "Illegal Fishing, Nova Scotia, District #2, 1894-1914," RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 244, file 1506, NA.

42. J. R. Kinney, fishery inspector, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia to deputy minister of Marine and Fisheries, 21 May 1894; deputy minister to Kinney, 29 May 1894, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 233, file 1376, NA.

43. A. H. Belliveau, inspector, to commissioner of fisheries, 11 July 1899, RG 23 Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 242, file 1534, NA.

44. In 1894 the overseer on the Wallace River was badly beaten by a group of men in disguise. Robert Hockin, inspector of fisheries, Nova Scotia to deputy minister of Marine and Fisheries. The reward poster and information on the persistent activities of poaching gangs on the Wallace River are in "Illegal Fishing, Nova Scotia, District 2, 1894-1914," RG 23 Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 244, file 1560, part 1, NA.

45. "Report of the Inspector of Fisheries, Prince Edward Island, 1881," in Sessional Papers, 1881, #11, 243.

46. At the time the Prince Edward Island salmon fishery yielded only about ten thousand pounds per year, which were normally caught when fishing for other species. The island had the natural disadvantage of small, shallow rivers. The cutting of nearly all of the forests along rivers for agriculture further damaged the salmon fishery.

47. "Report of the Inspector of Fisheries, Prince Edward Island, 1890," in Sessional Papers, 1890, #17, 154.

48. Guy Carr, overseer, Compton Station, ., to deputy minister of Marine and Fisheries, 29 May 1899; deputy minister of Fisheries to Carr, 6 June 1899, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 326 file 2773, NA.

49. O. Robichaud to R. A. Chapman, fisheries inspector, 8 November 1908; Chapman to W. H. Yenning, 19 November 1988 and 4 January 1909; James P. Byrne, attorney, to E. L. Newcombe, deputy minister of Justice, 2 February 1909 and 12 June 1909, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 247, file 1588, part 2, NA.

50. On the response of residents on the Restigouche River watershed to the ban on stake netting in the early 18705, see Union Advocate (Newcastle, .), 5 August 1874 and 19 August 1874.

51. R. A. Chapman to E. E. Prince, superintendent of fisheries, 26 July 1897; Prince to Chapman, 11 August 1897, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 247, file 1588, NA.

52. North American Fish and Game Protective Association, Minutes of the Proceeding of the First Meeting, 123-24. A similar pattern of resistance was reported on the St. John River above Fredericton. See, "New Brunswick Fishery Commissioner's Report for 1896," New Brunswick Crown Land Report (Fredericton, .: 1897), 8-13.

53. Sage, The Restigouche and Its Salmon Fishing, 62.

54. On the intimidation of witnesses, see "Report of Overseer Freeze, Doaktown," in "Report of W. H. Venning, Inspector of Fisheries, New Brunswick," in Sessional Papers, 1884, #7, appendix 3, 74; Alfred M. Gould, Jr. to Hon. L. P. Brodeur, minister of Marine and Fisheries, 22 March 1911, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 243, file 1552, NA. The depth of the problem was demonstrated by a York County overseer, in a letter to the deputy minister of fisheries in 1893. H. S. Miles, fishery overseer, Oromocto, New Brunswick, among others, suggested that informers be given anonymity: "[I]t is an utter impossibility to get men who have a total disregard for the ill will and nuisance which a conviction induces ... It is a well known fact that while men would not for a small sum be known or recognized as informers, yet at the same time would gladly give the necessary information and accept half the fine if they were unknown in the transaction." H. S. Miles to W. E. Smith, 29 November 1893, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 92, file 64, NA.

55. A common attitude toward the seasonal guardians was expressed by the acting inspector of fisheries for Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, when he remarked that, "Guardians are appointed without regard to qualifications. This state of affairs will exist, so long as the patronage system prevails. While in some cases Guardians are employed who faithfully perform their duties, the majority of them regard their official positions as merely a reward for political service rendered." Charles Bertram, acting inspector of Fisheries to Department of Marine and Fisheries, 27 April 1909, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 196, file 906, part 1, NA.

56. See "Abstract of Reports: Statement of Persons Removed from Marine and Fisheries Department, between 19 January 1897 and 29 June 1897," in Sessional Papers, 1898, #64b; on the role of local MPs and patronage committees in the process, see "Fishery Officers Restigouche County, 1895-1911," vol. 280, #2101; and, "Guardians, Charlotte and St. John Counties, 1894-1915," vol. 234, file 1396, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, NA.

57. David Morehouse, justice of the peace, Upper Blackville, ., to Department of Marine and Fisheries, 3 October 1902, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 247, file 1588, NA.

58. Joseph Devereaux, attorney, to A. E. MacLennen, member of Parliament, 28 August 1896; A. C. Bertram, inspector of fisheries to E. E. Prince, 5 October 1896; Prince to Bertram, 10 October 1896, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 196, file 1588, NA.

59. Lord Grey, governor general, to Hon. L. P. Brodeur, minister of Marine and Fisheries, 29 March 1909; R. N. Venning, superintendent of fisheries, to A. C. Bertram, 31 March 1909; Bertram to Venning, 15 April 1909; Venning to Bertram, 29 April 1909, RG 23, Records of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, vol. 196, file 1588, NA.

60. K. R. Bittermann, Robert A. Mackinnon and Graeme Wynn, "Of Inequality and Interdependence in the Nova Scotia Countryside, 1850-1870," Canadian Historical Review, LXXlV (March 1993): 1-43; K. R. Bittermann, "Farm Households and Wage Labour in the Northeastern Maritimes in the Early 19th Century," Labour/La Travail: Journal of Canadian Labour Studies 31 (Spring 1993): 3-26; T. W. Acheson, "New Brunswick Agriculture at the End of the Colonial Era"; and Beatrice Craig, "Agriculture in a Pioneer Region: The Upper St. lohn River Valley in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century," in Farm, Factory and Fortune: New Studies in the Economic History of the Maritime Provinces, ed. Kris Inwood (Fredericton, .: Acadiensis Press, 1993), 17-36, 37-60.

61. On out-migration and rural depopulation in the region after 1870, see, for example, Patricia , "The Problem of Outmigration from Atlantic Canada," Acadiensis: Journal of the History of the Atlantic Region XV (Autumn, 1985): 3-34; Alan Brookes, "Outmigration from the Maritime Provinces, 1860-1900: Some Preliminary Considerations," Acadiensis V (Spring, 1976): 52-82; Bruno Ramirez, On the Move: French-Canadian and Italian Migrants in the North Atlantic Economy, 1860-1914 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1991).

62. Judd, Common Lands, Common People, 124-7. Judd argues that the sense of entitlement to natural resources in northern New England was a product of "republicanism." This makes sense for the United States, hut not for eastern Canada, which had a mixed population of mainly Quebecois and Acadian French, transplanted New Englanders and immigrants from all over Great Britain. There was no single political tradition. For example, New Brunswick was founded as a loyalist province after the American Revolution; Quebec retained the French Civil Code and the Catholic clergy retained a powerful political position after it passed into British hands in the 17605; the Acadian population of the Maritimes had its own distinct political traditions. Americans immigrated to the colonies and provinces before, during, and after the American Revolution and exerted a significant but not dominant influence on political ideology. It may be that the American Revolution produced a unified body of popular political rhetoric that did not exist in Canada or other places, and it was a matter of rural New Englanders using the ideological tools at hand to defend their rights to natural resources. At any rate, the similarities between the attitudes of New Englanders and the residents of the eastern provinces to changing wildlife resource management regimes in the late nineteenth century are much greater than the differences.

63. T. G. Loggie, "Protection of Salmon in the South-West Miramichi River by the Secretary of the Club," 1 December 1894, in "Report on the Fisheries of District no. 3, Comprising the Counties of Victoria, Carleton, York, Sunbury, Queen's, King's, St. John and Albert, for the Year 1894, by Inspector H. S. Miles," in Sessional Papers, 1895, #11a, appendix 7, 242; "Report of the Inspector of Fisheries, Prince Edward Island, 1882," Sessional Papers, 1882, #5, appendix, 177.

64. St. John Globe, 30 August 1888, 3.

65. Daily Gleaner (Fredericton, .:), 19 September 1889, 2; see also the editorials in the Gleaner on 14 September 1889 and 20 July 1889. A similar accusation was made by Alexander Ascoh, a farmer from Gaspe County, Quebec, when he testified before a provincial legislative commission. Fish and Game Committee of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Quebec, "Evidence Deduced before the Committee and Replies Received," 124.

66. See the descriptions of sporting opportunities and advertisement for "per rod" fishing in G. H. Haynes, The Unrivaled Angling and Hunting Via the New Brunswick and Connections (S. l, s. n., ca. 1890), 38-42, 65-66.

67. Carleton Sentinel (Woodstock, NB) 25 August 1888, 1.

68. St. John Globe, 23 August 1888, 1.

69. Ibid.

70. "Report of Overseer Ryan, Grand Falls," in "Report of W. H. Yenning, inspector of Fisheries, New Brunswick," in Sessional Papers, 1889, » 8, appendix 3, 102.

71. Rev. Leo Hoyt, Andover, editorial, Sr. John Globe, 25 August 1888, 3.

72. Anonymous, editorial, Carleton Sentinel, 1 September 1888, 2.

73. Ives, George Magoon; Jack Little, "Popular Resistance to Legal Authority in the Upper St. Francis District of Quebec: The Megantic Outlaw Affair of 1888-1889," Labour/La Travail 33 (Spring 1994): 97-124. Both Ives and Little adopt the model suggested by Eric Hobsbawm in his classic Primitive Rebels: Studies in Archaic Forms of Social Movement in igth and 20th Centuries (New York: W. W. Norton, 1965).

74. Carleton Sentinel, 6 October 1888, 1.

75. Ibid.

76. Daily Gleaner, 6 October 1888, 1.

77. St. John Sun, 3 October 1888, 1.

78. Ibid.

79. One of the interesting postscripts to this case was that the story of the Tobique murder/tragedy became part of the local folklore. Some residents came to believe that it was in fact Major Howe who shot his wife and admitted as much ten years later on his death bed. In this version of the story Charles Howe was a "bluebeard," who had married three wealthy women all of whom died. It seems highly unlikely that Howe would have killed his wife while in the same canoe as his son and a guide. See The Tobiquer: Stories and Anecdotes from the Tobique 2 (July 1978).

80. Carleton Sentinel, 20 October 1888, 2.

81. See, for example, the references to public controversy and the defense of the leasing system in "The Fishery Commissioner's Report for 1897," in Annual Report of the New Brunswick Crown Land Department (Fredericton, ., 1898), 107-9.

Bill Parenteau is associate professor of history at the University of New Brunswick and editor of Acadiensis: Journal of the History of the Atlantic Region. His research is focused on the political economy of resource development in Atlantic Canada. Recent publications include "'Care, Control and Supervision': Native People in the Canadian Atlantic Salmon Fishery, 1867-1900," Canadian Historical Review (March, 1998)(winner of the CHR Prize, 1998).