Historic Documents
Regarding the Migratory Fisheries
of the Saco River, Maine
Prepared for the United States Fish & Wildlife Service
by Douglas H. Watts, Augusta, Maine
September, 2002
Introduction:
To gain a more complete understanding of the historic migratory fish resources of the Saco River, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service requested the author conduct a thorough search of historic document repositories, town histories and other resources for information regarding this subject.
Several lengthy works have been devoted to the early history of communities along the Saco River (Folsom 1830; Owen 1891; Ridlon 1895; McArthur 1944). Unfortunately, these works are nearly devoid of any description of the migratory fisheries resources of the Saco River.
Two resources were found to provide substantial information on this subject : Documentary History of the State of Maine Containing the Baxter Manuscripts, Vols. 5-24, (Maine Historical Society, 1910) and the Laws, Acts and Resolves of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
For brevity, quoted excerpts from these works are noted as:
Baxter 1910 = Documentary History of the State of Maine
LARCM = Laws, Acts and Resolves of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Findings:
The fisheries of the Saco River were briefly noted by Samuel Champlain, the earliest European known to visit the river. Champlain sailed into the river's mouth in July, 1605 and wrote:
"This place is very pleasant, and as attractive a spot as one can see anywhere. The river, which is bordered with meadows, abounds greatly with fish. At its mouth lies an islet adapted for the construction of a good fortress where one would be safe." (as quoted in McArthur 1944).
John Jocelyn, a resident of Black Point in Scarborough in the mid-1600s, described the diet of Native Americans living along the Saco River:
"Their diet is fish and fowl, bear, wild cat, raccoon and deer; dried oysters, lobsters roasted or dried in the smoke, lamprey and dried moose tongues; hard eggs boiled and made small and dried to thicken their broth. Salt they have no use of, nor bread. Their Indian corn and kidney beans they boil, and sometimes eat their corn parched upon earth nuts, or ground nuts, roots of water lilies; chestnuts and divers sorts of berries. They beat their corn to powder and put it up into bags, which they make use of when stormy weather will not suffer them to look out for their food." (as quoted in McArthur 1944).
During the numerous wars between the English and Native Americans in the 17th and 18th centuries the practice of Native Americans to harvest fish each spring at various locales on the Saco River was noted.
In a letter dated July 11, 1691, William Vaughan and Charles Frost informed the Massachusetts Governor and Council that, " ... we humbly offer your Honors of the opinion as follows viz. that the Enemy have been and probably still are upon Sawco river at their fishing places making provision for their future subsistence ...." (Baxter 1910)
One month later (August 7, 1691), an anonymous letter titled "An Account of the Eastern Expedition, Aug. 7, 1691" states:
" ... August 1st being Saturday we sailed from Grete Island and arrived at Saco about 2 o'clock. Next morning we landed our men and marched before day, & sent out our scouts but could make no discovery of the enemy, nor when we came to Salmon Falls (the principal fishing place) could we find that the Indians had been there this summer so we returned to our vessels that evening ..." (Baxter 1910)
This is the earliest mention of the name "Salmon Falls" on the Saco and is presumed to refer to the falls still known by that name on the Saco River. This passage suggests Salmon Falls, rather than the river's lowest falls, was the principal fishing place on the river for local Indians.
A March 27, 1700 letter titled "Memorial of Col. Wolfgang William Romer his Majesties Chief Engineer in America -- Touching the Five Rivers" states:
"Saco River
From Casco Bay I came to Winter harbour, four miles from the mouth of the Saco river, and went up in the pinnace as high as the first Falls or Cascades where I found a small fort, ill seated and worse built it was made of clay and sand instead of lime and the most considerable part of it, which is a small tower in form of an irregular Pentagone, is ready to fall, and in a word useless. The Fall or Cascade makes so great a noise that one can scarce hear oneself speak. This place is not so much a Frontier as a place of defense for the Salmon Fishing." (Baxter 1910)
Twenty five years later, during the conflict called "Lovewell's War," a May 1725 letter by Col. Thomas Westbrook shows the English used the timing of migratory fish runs to locate and attack groups of Indians living along the Saco River:
"Wee judge that the greatest part of the Enemy are drawn some distance back, on the great Rivers, this being their time to fish for Salmon & other fish up the fresh Rivers on which the Indians yearly make a fishing voyage. Our winter scouts discovered sundry of their fishing places on Saco, Pesomscott & Amuscoggin Rivers where they made large quantities last Summer. The new recruits are not yet come, notwithstanding wee have had so many Westerly winds. As soon as they arrive, if Arm'd, I will endeavor to visit some of their fishing places." (Baxter 1910)
Treaties signed by the various Maine Indian tribes and the colonial English government at Falmouth (Maine) in 1726 and 1727 ended Lovewell's War. The next 15 years was a period of relative peace between settlers and Indians along the Saco. In 1727, a letter was sent to Lt. Governor Dummer by Samuel Jordan, a town official of Biddeford:
Letter of Samuel Jordan to Lt. Gov. Dummer, dated Biddeford, June 8, 1727
"May it Please Your Honor
Having this opportunity I thought it my duty as it concerns the public interest, especially at this juncture of affairs, to inform your Honor, of what happened late in this Town; there being several Irish men settled in and about this place, and more particularly at Saco Falls, they practice the catching of all sorts of fish with scains, began last Spring, and continue the same practice still: by which means prevent the fish going up the Falls, into the fresh ponds, as usual, which has been found of great prejudice to the Indians, insomuch, that many of them have come and made their complaint to me, & desired that the Government might be informed thereof, that proper measures might be taken effectually to prevent the same. Otherwise the consequence will terminate the disservice of the Province, as I conceive. Since the Indians have made their application to me, as I was the Town Officer, and a well wisher to the Province's welfare, I, with the rest of the Town Officers, thought it our duty to forbid the aforesaid practice, notwithstanding which, they continue to go on, & will do so, without some immediate command from the Government. So I leave the whole to your Honors wise consideration & determination in the affair and remain
Your Honored Obedient Faithful Servant at Command
Samuel Jordan" (Baxter 1910)
This letter contains the earliest known reference to colonial settlers catching fish migrating up the Saco River. The author states this fishing "began last Spring," which would be 1726, the year Lovewell's War ended and presumably when settlers began to return to the area after many years of fighting.
Of note is that Jordan states the seines of the "Irish men" were located at and below Saco Falls, "which prevent the fish going up the Falls, into the fresh ponds, as usual ..."
The letter supports earlier accounts that the Indians' primary fishing site on the Saco was upriver at Salmon Falls and indicates the Indians' complaints to town officials arose because the seines were reducing the number of fish migrating upriver past the river's lowermost falls, ie. Saco or Cataract Falls.
Jordan's letter contains two statements suggesting the historic migratory fish population of the Saco River above Saco (Cataract) Falls consisted of clupeids and other fish as well as Atlantic salmon. First, Jordan states the Irish men were "catching all sorts of fish" with seines at Saco Falls in 1726 and 1727. Second, Jordan states the seines "prevent the fish going up the Falls, into the fresh ponds, as usual ..." This suggests some of the upstream migrants may have been alewives, which unlike salmon and shad, prefer to spawn in ponds.
Of interest is that Mr. Jordan based his request for the Governor to stop the fish seining at Saco Falls exclusively on complaints by Indians living above the Falls, not from complaints of local settlers.
After Jordan's 1727 letter, there is a 59 year gap in documents relating to the fisheries of the Saco River. The next document found is a 1786 petition to the Massachusetts General Court which reads:
"Petition of Saco River settlers to the Great and General Court, 1786:
"To the honourable Senate & House of Representatives in General Court assembled --
Humbly shew, the Inhabitants on Saco River, that the Salmon and other fish which annually come up said river to spawn, are of great benefit to your Petitioners, and that there is great danger of their being destroyed by the constant catching of them not being regulated. Therefore your Petitioners humbly pray that your Honors would pass an Act to regulate said Fishery as in your Wisdom shall seem best. And your Petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray &c.
Richard Jordan, Benjamin Hooper, James Emery, Samuel Seamman, Humphry Pike." (Baxter 1910)
This 1786 petition emphasizes the importance of the Saco River's fish runs to local settlers in Saco and Biddeford, rather than to Indians living farther upriver. The letter suggests fishing pressure was intense enough to cause petitioners to believe the level of harvest was harming the health of the Saco River's fish runs. Also of interest is the statement, "Salmon and other fish which annually come up said river to spawn ..." This indicates other fish besides Atlantic salmon were migrating past Saco Falls upstream to spawn.
Soon after this petition, the following law was passed on June 28, 1786 by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:
"An Act Regulating the Salmon, Shad and Alewife Fishery in Saco River, and the Branches Thereof, within this Commonwealth."
"Whereas the constant catching of Salmon, Shad and Alewives in Saco River, is greatly prejudicial to the growth and increase of said Fish, and to the great damage of the inhabitants on said River: Therefore
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives, in General Court Assembled, and by the authority of the same, That no person or persons be allowed, from and after the passing of this Act, to catch any Salmon, Shad or Alewives in any part of Saco River, or in any river or stream entering to or running into the same, within this Commonwealth, oftener or more than four days a week, viz.: from Monday morning sunrise to Wednesday morning sunrise, and from Thursday morning sunrise to Saturday morning sunrise, in each week; and if any person or persons, shall catch any Salmon, Shad or Alewives in Saco River, or in any stream entering to or running into the same, within this Commonwealth, or shall drag any seine, or drag-net, or set any pot or net, or any other Machine, for the purpose of catching any of the said fish, at any time other than by this Act is allowed in said Rivers and Streams, each and every person so offending, shall for each and every such offence, forfeit and pay the sum of Four Pounds, and the seine, net, pot or other machine so used shall be forfeited ...." (LARCM)
The Act continues for another page and discusses in depth the manner in which local officials were required to enforce the Act.
It appears there were problems enforcing this law and that illegal fishing continued. On February 26, 1790 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed "An Act in Addition to an Act for Regulating the Salmon, Shad and Alewife Fishery in Saco River, and the Branches thereof in this Commonwealth."
This lengthy Act amends and clarifies the specific manner in which complaints against seines and net pot fishermen would be enforced under the original 1786 Act.
A sign of further difficulties enforcing the 1786 Act and continued illegal fishing on the Saco is found in town meeting records cited by Owen (1891):
"Salmon frequented the river in considerable numbers and were taken by wholesale until it was found necessary to protect the fisheries by law. It is refreshing to note that the law was enforced. April 4, 1791, the town voted 'that Capt. Wm. Cole and Ensign John Cleaves should receive £17, 15, 4 out of the town Treasurer for their Expence in Carrying on a Law Suit Against Phineas McIntyre in behalf of the town Respecting the Salmon fishery."
In 1798, the first mention of the impact of mill dams on migratory fish in the Saco River is found in the Laws, Acts and Resolves of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:
"Chapter 8c.
Order on the Petition of the Inhabitants of Pepperellborough and Biddeford.
On the Petition of the Inhabitants of the towns of Pepperellborough and Biddeford, praying that provision be made for removing the obstructions to the passing of Salmon up Saco River.
Ordered, that the Petitioners notify all such persons concerned, by serving one of the Owners of each of the Mill-dams upon said river, within the towns of Pepperellborough, Biddeford and Buxton, with an attested Copy of their petitions, and this order thereon, Thirty days at least before the second Wednesday of the next Session of the General Court, that they may then appear and shew cause, if any they have, why the prayer of said petitions should not be granted. June 11, 1798." (LARCM)
An extensive search of documents could not find the original petition by the Saco River inhabitants referenced in the Order above; nor records of a response by the mill-dam owners or subsequent action by the Commonwealth regarding this Order.
Research has found no other documents relating to the historic fisheries of the Saco River after 1798 except the following discussion of the Saco in the statewide fisheries survey of Atkins and Foster (1867).
In this work, Atkins and Foster state:
"The Saco was a salmon river. The difficult falls that naturally existed at Biddeford, and again at Salmon Falls, were doubtless sufficient to deter less active fish from ascending it very far. There have always been shad in the lower part of the river, but we found no tradition of their ever passing Biddeford. As to salmon, it is certain that they ascended as far as Hiram falls, where a great many were taken in old times; and the Great and Little Ossipee rivers are reported to have been frequented by them. We could obtain no exact estimate of their numbers in former times, as they had ceased to be plenty beyond the recollection of the present generation. Mr. Jordan is aged sixty-nine, and had information obtained from his father and grandfather. It is very sure that salmon have not been plenty for eighty years; and that at no time for the last sixty years have they been so abundant that a man could take more than five or six a day at Saco falls. For many years they have been entirely extinct. The last taken at Salmon Falls was in 1843. Mr. Benjamin Coolbrith of Biddeford, has fished here for shad for the last twenty years, and has never taken a salmon."
The conclusions of Atkins and Foster (1867) regarding the upstream migration limit of shad and alewives on the Saco River appear to be speculative. Due to a long history of mill dams on the lower river prior to the 1860s, these authors could not have known what the river's lower falls looked like in their natural condition and the extent to which they may have been passable by various migratory fish species prior to dam construction. Atkins and Foster's report appears to rely exclusively on the recollections of local citizens and makes no reference to any of the primary source documents from the 1700s located in this report. Atkins and Foster note their inability to locate any residents with eyewitness recollections of the river's fisheries prior to damming ("they [salmon] ceased to be plenty beyond the recollection of the present generation").
Conclusion:
Primary source evidence indicates the migratory fisheries of the Saco River were heavily utilized by Indians and settlers as late as 1800. Primary fishing locations during this period included both Saco Falls and Salmon Falls. Eyewitness accounts suggest these fisheries were heavily exploited as early as 1726 and this exploitation probably resulted in the significant depletion of the fishery by the late 1700s. Mill dam construction on the lower river appears to have begun in the late 1700s and intensified in the early 1800s. There is no evidence that fish passage devices were constructed on the mill dams during this period in spite of several laws requiring them. Observations in the mid 1800s indicate that Atlantic salmon were nearly extinct by this time and American shad were found only in the river reach below the lowermost mill dams at Saco Falls. Based on the records located in this research effort, it is not possible to establish historic upstream migration limits for Atlantic salmon, American shad or alewives in the Saco River drainage. Without more specific primary source documentation, assigning historic upstream migration limits for these species on the Saco River would necessarily be speculative.
References Cited:
Atkins, C.G., N. Foster. 1867. Twelfth Annual Report of the Secretary of the Maine Board of Agriculture. Stevens & Sayward, Printers to the State. Augusta, Maine.
An Introduction to Biddeford's History and a Chronological Outline of Events. 1944. Prepared by the McArthur Library. Biddeford, Maine.
Baxter, J., editor. 1910. The Documentary History of the State of Maine Containing the Baxter Manuscripts. Vols. 5-24. Maine Historical Society. Lefavor-Tower Company. Portland, Maine.
Folsom, G. 1830. History of Saco and Biddeford. Alex C. Putnam. Saco, Maine.
Laws, Acts and Resolves of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Boston, Mass.
Owen, D. 1891. Old Times in Saco. A Brief Monograph on Local Events. Saco, Maine.