A GREAT deal of careful research has been published, during the last ten years, dealing with growth stpdies of fish. Nearly all of these studies have been based upon material collected either by the scientific worker and his staff (using nets) or upon material obtained by the scientist from the catches of commercial fishermen. These publications cover a large number of species, both among those considered of economic importance as food fish and those of lesser direct economic importance, often classified as rough fish and minnows. However, a brief survey of these publications brings to light the fact that the fish of greatest importance to the fishing public, namely those classified as the more important game species, have been partially neglected. The reason for this is obvious. Game laws restrict these species from the catches of commercial fishermen in nearly all of our inland lakes. Although the scientist is less restricted in his activities, he feels that to kill a large number of important game fish in lakes frequented by fishermen would arouse adverse public opinion, perhaps to the extent that his own activities might be curtailed. As long as the game fish rank first in importance to the public, they should in no way be neglected, although the worker must resort to new methods of obtaining the desired data. With the purpose of obtaining materials for gamefish growth studies, the Wisconsin Conservation Department, the U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, and the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (in 1928) requested anglers to cooperate with them by sending in scales from their catches, along with accurate measurements of lengths and weights, determinations of sex, and the lake from which the fish were taken. As soon as this request became widely known, the cooperation was hearty and to date a large amount of data has been collected, not only from the five most important game fish species, i.e., Esox masquinongy, E. lucius, Stizostedion vitreum, Huro salmoides and Micropterus dolomieu, but also much material from some of the less important species, namely, the bluegill, rock bass, white bass, and trouts. Since this type of collecting has been in progress, four general reports have been published (mimeographed) (Juday and Schneberger, 1930 and 1933, Juday and Bennett, 1935, Juday and Schloemer, 1936). At the present time, enough materials are available for more detailed reports upon individual species. The first of these, dealing with the growth of the muskellunge in Wisconsin, is already published (Schloemer, 1936). The recent trend in fisheries biology research is toward fish management,