lxix 



boys sent out to fish whose duty it was to bring home a daily supply for 

 their families, the size being- no object, and a sufficient amount the only 

 criterion. Hundreds of small fry are thus daily destroyed by the nets of 

 these little urchins, whilst the adult fishermen also assist in this work of des- 

 truction. At Rajahmundry, above the weir, the price offish in the bazar was 

 reputed to have risen 100 per cent, in seven years, and a great decrease of fish. 

 Here the fry and immature fish were being captured in myriads. At Comba- 

 conum I sent out some fishermen for two days to see what specimens they 

 could collect for me, and during that time they brought me upwards of 

 5,000 young fish, these being, as they stated, the quality they were cap- 

 turing in and near the station. That the destruction of fry is carried on to 

 an excessive extent must be patent to the most casual observer who travels 

 during the monsoon months. It appeared to me that the principal reason 

 for the decrease of fish, was that the fry were captured in excessive numbers 

 owing to the minuteness of the size of the meshes in nets; that irriga- 

 tion weirs and falls in canals arrested the ascent of breeding fish, which 

 were also trapped in irrigated fields and water-courses ; and lastly, that 

 indiscriminate fishing was disastrous. 



142. One official (para. 158) having remarked upon my proposi- 

 „, ,. . . tions. — "I believe any law regulating the 



vJ user vnt ion on nn oi") in ion • 



that prohibiting the destruction size of the mesh would be inoperative in this 



of fry by regulating the mini- country ; it would be cruel to the poor people 



mum size of the meshes of nets w ] 10 f or t J ie most part li ve on sma U f j s h » 



would be cruel to the poor. T ,, . ,/ ,, • ,, ,• 



r I am unable to see the cruelty in attempting 



to augment the food supply of the poorer classes. I have examined mag- 

 nificent pieces of fresh-water in the Madras Presidency not containing 

 sufficient fish for the few inhabitants along their banks. In large dis- 

 tricts any one may fish in whatever way best suits his individual views, 

 and ignorant natives, who never look beyond to-day's wants, take what 

 they are able irrespective of size, and fish where they please no matter 

 how. As the large fish are cleared off, smaller meshed nets are employed, 

 until at last the fry, as a rule, become the sized fish which are taken. 

 A staff of water bailiffs would be expensive, but if fisheries are let, the 

 lessee becomes their keeper : his people the watchers. Self-interest would 

 never allow his permitting every little boy to have and use a net where- 

 with he is destroying the fry. It is sometimes asserted that it would 

 be hard on the poorer classes not to permit them to capture these little 

 wee fish : it seems to be thought that fish come of themselves, are not worth 

 protecting when young, but should at all times be game in every manner 

 to the whole of the population. But how have these pseudo-philan- 

 thropic views answered in practice? By decreasing the fish and con- 

 sequently diminishing the supply of food in whole districts. Thus, when 

 famine years come round the waters will be found depopulated, the 

 little fish have been eaten by the poorer classes, and consequently 

 larger ones will be sought for in vain. I deny the philanthropy of such 

 proceedings, but on the contrary hold that practically, although unintention- 

 ally, when carried out, they will be found amongst the most cruel in their 

 effects of any that could be devised. At first permitting any one andevery one 

 to fish as they please, temporarily increases the quantity captured, but at 

 a permanent injury to the fishery, by decreasing future years' supply, and, 

 if continued, almost annihilating them. Water should be as valuable as 



