32 



THE IMPOVERISHMENT OF THE SEA. 



as tlie basis, the annual totals of mackerel, herrings, pilchards, and 

 sprats being deducted from the totals of "all fish, except shellfish." 

 The elimination of the drift-net fish yields a remainder which may 

 safely be regarded as the product of the trawl and line fisheries together. 



In distinguishing the products of the North Sea fishery, however, it 

 has been necessary to deviate to some extent from the line of separation 

 adopted by the IJoard of Trade (the North Foreland), whereby Ramsgate 

 is excluded from the East Coast ports (Mr. Berrington's Evidence, Select 

 Committee, 1893, § 2,426). The principal fishing grounds of the Hams- 

 gate trawlers largely coincide with those of the Lowestoft vessels in the 

 southern part of the North Sea, and I am informed by the Harbour- 

 master of Eamsgate through the Board of Trade, that "most of the 

 Ramsgate trawlers work in and out of Lowestoft as much as they do 

 here [i.e. Ramsgate] ; it depends greatly upon the wind which port they 

 can more easily make." Lender these circumstances it was clearly 

 necessary to transfer the figures for Ramsgate catches and vessels from 

 the South to the East Coast. Accordingly, the line which I have 

 adopted for separating the East from the South Coast lies between 

 Ramsgate and Deal, thus coinciding with the classification of the 

 fishing ports originally given by the Inspectors of Sea Fisheries in their 

 first Annual Report, p. 25. It is, perhaps, worthy of consideration 

 whether it would not be advisable to revert to this original scheme in 

 any future rearrangement of the fishery statistics. 



The Board of Trade has kindly provided me with a detailed return of 

 the fish landed annually at Ramsgate since 1888, from which the follow- 

 ing figures, representing the total quantities of " bottom fish " landed at 

 the port, have been derived. 



These figures have been deducted from the totals of bottom fish 

 for the South Coast derived from the Statistical TaUcs, and added to 

 the corresponding figures for the East Coast. The resultant figures,* 



* The figures in Cunninf,'liam's table on p. 55 {I.e.) contain two errors of sonic import- 

 ance. His total for drift-net fish in 1889 should be 2,428,118, instead of 1,428,118; 

 and liis total for bottom fish in the same year should be reduced by the same amount (one 

 million). For 1890 his figures for the same two items should be 2,000,044 and 4,099,986 

 reapectivcly. The latter errors clearly arose from an alteration in the order of the various 

 items in the Stntistiml Talks for that year, the figures for plaice having been taken 

 by Cunningham to represent herrings. These errors materially alfect his conclusions 

 at the top of p. 57, which need correction. 



