44 
Another query put to the chief constables was to ascertain if 
“ proper arrangements exist for the proper observance of the pro- 
visions of the Salmon Fishery Acts of 1862 and 1868, for the pro- 
tection of salmon in the salmon rivers of your county ?” 
From the answers to this query, it appeared that i eight counties 
(the names of which are given), each containing several fishery 
districts, 20 Fishery Boards exist. In one of these counties, there 
are no less than thirty-two salmon rivers ; and in another county 
(but not one of these eight), viz. Argyll, where there are also 
thirty-two salmon rivers, there is only one Fishery Board, viz. in 
the Island of Mull. It appears that, in terms of the Salmon Act 
of 1862, the whole of Scotland was perambulated by Government 
Commissioners, with the view of officially determining the districts 
in which Fishery Boards were to be formed. The districts fixed 
on by these Commissioners numbered 105, each of course con- 
taining one or more salmon rivers. The Sheriffs of Counties, by 
appointment of Government, summoned the fishery proprietors in 
these districts to meet, with the view of forming Boards; but in 
most districts the call was not responded to; and at present 
there are no more than about twenty Fishery Boards altogether, 
independently of the Tweed Commissioners. 
It is true that the absence of Fishery Boards in some districts is 
there partially compensated for by such protection as can be 
afforded by individual proprietors, through whose property, or 
part of it, salmon rivers run. This is the case in Sutherlandshire, 
and in some parts of Inverness-shire, Ross-shire, Perthshire, Elgin, 
Argyllshire, and Caithness. Their protection of salmon is of 
course less efficacious than that of Statutory Boards. But sup- 
posing their protection were as good, the fact remains, that there 
are at least two-thirds of the Scotch salmon rivers without any 
protection against pollutions, obstructions, and poaching. 
Therefore, the first point of inquiry surely should be, why has 
the scheme of protection introduced by the Government Salmon 
Acts of 1862 and 1868 so completely failed ; and why should no 
less than twelve years have been allowed to elapse, without any 
remedy being applied, or even proposed ? 
It appears that, in or shortly before the year 1870, this fact of 
