A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



also the ground that suits a number of small flat fishes, and the unthinking 

 trawl catches indiscriminately the edible shrimps, the useless solenettes (Solea 

 luted), and the young soles (Solea vulgaris) in their unprofitable stage. 

 Professor Herdman has suggested that the clearing off of solenettes by the 

 shrimp-trawlers may be indirectly beneficial to the young soles, which will 

 thereby have fewer enemies and less competition in pursuit of food. 1 But in 

 1895 he writes, 'The statistics of hauls taken during the past year from the 

 steamer show once more, if any showing is still needed, that that destructive 

 engine the shrimp-trawl brings up along with a miserably small number of 

 shrimps, an astonishingly large number of young food fishes. On 2 November, 

 off the Kibble estuary, with 5 quarts of shrimps were taken over 5,000 

 undersized food fishes. On the same date, off Blackpool, with ij quarts of 

 shrimps were 10,000 fish ; on 24 October, in Heysham Lake, with 2 quarts 

 of shrimps were 4,000 plaice about 4 inches long ; and so on. Of course 

 it is satisfactory to know that there are so many young fish on the ground, but 

 it is deplorable that for the sake of a quart or two of shrimps several thousands 

 of young fish should run some risk of being sacrificed.' 3 As a remedy it has 

 been proposed that the net should not be attached to the frame, which stirs 

 up the mud, but to a bar raised just so far above the frame, that the flat 

 fishes may glide away beneath the net while the more excitable shrimps leap 

 into it. To the plan of restoring the young fishes to the sea it is objected 

 that only very few of them would be likely to survive the rough handling 

 they meet with in the process. It is difficult to say whether even so they 

 may not as provender for other animals by transmigration of bodies ultimately 

 become serviceable to man. This is no more than a pious hope. It should 

 not make the fishing industry deaf to that wisdom of the ancients which 

 pronounces that wilful waste makes woful want. 



In the family Pandalidae the species Pandalus montagul (Leach), often 

 less correctly spoken of as P. annullcornis, is probably the prawn on which 

 Dr. Leigh bestows so high a gastronomic commendation. Byerley says of 

 it, ' This species, which is the plentiful edible prawn (or locally ' sprawn ') 

 of our district, has often been mistaken for the young condition of the true 

 one.' 8 By ' the true one' he evidently intends Leander serratus (Pennant), 

 of the family Palaemonida?, the common prawn of some districts, though not 

 of all, as shown by Byerley's own remarks upon it, which follow the state- 

 ment just quoted. He says that it is 'by no means common. Sometimes 

 the fishermen may bring in from twelve to twenty amongst a hamper-full of 

 the former species.' Similarly, A. O. Walker says of the Pandalus, 'abundant 

 everywhere on stony ground,' but of Leander terrains, ' stony ground ; not 

 abundant.' 4 The more modern writers appear to know nothing of ' sprawn ' 

 as a local name for P. montagui, invariably in the vernacular calling it ' the 

 shank.' Professor Herdman supplies the information that it ' feeds to a large 

 extent on Sabellaria alveolata a worm which builds up masses of rock by 

 cementing together sand grains as the stomach contains usually numerous 

 setae, occasionally the remains of the worm itself,' besides several other items 

 of a miscellaneous banquet. 6 Another prawn, Pasiphtza sivado (Risso), 

 belonging not to the family Pensida? in which Byerley places it, but to the 



1 Op. cit. vii. 1 16, 118 (1893). * Op. cit. ix. 152 (1895). s Fauna of Liverpool, 53. 



* Trans. Liverp. Bio/. Soc. vi. 101 (1892). * Ibid. viii. 74 (1894). 



162 



