December 3, 190S] 



NA TURK 



H5 



are factors not included in tlie reclioning, but the adoption 

 by the Board of a chart in which the tishing-grounds of 

 vvestern Europe are divided into " regions " and the Nortli 

 ijea into " areas," according to depth, is excellent, 

 especially in connection with plaice and other flat fishes. 

 In briefly noticing the nature of each area, it is stated 

 that the fishes caught in the North Sea no longer con- 

 stitute the predominant quantity of a few years ago, but 

 rather more than half the total quantity of " demersal " 

 fishes landed by British vessels, yet the reader is left in 

 doubt concerning the nature of the statistics of a few 

 years ago, and as to whether the recent statistics of the 

 International Bureau have been taken into account. It 

 is interesting that the most prominent fish is the haddock, 

 as in Scotland, a fish about which as many misgivings 

 have been bruited as about the plaice. 



On the whole, the report, its foreign and colonial in- 

 formation, and its elaborate, skilfully arranged and 

 important tables, ought to assuage unnecessary fears as to 

 the yield of the sea. It is true statistics are at most 

 approximative, and need the support of scientific experience 

 and a thorough acquaintance with the waters in, as well 

 as adjacent to, the North Sea, both of which were absent, 

 for instance, in the statistics laid by the Scotch Board 

 before the Parliamentary Committee under iVIr. Marjori- 

 banks in 1893, but they are indispensable. In all proba- 

 bility the Board will arrange for a more expeditious issue 

 of the report in future. The Scotch Board's report for 

 1907 is now in hand. 



Little need be said about the special report on plaice, by 

 Captain W. Masterman, further than that in its present 

 stage it demonstrates the ability and infinite pains taken 

 by its author in the methods of weighing and measuring 

 specimens from the various " areas " of the North Sea. 

 Four " ichthyometric " ports have been chosen, viz. 

 Grimsby, Boston, Lowestoft, and Ramsgate, and the 

 series of elaborate tables giving the number of large, 

 medium, small, undistinguished and others, from each 

 area, and also their condition as to the viscera, show that 

 every available fact will be grasped. In future reports, no 

 doubt, a record from each area, and from personal observa- 

 tion, of the captures of plaice under 19 cm. which have 

 been thrown overboard before returning to land, will be 

 given, for such would be invaluable in placing the whole 

 subject before the investigator. The use of the small- 

 nieshed ground-net of St. Andrews and the various surface- 

 and mid-water nets on each area will probably also add 

 further information. The reported fall from 48 million 

 kilos, in 1903 to 29 million kilos, in 1906 merits full 

 investigation. \ careful summary of the captures of plaice 

 from the North Sea by other nations would also be useful, 

 especially as Dr. Kyle has shown that the totals of plaice 

 landed at all the North Sea ports were nearly doubled 

 Iie^ween 1S92 and 1903, and that, ten years after Dr. 

 Petersen had reported the gradual decline of the Danish 

 plaice-fishery in the Cattegat, not only was it more pro- 

 iluctive, but, as if to emphasise the lesson, an entirely 

 new plaice-fishery by the Swedes on the northern border 

 of the same area had sprung up and was flourishing. 

 ICxperience demonstrates that when much harrassed and 

 their ranks thinned, the older plaice become, like other 

 fishes, extremely wary, but the vast swarms of very young 

 plaice have shown no diminution on any shore, for it was 

 pointed out long ago (1884) that none occur in deep water. 

 ICven a small untrawlable area is of importance in such a 

 question, and it is stated that, in regard to plaice, 17 />cc 

 cent, of the area of the North Sea is so. Much informa- 

 tion may also be procured by the use of plaice-nets on 

 suitable grounds, especially if diminution is reported. 

 Moreover, the misunderstanding of the Scotch IDepart- 

 nicnt in summarising the ten years' work of the Garland 

 should be borne in mind. The whole question is so com- 

 plex that any new facts obtained by the able scientific 

 slaff of the English Board would be very welcome. 



The third and very important report is that of the com- 

 mittee on the scientific and statistical investigations, and 

 I he task was one which even the special experience of a 

 long life may well have faced w'ith diffidence : yet the fact 

 that the secretary of the commission was the only one 

 specially trained on the subject may have had its 

 advantages, since unbiassed minds would thus be brought 



NO. 2040, VOL. 79] 



to bear on the complex question. In this brief notice, 

 however, it is only possible to make a few general com- 

 ments, and to allude to the main features of the recom- 

 mendations — premising that the report, in its comprehensive 

 nature, moderation, and fairness, is worthy of the com- 

 mittee. 



In the interesting historical summary of scientific 

 fisheries' work ample justice is done to England, but it 

 is not shown with sufficient clearness that it is to Lord 

 Dalhousie's Commission (1883-5) *at the country owes 

 the scientific and statistical initiative in the department, 

 and that ever since such work has been as conspicuously 

 ■ Scotch as English. Further, that many of the recom- 

 mendations in that report (1884-5) have been utilised by 

 the Scotch, English, and Irish Boards — in some cases for 

 many years, whilst others are again brought up in the 

 present report. Amongst other things, it is curious that 

 the herring-brand of the Scotch Board has apparently 

 been thought more important than the ten years' unique 

 work of the Garland and the scientific conclusions there- 

 from, and that the work of the recently formed Ulster 

 Marine Biological .-Association is duly noted, whilst the 

 committee appears to be unaware of the existence of the 

 oldest marine laboratory in Britain for scientific fisheries' 

 work. The account of the personnel of the British section 

 of the international investigations and the historical 

 summary might well have been abbreviated. In their out- 

 line of future investigations the committee has prudently 

 followed what has previously been advised (mimis hydro- 

 graphy and chemistry, both of which are somewhat 

 expensive, whilst the 'results to the fisheries have been 

 small). Artificial hatching for the stocking of the sea also 

 is, so far as observed, an unnecessary task. 



A central fisheries council, representative of the three 

 divisions of the kingdom, as suggested, has much to re- 

 commend it, but it would be well to consider — on the 

 score of efficiency and expense — whether one instead of two 

 members from each division would not suffice, the Treasury 

 appointing the other two, after consultation with the Royal 

 Society, not the Meteorological Office. No fault can be 

 found with the restriction of the labours of the council to 

 researches and statistics affecting the common interests of 

 the sea-fisheries of the United Kingdom, and to the other 

 duties stated, provided due attention is given to uniformity 

 of method in the annual reports of each division. Yet a 

 further step is worthy of consideration, viz. the sever- 

 ance of the Fisheries' Department from agriculture and 

 its representation in Parliament by a responsible Minister, 

 as the minority report so far indicates. In regard to the 

 continuance of the grant of loooL per annum to the 

 Plymouth Laboratory — with the necessary reservations — no 

 dissentient voice will be heard amongst men of science. 

 There can be no question as to the expediency of appoint- 

 ing a scientific officer and scientific assistants to the English 

 Department of Fisheries. It is difficult to explain why 

 this has so long been delayed. Nor is there any objection 

 to the committee's scheme for international cooperation 

 or to the Ir.'iernational Council on the lines indicated. The 

 sea is the highway between nations, and to a large extent 

 their common fishing-ground. It is to be hoped that the 

 Government will, in the main, give effect to the com- 

 mittee's judicious recommendations. W. C. M. 



THE EUROPEAN POPT'L\TTOX OF THE 

 UNITED STATES. 

 pROF. RIPLEY, in his Huxley lecture delivered recently 

 ■'■ before the Royal Anthropological Institute, on the 

 European population of the United States, raised a number 

 of novel and important problems, for the solution of which 

 the evidence is at present insufficient. In contrast to 

 Europe, where the existing races have grown up from the 

 soil, in America they, "one may say, have dropped from 

 the skv. Thev are 'in the land, but not yet an integral 

 part of it. They are as yet unrelated to its physical 

 environment." Further, the influence of environment on 

 this diverse population is as yet little more than a matter 

 for speculation. The day has passed for assuming that 

 the modern American type is a reversion to that of the 

 American Indian : but for the future of this foreign popula- 

 tion suddenly planted among new surroundings we must 



