320 KNUT DAHL. 



reducing their mesh, according to the demands of the locality, 

 and in this way they would essentially increase their own incomes, 

 and also the national income, by catching trout and other sea- 

 fish along with the salmon. 



Thus I do not for one moment doubt that free choice of 

 mesh would be a great blessing. 



The question, however, as before mentioned, also refers to 

 the amount of power, which mesh regulations possess of 

 protecting non-saleable salmon and trout. 



The original motive of mesh regulations in our salmon 

 legislation, was the protection of the young, non-saleable fish. 

 The mesh was then IV4 inches (Norw.) between the knots. 



The law of May 23rd, 1863, which fixed the minimum size 

 of the mesh at 5"8 cm. between the knots, also aimed however, 

 at protecting the grilse, also including the seatrout, the specific 

 distinction between grilse and seatrout being a question of doubt. 

 Experience, however, showed that the grilse in large numbers 

 were caught by this mesh, and in the law of 1821 the mesh 

 was enlarged to 6*5 cm. between the knots. 



This regulation, however, met with such opposition on the 

 part of the fishermen that the legislating powers were forced to 

 suspend the operation of this regulation and suffer the old mesh 

 regulation to remain in force. 



The idea of enlarging the mesh and sparing the grilse 

 is rejected by the fishermen as well as by the special law- 

 commission appointed in 1896. 



Even the original mover in this matter, our inspector of 

 fisheries, has, in his criticism of the regulations proposed by the 

 latter commission (Christiania 1901) renounced the idea, at least 

 temporarily, of enlarging the mesh. 



When we now consider that even fine meshed bag nets 

 cannot, as my experiments show, catch grilse of smaller size 

 than those caught in the present regulation mesh, clearly our 

 reasons for mesh regulations must remain the same as before 



