24 



MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFOBE THE 



3 March 1904.] 



Mr. Jamek Ingram 



Mr. JAMES INGRAM is called in; and Examined as follov; 



Chainnan. 



406. Will you tell us what your position is ? 

 — I am a Fishery Officer at Aberdeen. 



407. Under tlie Fishery Board for Scotland ? 

 —Yes. 



408. You have heard the evidence given by 

 Mr. Millikin ?— Yes. 



409. Have you anything to add to it ? — In 

 some matters I am sorry to say I do not agree 

 with my chief. 



410. Perhaps you would state the points upon 

 which you differ from him ? — Under existing 

 conditions it would not be very difficult to pre- 

 vent the sale of undersized flat fish. 



411. It is not proposed. The landing is what 

 is proposed to be prevented ? — Yes ; I quite 

 agree with Mr. Millikin with reference to the 

 landing. In order to ascertain whether there 

 are immature or undersized flat fish in a shot, 

 it is necessary to go on board and turn them all 

 over, and it would be an enormous Avork in a 

 shot, say, of 10 to 20 tons. If a shot of 5, 10 or 

 20 tons came in, it would be impossible nearly 

 to detect undersized flat fish in the shot before 

 landing, because they cannot" well be examined 

 until laid on the floor of the market. 



412. It is not a very difficult operation, is it, to 

 ascertain the contents of a box by putting your 

 hand in and pulling them out ? — No, because 

 nearly a,ll the fish landed in Aberdeen Market are 

 classiied as to size ; that is to say, we have usually 

 three and sometimes five selections in plaice — 

 extra large, large, medium and small, and very 

 small ; so that by this classification one can see 

 nearly at a glance what the nature or size of the 

 flat fish is. 



413. Has that been going on for long ? — Since 

 I have been in Aberdeen, at any rate, and 

 before. 



Have you the statistics there ? — Yes. 

 Will you hand them in ? — Relating to 



414. 



415. 



what ? 



416. 



Relating to the numbers of fish and the 

 various sizes ? — I have the quantities of the 

 various kinds of fish landed in 1902. 



417. You can tell us the total number landed 

 and divide that total into four classes, if I 

 understand you aright ? — There are 33 selections 

 of fish in the ma.rket every day ; 33 classifica- 

 tions usually, and the statistics show the 

 quantities under the various headings. 



418. And are those tables recorded ? — ^Yes. 



419. And are available? — The 33 selections 

 have bee:i tabulated only since January of this 

 year ; that is to say, haddocks, plaice, witches 

 and megrims were not previously differentiated 

 (as to size) in the official returns. 



420. Do you mean to say that flat fish and 

 round fish are aU mixed up together ? — No ; I 

 had better show you the statistics. 



421. What is a megrim ? — It is a flat fish like 

 a witch. Here, for instance, is a return of the 

 trawl and hne fish landed for the year 1902 

 with the diff'erent sizes (handing in the same). 



Marquess of Huntly. 



422. \Vhen was this clas -ification commenced ? 



Marquis of Huntly — continued. 

 We always put it down in our books to a 

 certain extent, but it was only officially returned 

 from J8.nuary of this year 



Chairman. 



423. I see you take the same classification 

 that we have been doing lately ; you take large, 

 medium and small of plaice, and you have large 

 and small witches and large and small megrims ? 

 —Yes. 



424. Then this is available at any rate for 

 1902 ?— Yes. 



425. This return shows that so far as plaice 

 are concerned the number of undersized, that is 

 to say, of small plaice, is only 1,663 cwt. as 

 against 20,937 cwt. of medium ?— But those are 

 not undersized — not many of them are under- 

 sized according to the definition. 



426. What do you call undersized ? — Accord- 

 ing to the definition given to me, under 8 inches 

 in the case of plaice. All are not under that 

 size. 



427. Are they all under 11 inches ?— No. 



428. What are they under ? — I have thought 

 of that, have measured the plaice, and can 

 speak to the sizes. 



429. Can you tell us what you understand by 

 these three classifications, large, medium and 

 small ? — An extra large plaice would measure 

 from 2 feet to 2;l- feet in length ; then a large one 

 would be nearly 2 feet; a medium would be 18 

 to 20 inches, and a small one would be anything 

 from 10 to 15 inches or thereby. 



430. What becomes of the interval between 

 15 and 18 inches: where do you classify them ? 

 — Have I left an interval ? 



431. Yes. — I had better give- them again. 

 Extra large from 2 to 2^ feet ; large nearly 2 feet ; 

 medium 18 to 20 inches, and small would he 

 from 8 to 10 inches. 



432. Now we Lave a larger gap still. What 

 becomes of those between 10 and 18 inches ? — 

 They do not, of course, stick to exact measure- 

 ments ; I am only speaking from proximate 

 measures ; it is guided by the eye. 



433. Then in your own mind you would not 

 put a plaice, if he looked to your eye over 10 

 inches, into the small class ? — No, I daresay it 

 would nearly go into the medium, but it is only 

 regulation by the eye. 



434. I do not think I need take you over the 

 ground Mr. Millikin covered except to ask you 

 the question I put to him : have you any know- 

 ledge of the feeling of the owners of the large 

 trawlers with regard to the desirability of 

 stopping the catching, if possible, of undersized 

 flat fish ? — It has never been a grievance in 

 Aberdeen up to this time, that is to say there 

 has been no excess of small flat fish, and it has 

 never come prominently before the trade, but I 

 know when they have seen these small fish they 

 called them "ivy leaves," as they resembled 

 them. When the buyers even have seen them 

 they have said it w^as a wrongful and a wasteful 

 thing to catch them, 



435. Would you be surprised to hear that the 



glEx-L(!rd 



