SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



45 



4 March 1904.] 



Dr. Wemtss Fulton. 



[Continued. 



Lord Northhourne. 



778. Where was it caught ? — It was caught in 

 the Moray Firth. 



779. How long ago ? — In December. Here 

 Are others (producing others). 



Duke of Abercorn. 



780. Are these all caught in the Moray Firth ? 

 — No, they were caught m different places. But 

 this (holding up a much larger fish) is a plaice, 

 and it is quite immature. 



Chairman. 



781. How big is that ? — 10 inches. 



Lord Heneage. 



782. And that is an immature plaice ? — Yes. 

 I show these to show the very great difference 

 in size. 



Lord Northhourne. 



783. HoAv many eggs would a fish of that size 

 have ? — It would have perhaps about 200,000 

 when it spawns for the first time. This fish, of 

 course, is immature, but when it gets mature it 

 produces from about 2u0,000 to 400,000 or 

 500,000 eggs. 



Duke of Abercorn. 



784. At what size will they begin to spawn ? — 

 About from 14 to 17 inches. 



Chairman. 



785. Is that all you have to say to those 

 specimens you have brought ? — In connection 

 with the mesh of the net I might point out that 

 the determination of the mesh would depend very 

 much upon the shape of the fish. This (produc- 

 ing another fi^h) is rather like a sole; it is not a 

 sole, but it is a long and slender fish, the witch. 

 This (producing another fish) is a plaice ; it is 

 very rigid and broad, and it would require a very 

 large mesh ; while a large mesh for it would allow 

 a great many of these other large fish to escape. 

 That shows] the difiiculty that you have when 

 dealing with mixed fish. 



786. With reference to the Bill, you think, 

 that in view of the somewhat chaotic state of our 

 information generally on the hal:iits of fish, it is 

 an advantage to have the Bill somewhat elastic, 

 so that it can be altered ? — Yes, I think that is 

 one of the great advantages. 



787. If we make any false step we can retrace 

 it ? — Yes. 



788. Whereas such a Bill as the Bill of 1900 

 once passed by Parliament could not be altered 

 without further recourse to Parliament ? — Just 

 so. 



789. Do you concur with what Professor 

 D'Arcy Thompson said with regard to the desir- 

 ability of obtaining further information as to the 

 place where undersized fish are caught and fish 

 generally are caught ? — Most emphatically ; I 

 think that is really the most important thing. 



790. Are you conducting the investigations on 

 behalf of the Scottish Fishery Board under the 

 International Sea Fishery Conference ? — No ; 

 Professor Thompson is doing that. 



791. And he has told us that practically the 

 Scottish Fishery Board have exhausted all their 

 power of obtaining these statistics ? — They have 

 really no power at all, I understand, to compel 

 information to the place of capture. 



Chairman — continued. 



792. But with such powers as they have, that 

 is, of ascertaining the numbers landed, and so 

 forth, you are domg all that you possibly can in 

 that direction ? — Yes. 



Duke of Abercorn. 



793. I suppose you agree with other witnesses 

 when they stated that the general knowledge of 

 the habits of fish now is really very limited ? — 

 Yes ; still we have made great advances during 

 the past few years. 



794. That is owing to scientific observations 

 made by gentlemen like yourself ? — Yes. 



795. Still they may be extended very consider- 

 ably ? — Yes, they may be. 



796. If more money be given by Government, 

 the result would also be to a larger extent more 

 useful ? — Yes, I think so. 



Lord Ticeedmouth. 



797. Have you ever been on those eastern 

 fishing grounds yourself ? — No. 



798. You only know them trom hearsay ? — 

 Yes ; but I should think the investigations being 

 made by the Marine Biological Association 

 should give exact particulars as to the propor- 

 tions of different kinds of fish there. 



Duke oi Abercorn. 



799. Where do the Aberdeen trawlers go to 

 chiefly ? — They work chiefly in the north. This 

 is a chart of the North Sea (producing the same) 

 and this shows where they were working, for 

 instance, in 1901. They go very little to these 

 eastern grounds or south of the Dogger. The dark 

 colour shows where they Avork chiefly, that is, up 

 north-east of Aberdeen (handing in the same). 



Lord Ttveedmouth. 



800. You rather seem to point to having 

 different sized limits for different parts of the 

 coast ?— I think that would be necessary, at least 

 from a biological point of view, because the rate 

 of growth is different on different parts of the 

 coast and the size at maturity is different ; the 

 biological limit is different. 



801. That is all quite true; but do not you 

 think there would be grave difficulties in having 

 one limit in one part of the coast and another 

 limit in another part, even if you had one limit 

 on the east coast of Scotland and another on the 

 south-west coast ? — There might be ; but I think 

 since the fixing of the limit is given to the 

 department, all these questions would be taken 

 into account and very fully considered before 

 the limit was fixed. 



802. Do you really think it is possible to have 

 two or three different limits of size for flat fish 

 in and around the coasts of Great Britain for the 

 same species ? I am not speaking from a scientific 

 point of view ; I am speaking from a practical 

 point of view. How could you get fishermen to 

 understand that they could land fish of a certain 

 size in one port and not in another ? — I think 

 the difference of an inch or two between Scot- 

 land and England would not have much effect 

 in that way ; because I think it would not pay 

 to send the fish down to England for the sake of 

 an inch or two of fish over the limit. 



803. So far as Scotland is concerned, do you 

 think that the imposition of a size limit on flat 



fish 



