SELECT eOMMITTEE ON- THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



61 



10 March 1904.] 



Mr. E. W. L. Holt. 



[Continued. 



GhairTuan — continued, 

 the winter you find a certain amount of imma- 

 ture fish on all the grounds where you catch 

 fish at all, but the proportion is quite a small one. 



1116. Then the trade as at present con- 

 ducted lands the fish at comparatively few ports, 

 does it not ? — So far as I know. 



1117. And as at present advised, it would pro- 

 babty be sufficient to regulate the landing at 

 those ports without troubling about the smaller 

 ones? — Ten years ago it certainly would have 

 been suflicient. I have no recent knowledge on 

 the subject. 



1118. But supposing the conditions not to 

 have changed smce then, that would be your 

 opinion ? — -Precisely. 



1119. Then, with regard to the size, what size 

 do you think would be the minimum that would 

 make it worth the while of the steam trawlers 

 going to these eastern grounds ? — Ten years ago 

 I thought the size should have been 13 inches ; 

 but I think it is extremely probable that the 

 conditions of ten years ago are not those of to- 

 day, and that there has been an actual diminu- 

 tion in the average size of the fish on those 

 grounds, making it now worth while for fisher- 

 men to bring home fish which they would have 

 shovelled overboard ten years ago. In fact, if 

 there is no such diminution, and this alleged evil 

 has been going on for ten years without produc- 

 ing any result, it appears that its effect must 

 have been overrated ; but I do not know what 

 the present conditions are. 



1120. Then you think the conditions are 

 likely so to change that a limit which might be 

 quite effectual at one time would not be effectual 

 at another — I do not mean at another season, I 

 mean over a period of years ? — I think that if 

 the average size has decreased, that is to say, 

 the larger fish have become less plentiful, a 

 smaller limit now might be just as efficacious 

 as a larger limit 10 years ago. 



1121. On the other hand, supposing the smaller 

 limit to become efficacious, might it not be that in 

 the course of time the size of the fish on these 



f rounds would so increase that it would be 

 esirable to raise that limit to the 13 inches 

 which you thought was necessary in 1892 ? — It 

 might be so, but on the other hand the fact that 

 the fish had become on an average larger would 

 show that you had largely effected your object. 



1122. And would it not be desirable to con- 

 tinue to effect that object? — Probably it would 

 be, but I should say that that would be a matter 

 for consideration when the time comes. 



1123. My object in asking you, of course, is 

 to know from you whether you think it is desir- 

 able to impose a limit by Act of Parliament, or 

 whether it is not more desirable to have power 

 to vary that limit in accordance with varying 

 circumstances ? — I should be altogether averse 

 to any limit fixed by Act of Parliament. It is 

 much better for the Fishery Authority to have 

 the power to make such limit as may from time 

 to time seem to them to be useful, 



1124. Could you hand in anv statistics of the 



Quantities you examined during those years ? 

 [ave you preserved them ? — I do not think I 

 could. 



1125. Have you any observations to give us 



Chairman — continued, 

 on the size of other flat fish — turbot, brill, soles ? 

 — The sizes at which they spawn are familiar. 

 For instance the brill begins to spawn at about 

 15 inches, the sole at about 12 inches, and the 

 turbot at about 18 inches ; and I was never 

 satisfied that there was any great destruction of 

 either undersized brill or undersized soles on these 

 eastern grounds, though there were a certain 

 amount of undersized turbot destroyed. 



1126. Do you think that the imposition of a 

 size limit on plaice, without any imposition of a 

 size limit on other flat fish, would be sufficient 

 to deter vessels from going to these eastern 

 grounds ? — It most certamly would, supposing it 

 excluded a large proportion of plaice — supposing 

 the conditions were approximately the same as 

 they were ten years ago. Ten years ago unless 

 the fisherman could sell practically all his plaice 

 the trip would not pay ; he might have a box 

 or two of soles and perhaps a hundred small 

 turbot and a few small briU, and, perhaps, some 

 gurnards, but certainly not enough to nearly 

 pay the expenses of coal alone. 



1127. Have you any special knowledge of 

 the markets for, and traffic in, undersized fish 

 on the Continent of Europe ? — No, I have none. 

 I understand that the fish traffic in the inland 

 parts of Germany has greatly increased within 

 the last few years, but I have no particulai- 

 knowledge of that. 



1128. Do you know at all whether that is 

 owing to increased railway facilities ? — To 

 decreased railway rates. I know that. 



1129. I should have said rates ? — They have a 

 special rate for small and rather cheap fish. 



1130. Now turning for a moment to the South- 

 west of England as distinguished fronr the 

 eastern ports, do you think that there is any 

 necessity there in the interests of the fishing 

 trade as a whole, to place any restrictions upon 

 the landing of undersized fish caught in the 

 Channel and round the South-west coast of 

 England ? — I think absolutely none. 



1131. You think it would be a sufficient pro- 

 tection for the great majority of undersized fish 

 in the North Sea if restrictions were made to 

 apply solely to vessels which go to catch them 

 on the eastern grounds ? — Yes, 



Marquess of Runtly. 



1132. Supposing that these small undersized 

 fish were prevented from being sold in England, 

 would you see any danger of foreign smacks 

 going to these eastern grounds and catching 

 them and selling them abroad in a foreign 

 market ? — They can do that at present, but I 

 believe that formerly, at any rate, they used to 

 sell most of their fish in England. 



1133. But it would be absurd if our trawlers 

 were prevented fi'om going to these grounds and 

 then tJiey were denuded of these fish, which 

 they want to stop beirg killed, by foreign 

 skippers ? — I do not know enough about foreign 

 market conditions, but my impression is that 

 there is not a great market for them abroad. 



1134. We had some evidence last time about 

 some owners who said that -there were some 

 markets arising for making them into hora 

 d'oeuvre ? — I have no knowledge of the subject. 



1135. Y 



ou 



