80 



IIINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFv:)RE THE 



10 M,trch 1904.J 



Mr G. L. Alwaed. 



[Continued. 



Gha irman — continued. 



trawling during certain months of the year. Is 

 that the first object to be aimed at? — Well, that 

 j ; a question ■which really wants a little explana- 

 \ ion. I do not think it has been clearly stated 

 ihat we are getting now in the North Sea, to us 

 unknown years ago, immense quantities of fish, 

 and it is quite evident that the fishing out those 

 large and matured fish has given place to the 

 small ones to feed, and they grew in large 

 numbers more than they did when those same 

 grounds were fairly well stocked with large fish ; 

 and we have during this last four years experi- 

 enced what we never anticipated. The general 

 trait of the matter was this: that on thosegrounds 

 in the North Sea which you refer to on the east 

 side (where you have had full explanation that 

 they abound with those small fish), what we found 

 was, close into the shore small, a little further 

 oft' a little larger, and a little further 

 oft" still larger ; say three years fish, off about 

 25 or 30 miles ; about two years fish, off about 

 15 miles; then right into that shore, the new 

 fish of last year. Now the fact is that 

 off in the deep water there are not so many large 

 fish, and during this last three or four summers, 

 while the fine weather was on, we had an abund- 

 ance of small fish scattered over parts of the 

 North Sea where we never saw them before. 



1448. Beyond these eastern grounds ? — Be- 

 yond the eastern grounds. 



1449. Then you do not consider that a material 

 benefit would accrue to the fish of the North Sea 

 if trawling were prohibited during certam 

 months of the year on the eastern grounds ? — I 

 think the question of attaching prohibition to 

 any gi'ound is a very dangerous and difficidt 

 question. If you confine legislation to the fish 

 itself, caught by whom you like and caught from 

 where you like, then I think you accomplish the 

 object. But if you try to locate (I think our 

 conferences have discussed that point very 

 closely) you get yourself into great difficulty, and 

 I do not think we accomplish the end. It is a 

 question of the fish ; it is not a question of where 

 it is caught. Confine it to the fish itself, because 

 the difficulty is : how are you going to different 

 tiate where that fish was caught. 



1450. Supposing }-our limit of 8 inches were 

 accepted and put in the BiU, do you think it 

 would have the effect of preventing the steam 

 trawlers fi-om going to those eastern waters ? — 

 Yes, I think it would naturally compel vessels 

 to go to places where the fish was not so small, 

 and whether it was on those eastern waters or 

 wherever it was it would accomplish that object. 



1451. Accomplish what object ? — Accomplish 

 the object of preventing the catching of this 

 undersized fish, and preventing the landing of 

 them, caught wherever they may be. 



1452. Do you go so far as to say that if the 

 trawl is put down, any measure Avould prevent 

 the catching ot these fish if you go on the 

 gi-Qunds where they are ? — It Avould be no use 

 to catch them if they cannot be sold, you know. 



1453. But do you mean to say that the 

 trawlers "ss'ould no longer go ainwhere in the 

 North yea for fear they should catch the smaU 

 H-li ' — No : but as soon a.s they discovered they 

 \\-i:\i: on the OTOuud wdiere the sra.dl f.sli were, 



Gha i nnan — continued, 

 and the fish would not pay them, thov would go 

 away; they must desist. 



1454. They would leave the ground wherever 

 it might be ? — They would be bound to do. I 

 should hke to point out that in the estuary of 

 Boston of the deep — which is a wonderfully 

 prolific place — those fish move off some miles 

 into the sea, and we have a very large quantity 

 of our trawlers go and fish outside the 3-mile 

 limit there, We do not want those fish bringing 

 into the market any more than we do from the 

 east side of the North Sea. And at that parti- 

 cular place I remember that at the North Eastern 

 Sea Fishery Committee, whose duty it was to 

 assist in an enquiry for drawing up byelaws, one 

 of our great difficulties was that we found in 

 that locality those small fish being caught with 

 horses and carts on the shore by tons, denuding 

 the west side of the North Sea of all those 

 natural supplies. Our byelaws put a stop to 

 that; and consequently we think we have done 

 an immense amount of good. But still those 

 fish, when they grow to 5 or 6 inches, get 

 some little distance off to sea and outside 

 of the 3-mile limit, beyond which we have 

 no control as a Sea Fisheries Committee. Our 

 steam trawlers catch those. We no not want 

 them to catch them. We want them preserving 

 until they get a little larger and go further off 

 to sea, and it is more a question of size. It is 

 perfectly true that the locality described as the 

 east side of the North Sea, where they abound 

 in such vast numbers, is one part of the ques- 

 tion. But this small fish question is the whole 

 question. 



1455. Then, notwithstanding the great dif- 

 ficulty which has been found in passing an Act of 

 Parliament with a hard-and-fast limit, you would 

 prefer to see such a Bill or no Bill at all ? — Well, 

 if the Bill has no ultimate good effect, why 

 have the Bill ? 



1456. Then your answer to my question I 

 take it is, yes ? — No, I prefer the Bill. 



1457. You prefer the Bill as it is to no Bill at 

 all? — Well, I think I must say yes; but ol 

 course we have anticipated that there never 

 has been a Bill tabled, either in your Honour- 

 able House or in the House of Commons, but 

 what has been subject to some amendments, 

 and we have thought it possible to suggest 

 some amendments, slight perhaps, which would 

 accomplish the object we have in view. 



1458. But you admit, do you not, that your 

 knowledge of Parliamentary procedure is per- 

 haps more limited than those whose duty it is 

 to pilot the Bill through Parliament ? — I admit 

 that. 



1459. I do not know that 1 quite clearly got 

 from you whether you have gone into any cal- 

 culations as to whether it would be no longer 

 commercially profitable for the Grimsby steam 

 trawlers to go to the eastern grounds if they 

 were prevented from landing an 8-inch 

 plaice ? — I believe it would regulate itself 1 

 believe that if they went on to those grounds 

 and they found that nine-tenths of their haul 

 was immature or undersized fish, the thiug' 

 would regulate itself, they would not go there : 

 they would go away somewhere else. 



"1460. R-.'t woi;1il it be so ?— XfitnnOiv. 



KfT: \vc 



14(1 



.^ould 



