84 



MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE 



10 March 1904] 



Mr. G. L. Alward. 



[Continued. 



Earl of Yarborough — continued. 

 diminution of flat fish to ? — To the fact of over- 

 fishing. 



1523. Therefore the same thing which results 

 now off our English coasts might probably 

 eventually have the same effect in the North 

 Sea fisheries if there is over-fishing? — That 

 is so. 



1524. Therefore, naturally you would be of 

 opinion that any legislation on the present subject, 

 wTiether it is absolutely efficient or not.is advisable, 

 so as to make a start ? — Yes. 



1525. And I think the people of Grimsby 

 fully appreciate that ? — Highly. 



1526. And perhaps with some alteration in 

 the present Bill they would be very willing to 

 offer no opposition, in fact, to support the Bill 

 in the other House ? — I think so ; and with re- 

 gard to a falling off, and the more or less fish, I 

 think we have relieved the North Sea consider- 

 ably with our large and improved trawlers 

 now. I think Hull are sending the principal 

 part of their large steam trawlers to Iceland all 

 the year round, and we Grimsby people are 

 sending an immense quantity of vessels there. 

 Consequently we have lessened, so far as Hull 

 and Grimsby are concerned, the taking out of fish 

 from the North Sea considerably, because we 

 find it is not sufficient to pay all the year round. 



1527. Now do you know anything about the 

 importation of undersized fish from the 

 Continent into England ? — There has not been 

 much of that going on in Grimsby now for 

 several years, but I think it goes direct to 

 London. 



1528. The evidence has stated that there is a 

 considerable amount of fish of that class im- 

 ported during the whole year into London ? — 

 Yes, that is so, I believe. 



1629. I suppose in your opinion it would be 

 inadvisable that that should continue ? — If you 

 prohibit the sale you accomplish the whole 

 thing, do jow not ? 



1530. That will be one great advantage in the 

 Bill ?— That is so. 



1531. Because whatever we might do with our 

 own people we do not like to have from 

 foreigners this importation which we consider to 

 be unfair to British interests generally ? — The 

 prohibition of sale of course covers the whole 

 thing. 



Chairman. 



1532. I have only one or two more questions 

 to ask you. You gave us some very remarkable 

 figures of the falling off between 1875 and 1892 

 in the catch, and a corresponding increase in the 



Cha irman — continued, 

 price. Is it your opinion, if matters go on as 

 they do now, that a similar falling off will be 

 exhibited in the catch of the steam trawlers and 

 a similar increase in the price ot the fish ciught 

 by steam trawlers ? — A similar falling off and a 

 similar decrease in catch; it is bound to 

 be so. 



1533. That is to say the result of this will be 

 that just as there was an increase in the fish 

 food of the people between 1875 and 1892, so is 

 there likely to be, as the larger area is fished out, 

 an increase in the price of the food of the 

 people from the fish caught by the steam 

 trawlers ? — That is so. I think that was the 

 foundation upon which we discussed the thing 

 very much. Are we to go in for a close season, 

 or what is to be the result, because our fish is 

 getting less and less. Then we discovered those 

 other grounds and got over the difficulty some- 

 what. 



1584. You are a member of the North- 

 Eastern Sea Fisheries district ? — Yes. 



1535. You are conversant, probably, with the 

 byelaws all round the coast of the different sea 

 fishery committees ? — Yes. 



1536. Do you think it would be advantageous 

 so far as possible to have uniformity of byelaws 

 all round the coast ? — No, I do not think it is 

 absolutely necessary for inshore purposes, be- 

 cause there are certain rocky shores roimd our 

 coast where you need not prohibit trawling, 

 because you cannot trawl ; consequently there 

 is no necessity for making bye-laws. 



1537. But what I mean is, do not you think 

 that, so far as trawling is possible, it is advisable 

 to have as far as possible uniformity of byelaws 

 regulating the trawling within the 3-mile limit ? 

 — Yes, I think so. 



1 538. Therefore would you welcome the clause 

 in the Bill which provides lor the Fisheries 

 Department having the same right to make bye- 

 laws that is now possessed by the fishery com- 

 mittees ? — Do you refer to inshore fishing ? 



1539. I do. — Then do I rightly understand 

 that you would supersede the fishery com- 

 mittees ? 



1540. Let me read the clause to j^ou: "For 

 the purpose of preventing the destruction of any 

 undersized flat fish the Board of Agriculture and 

 Fisheries shall have the like powers as the 

 committee of a fishery district under the Sea 

 Fisheries Regulation Act, 1888"?— Yes, I 

 endorse that clause. I have read it and I 

 endorse it. 



The Witness is directed to withdraw. 



Mr. ARNALL BRAME CAPPS, is called in; and Examined, asfoUows:— 



Chairinan. 



1541. I think you are a member of the Suffolk 

 Mutual Drift Net Fishing ? — I am the secretary. 



1542. And you reside at Lowestoft ? — Yes. 



1543. Do you come here to-day to tender 

 evidence on behalf of the fishery industrj- in 

 Lowestoft ? — The longshore fishing more par- 

 ticularly, from Lowestoft to Aldborough. 



Chairman — continued. 



1544. How far out do the longshore fishermen 

 go ? — They fish in territorial waters as a rule. 



1545. No further out than territorial waters ? 

 — Very seldom. 



1546. How will they be affected by this Bill ? 

 — They think that the powers which are sup- 

 posed to be given to make these byelaws, as you 



• ha\e 



