SELECT COMMITTEE OX THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



121 



17 March 1904.] 



Mr. Gaestang. 



[Continued. 



Chairman — continued . 

 been separated off from the work at sea. Con- 

 sequently it was this Statistical Committee, as I 

 understand it, which was expressly authorised to 

 provide an estimate for statistical and market 

 observations. 



2206. But out of the money which is allotted 

 for this purpose, is any given to anybody except 

 your Association and the Scottish Fishery 

 Board ? — I think not, but I do not know. 



2207. Then can anybody collect these statistics 

 except your Association and the Scottish Fishery 

 Board ? — If I understand the matter rightly, 

 my Association was never intended to collect 

 statistics ; it was never asked to collect statistics. 

 There was a demarcation drawn. Unfortunately 

 there seems to have been to some extent a con- 

 fusion; but we have evidence from this report, 

 and other material, that His Majesty's Govern- 

 ment reserved to the Fisheries Department 

 statistical questions, and commissioned the 

 Marine Biological Association to undertake the 

 work at sea, and they accepted an estimate that 

 was drawn up by myself, as representing the 

 Association, for that part of the work. 



2208. And who was to undertake the statistical 

 work ? — The statistics are definitely placed, by 

 Act of Parliament I believe, in the hands of the 

 Fishery Department. 



2209. Are you aware that the Council at 

 Hamburgh passed a resolution. Are you aware 

 of the terms of that resolution ? — I have not 

 them here. I was present at the meeting and 

 remember the terms of the resolution. I think 

 it was a very estimable one because these statis- 

 tical observations upon the market are of great 

 importance; and the whole international pro- 

 gramme was intended to be the combination of 

 biological observations at sea with market 

 observations and statistics collected ashore. 



2210. Do you think that the money expended 

 in these enquiries would be better spent in ob- 

 taining these market observations than upon 

 the scientific investigations that your Society 

 has undertaken ? — No, I cannot at all agree to 

 that. I think it is a matter of great importance 

 that investigations should be carried out on the 

 fishing grounds themselves. *Market observa- 

 tions are very good in their way. They give a 

 record of what is landed by fishermen, but not 

 of what is caught ; and only observations carried 

 out at sea by means of fishing boats and ordi- 

 nary fishing nets can, in my opinion, provide 

 that necessary information. 



2211. Why do you say that it cannot be given 

 by the fishermen themselves ?— It is voluntary 

 information which has not authority, being given 

 by men who are themselves demanding legisla- 

 tion. I do not for a moment wish to impugn 

 their veracity, but there is no sufficient gua- 

 rantee as to the accuracy of their observations. 



2212. Do not they keep a log ? — Yes, I sup- 

 pose in some cases. 



2213. Would not the observations in the 

 log of the catch of the fish be conclusive proof 

 as to where the fish was caught and what the 

 nature of the fish was ? — Yes ; naturally so far 

 as they give observations they are of very great 

 value, but it is not within the province of fisher- 



(0.10.) 



Chairman — continued. 



men to measure the fishes with the accuracy of 

 detail that a special staff is able to devote to the 

 matter. We measure every fish exactly. 



2214. Could they not be measured on land- 

 ing ? — They could be measured on landing, but 

 then the catches are mixed and you do not 

 know what has been thrown overboard. 



2215. Do you wish to say anything further 

 about these operations ? — I should like to draw 

 the attention of the Committee to one branch of 

 work we have been doing. We have been 

 marking, in accordance with the International 

 programme, a number of plaice and other fishes 

 with labels to determine their wanderings. 



2216. And turned them loose ? — And turned 

 them loose. This chart, which I am afraid is on 

 somewhat a small scale, represents the southern 

 part of the North Sea which would be fished over 

 by the Lowestoft smacks. 



2217. Will you kindly point to Heligoland ?— 

 I am afraid it does not go far enough north. 

 The fact is that the Heligoland region does not 

 fall within the English part of the investigations. 

 This represents our English observations. 



2218. That is where the Lowestoft people 

 mostly fish ? — Yes. 



2219. The Grimsby and Hull vessels rarely 

 go there ? — Very rarely except to the most 

 northern part of it. I merely show a few 

 results. In December 1902 we marked 150 

 small plaice north of Holland (pointing to the 

 chart). The first of those plaice was recovered 

 here six weeks later, in January, after travelling 

 150 miles; and all along the line from tJiei'e to- 

 here, during the next two months, specimens 

 of that original batch were found along the line 

 of route. We had some reason to think about 

 March that the fish had stopped making this 

 southward migration, and were going north 

 again, so we marked fishes here in March, and 

 this hypothesis was verified, because the catches 

 from this batch were now met with to the north ; 

 that is to say, in the spring we found from these 

 experiments that the plaice were moving north- 

 wards, and they moved up as far as the Cromer 

 Banks, the Lemon Ground, in the course of a 

 few months. We then marked them on the 

 Lemon ground in April and May, and found 

 that during the summer months the fish radiated 

 round about in the same region. 



2220. Up till when? — During July, August, 

 and September, those were about the months. 

 But later on, a few of these did migrate further 

 north. For example, in January of the present 

 year one was found right away to the north off 

 the coast of Yorkshire. 



Marquis of Huntly. 



2221. When was it marked ? — In the spring 

 of last year — May ; that is to say, nine months 

 later it was found off Yorkshire. 



2222. Had it increased in size ? — I have not 

 got my records here, but we have tabulated the 

 increase in size of all the fishes. 



Chairman. 



2223. What is the general result ? — The 

 general result is that a fish, say, of about 



Q 8 inches 



