SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



127 



17 March 1904.] 



Mr. Gabstanu. 



{Continued. 



Duke of Ahercom — continued. 



destruction. Therefore, when your Lordship 

 asks me whether I am in favour of the Bill as a 

 Bill, all I can say is that I am in favour more 

 from diplomatic considerations than from any 



-conviction as to the efficacy of the measures 

 proposed. Nevertheless, I am in favour of a 

 restriction being placed on the capture of 

 small fish by steamers. But at the present stage 

 I am against the imposition of any limits on the 

 landings of the smacks, because as I say, so far 

 as I am acquainted with the evidence, the limits 

 would do no good in the case of the smacks ; and 

 of course no one desires to unnecessarily cripple 



.a particular industry. 



2277. Then if this Bill became law and the 

 restriction of landing of undersized fish were im- 

 posed in England, and therefore it was unpro- 

 profitable for the English trawlers to go to what 

 they call the Eastern waters, I think from what 

 you have already stated you are of opinion that 

 their place would be supplanted by foreigners to 



. a great extent ? — Yes, to a large extent. 



2278. And, therefore, what we wish to obviate 

 now would not take place as regards the protec- 

 tion of this small class of fish ? — No ; tne de- 

 struction would be mitigated perhaps, but it 

 would not be done away with. 



2279. I think you said that it is not advisable 

 that any breeding ground should be overstocked 

 with small fish, that they do not increase in the 



. same proportion as a limited number would, and 

 therefore that they do not go down to deeper 

 waters when they become of a greater size ? — 

 Tes. I do not want too much importance to be 



. attached to that branch of my evidence, because 

 I adduced it for quite a side issue, and it bears 

 very slightly on the general question. All we 

 know is that if the density of fish is great the 

 rate of growth is less than upon more sparsely 

 populated grounds ; and it is rather a matter 

 for further inquiry than a basis for considera- 

 tion at the present time. 



2280. But if there was an international agree- 

 ment, what countries, in your opinion, would 

 join in that agreement ? — I am not authorised, 

 naturally, to speak for other countries, but we 

 know that Denmark, which has an effective 

 limit at the present time, is very anxious to 



J)reserve that measure of protection. But in 

 ooking at the last report of the Danish 

 .authorities* one finds how seriously they feel 

 that the absence of restrictions on the 

 • German and English vessels is really paralysing 

 their own efforts to save the fish. The absence 



■ of restrictions on the English and German 

 vessels on the Danish grounds is rendering the 

 .situation in Denmark itself so critical that the 

 fishermen are agitating for the removal of the 

 size limits at present in force there. 



2281. And is the same thing taking place in 



■ Germany ? — All I can say is that I believe the 

 ■Germans, and I may also say the Dutch will be 



perfectly willing to consider and even to propose 

 regulations of a restrictive character when it has 

 been demonstrated in a clear way that the 

 destruction of small fish by their own or other 

 vessels is now being carried to such an extent as to 

 be to their own disadvantage. When it has been 



Duke of Ahercom — continued. 



proved that it will be to their own advantage, 

 the advantage of their own fisheries, to have 

 restriction, then I believe they will be thoroughly 

 prepared to join in ; and" I have adduced 

 evidence, at any rate on behalf of Germany, to 

 shew that they arc face to face with just the 

 same problem as wc are in England, this declin- 

 ing yield per boat, and therefore have the same 

 interest as ourselves in bringing about an inter- 

 national arrangement. More than that I cannot 

 say. 



2282. But would France be willing to join ? — 

 Unfortunately France is not concerned in 

 these investigations and I can only speak 

 generally for France. Some years ago before 

 these North Sea investigations were under way, 

 I had several occasions of meeting the French 

 experts and talking with them, and I was 

 informed that the low limits at present in force 

 in France had already given them so much 

 trouble that the local magistrates very rarely 

 enforced them, and I do not think there is the 

 same prospect of France joining in as there is of 

 other countries ; but I cannot say definitely. 



Marquess of Huntly. 



2283. But in any international agreement it 

 would be necessary, of course, for France to be 

 a party to it? — I think it certainly would be 

 very desirable, but so far as the trawling steamers 

 are concerned the French trawlers are not very 

 numerous in the North Sea. 



2284. I understood from you that the result 

 of reducing the number of English trawlers 

 going to the eastern grounds would be to perhaps 

 increase the number of foreign trawlers, the 

 French among them ? — To increase the number 

 of boats belonging to those countries advan- 

 tageously situated; and if you take the case 

 of the eastern grounds of the North Sea, 

 the tendency would be to increase the catch of 

 the German and Danish vessels, and therefore 

 to encourage the development of those fleets, 

 but not the French fleet, which is situated a 

 long way away. At the present time I think 

 the French ti'awlers do not visit these eastern 

 grounds, or only to a small extent. They fish 

 mostly in the Channel and to the westward. 



2285. I should like to make one point quite 

 clear about the Bill. Your own predilection is 

 for an international agreement preceding a 

 Bill, but if, as I understand, the Conference 

 are very strongly in favour of England 

 taking the precedence in this legislation, 

 or, rather following Denmark in it, do 

 you disapprove of an enabling Bill of this 

 sort so as to set an example ? — -No, I draw a 

 sharp distinction between approving the Bill 

 as a diplomatic measure and approving the 

 Bill as an effective means of stopping the 

 destruction of fish. To promote the Bill in 

 order to pave the way for international action is 

 one thing which can be defended on quite 

 different grounds ; and I feel that it would be a 

 distinct advantage to this country to pass some 

 measure of restriction on the action of the steam 

 trawlers on those eastern grounds. I think it 

 would be likely to do some direct good, and also 



to 



Fiskeri-Beretning for Finansaaret, 1901-2, udarbejdet af C F. Drechsel. Kjobenliavn, 1903, pp 164-5. 



