LEGISLATION AND THE SEA FISHERIES 173 



the above extensions of the fishery district were made there would 

 still remain an area of over 13,000 sq. miles for unrestricted fishing. 

 If the local by-laws are reasonable and have produced any effect 

 in preserving the continuity of the supply of fish in the district, 

 then it would be sound policy to advocate their extension over a 

 wider area. The effect on the different classes of fishermen would 

 be that the steam trawler would lose an additional 1000 sq. miles 

 of potential trawling ground. Over a similar area the deep-sea 

 fishing smacks would be compelled to use a trawl net, the meshes 

 of which must be not less than 6 in. measured round the four sides 

 of the square. The inshore fishermen using second-class boats 

 would not be much affected. Only occasionally, and then mainly 

 in the summer as at Morecambe, Fleetwood, Southport and Pwllheli, 

 do these men fish outside the present territorial limits, i.e. in an 

 unrestricted manner. The limited number of occasions they fish 

 outside the territorial waters hardly makes it worth their while 

 to carry special nets with small mesh, nets which would be illegal 

 inside the district, so that practically speaking, and subject to 

 certain limited exceptions, these men always fish under restriction. 

 There would be, therefore, no change for them in any proposed 

 extension. Steam trawler owners and skippers may be inclined 

 to be scornful at any attempt made to extend the jurisdiction of 

 the present district committees. Assuming the proposals outlined 

 above for the Irish Sea ever came into force, it would practically 

 mean that steam trawling in that area would be prevented within 

 the 20-fathom line, which follows closely the proposed extended 

 limits. Any fishing done by steamers within that line is almost 

 invariably carried on by old and obsolete steamers which would 

 be better scrapped. Moreover, since all well-managed steam trawler 

 companies set aside annually certain sums to a reserve for deprecia- 

 tion, there is no strong reason against setting aside certain grounds, 

 especially when such grounds are known to be frequented by 

 undersized fish, and are in any case only fished by vessels in their 

 decrepitude. 



