of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



li 



Four cases remained unsettled, two of which at least were likely to 

 result in litigation. One case went to Court, hut was dismissed owing 

 to the inconclusive nature of the evidence against the defender, and 

 in two others the officer found the respondent not at fault. 



The total of 36 is made up by two charges of damage to nets by 

 H.M. ships, which, whether well founded or not, were dismissed by 

 the officer on the ground that the complainers had not been exhibiting 

 the regulation lights for boats engaged in drift-net fishing. Some 

 time ago the Admiralty issued a statement of the conditions on which 

 they would consider claims by fishermen in respect of damage to their 

 gear by Naval vessels, and one of the most important points was the 

 production of evidence that the proper lights were being shown on 

 the occasion when the alleged damao-e occurred. The attention of 

 Scottish fishermen was drawn to the matter by a poster issued by the 

 Board, and it is believed that the two cases referred to in which the 

 warning was neglected are exceptional. It should be added, however, 

 that the Appendix does not profess to be a complete record of claims 

 raised against the Admiralty, such cases being also outside the scope 

 of the Act, and only those coming under the direct cognisance of the 

 Board's officers being for convenience included here. 



PEOSECUTIONS FOR ILLEGAL TEAWLING. 



During 1910, 27 British and 4 foreign trawl-masters were prose- 

 cuted for infringement of the laws prohibiting trawling around the 

 coasts of Scotland, convictions being obtained in all cases except one, 

 in which the verdict was Not proven." As compared with the 

 previous year, there is a reduction of 11 in the number of detections of 

 home trawlers, and of no less than 18 in the number of foreigners. 



Of the foreign trawlers, 1 was detected off Skye, and the remaining 

 3 in the Moray Firth, the latter figure indicating a very considerable 

 decrease in the amount of inshore trawling in these waters. 



As regards home trawlers, four of the convictions were against 

 masters of sailing trawlers detected working in Luce Bay. For some 

 time the Board had had complaints that the law was being infringed 

 in this locality, but, owing to the configuration of the land, it was 

 difficult to catch oftenders red-handed. The substantial penalties 

 inflicted in these instances will, it is believed, act as a deterrent to 

 others who may be tempted to use the otter trawl in this bay. With 

 these exceptions, no case of illegal trawling occurred in the Firth of 

 Clyde or Solway areas. 



Of the other parts of the coast, the only section in which it might 

 be suspected that the law was frequently infringed was the wide 

 stretch closed to trawling at the mouth of the Firth of Forth, 

 including St. Andrews Bay. From these parts 10 detections are 

 recorded, but 3 of them occurred in December, 1909, the trials not 

 taking place until the following year. No part of the coast is more 

 frequently visited by the Board's cruisers, but, owing to the open 

 nature of the approaches to the area, vessels passing to or from 

 Granton may be tempted to try a drag of the trawl within the 

 prescribed limits on the chance of eluding detection. The remaining 

 offences by British subjects referred in equal proportion, 3 each, to the 

 East Coast (Forfarshire to Aberdeenshire), Moray Firth, Orkney and 



