of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



261 



available made no difference. In tlie correspondence I had on the subject 

 no attempt was ever made to show that there was some reason why my 

 having the totals would be prejudicial to any interest involved. If any 

 reason of this kind had been given, I would have accepted it at once, as at 

 any rate an explanation why, in the opinion of those specially interested, 

 the figures should be withheld. I have no desire to prejudice any private 

 interests in making such a request. I therefore remain with the feeling that 

 in seeking what I conceive to be a public interest — and it is with public 

 interest alone that I am concerned — a rather remarkable, and, I am pleased 

 to say, an altogether exceptional refusal has been accorded me. 



I consider the matter worthy of the consideration of the Board in view 

 of the importance of obtaining information of this kind. It may be 

 recollected that in the Report of the Royal Commission on Salmon 

 Fisheries, 1902, reference was made to the importance of such statistics. 

 The Commission state (p. 16) " We think that this is a case where the pubhc 

 advantage ought to outweigh the private objection, and that powers 

 should be given to the Central Authority in England and Scotland respect- 

 ively, to obtain statistics by methods already adopted for other purposes 

 of government, by which inquisitorial treatment and unnecessary publica- 

 tion are avoided." 



It is, now, impossible for me to seek information from the source 

 referred to until statutory powers are obtained. 



Bye-Laws Respecting Fish Passes. 



The Salmon Fishery interests as compared with the interests of those 

 who derive water from a river for mill purposes, the owners of dam dykes, 

 have always been a fruitful source of difficulty. 



If the Bye-laws of the Salmon Acts are not complied with, it rests 

 with the Clerk of a District Fishery Board to take the necessary steps 

 before the Sheriff. But a clerk may or may not be instructed to do m by 

 his Board, and the circumstances in which the members of a Board find 

 themselves, or, to put it another way, the interest which certain members 

 of a Board may have in avoiding the application of the Bye-laws, explains 

 the very different ways of District Boards in this particular. 



It appears also that one is liable to be misled by the reports which 

 may be received on such matters. In one of the reports appended the 

 statement was made that the Salmon Acts were complied with. As I had 

 compiled a report as far back as 1902 dealing with the seven dam dykes of 

 the district and the absence of any attempt to fulfil the requirements of the 

 Acts, I took steps to ascertain the facts. I then found that the statement 

 was entirely misleading ; and I was further informed by the Clerk to the 

 District Board that his Board have always held the view that there is 

 nothing in the river which amounts to a non-compliance with the Bye-laws. 

 I am sorry to state also that a letter to the Chairman of the District Board 

 asking if he supported this view expressed by the Clerk brought no reply. 



Unfortunately, the matter ends here for want of powers on the part 

 of a neutral authority to adjust matters between the interests involved. 

 In a district such as that referred to the salmon interests, as provided for 

 by the Salmon Acts, have no place as compared with the interests which 

 are opposed. 



Sea Trout. 



For statutory purposes, sea trout are regarded as salmon. The 

 Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1862, defines the word "salmon" as 

 including " sea trout, bull trout," as well as smolts and parr. 



