xlvi 



Thirty-first Annual Report 



were made, as compared with 14 in the previous year ; to the Moray 

 Firth, ill which 12 Britisli trawlers were found at work in 1911, but 

 onl}^ 4 in 1912; and the Firtli of Forth and vicinity, where the num- 

 bers of detections for the past three years has been 10, 3, and niL 



All the Lewis cases were detected by local fishermen, as were also 

 the Foula cases, and two each of the cases referring to Fair Isle and 

 Shetland. One other case detected by fishermen was that of a foreign 

 trawler in the Moray Firth. Of the remaining cases, 20 were detected 

 by the Board's cruisers and 2 by H.M.S. Eingdove." In four of the 

 cases put forwnrd by fishermen the verdict was " not proven," and in a 

 case reported by the " Ringdove " the result was the same ; but with 

 the exception of one case which was dropped, all the others resulted 

 in convictions being obtained. 



The total fines imposed amounted to £1530, much less than in many 

 previous years, while the average of £51 also shows a decrease. It 

 should, however, be noted that five of the six convictions obtained 

 against the masters of foreign trawlers were, as explained in last year's 

 Eeport, obtained under the Acts of 1883 and 1891, and were followed 

 in every case by the forfeiture of all fish and gear found in the trawlers 

 at the time of detection, the fish so forfeited being sold for a total of 

 £361 14s. 5d. net. The total net proceeds from the sale of forfeited 

 trawl gear during the year was £143 6s. 3d. The amount of fines 

 paid was £597 6s. 8d., while imprisonment in periods for each offence 

 of from 20 to 60 days was accepted as an alternative in 13 cases. 



In only five cases throughout the year was the highest possible 

 fine of £100 imposed. The highest average penalty was imposed in 

 the Stornoway Sheriff" Court ; but as threats on the part of the trawlers 

 of personal violence to the fishermen were alleged in connection with 

 these cases, especially those relating to Loch Roag, the heavy penalties 

 seem justified. 



In the case of the Oroton," detected by a Lossiemouth crew, per- 

 sonal violence appears to have been attempted, but as the fishermen 

 were unable to identify individual members of the trawler's crew the 

 off*enders could not be prosecuted. 



Particulars of the prosecutions in 1912 for illegal trawling will be 

 found in Appendix K, ISTo. II., while a statement giving at a glance 

 a summary of the prosecutions in each year since 1886 appears in 

 Appendix K, 1\ o. lY. 



PROSECUTIONS FOR OTHER OFFENCES. 



Appendix K, No. III., gives particulars of prosecutions of the masters 

 of fishing vessels for offences other than illegal trawling. Only two 

 such prosecutions occurred in 1912, both of which were in connection 

 with trawling cases, and related to failure to exhibit the required 

 lights while trawling by night, the object, of course, being to evade 

 observation while working within the prescribed waters. A conviction 

 was obtained in each case and salutory penalties were imposed ; and 

 by reference to the preceding Appendix it v.-ill be seen that the act of 

 illegal trawling was also established in both cases, 



