Report on Salmon Fisheries. 



ix 



year. That Bill met with strong opposition in various quarters, 

 especially on Tweedside, and is not to be brought before Parliament 

 this session. The Scotch Salmon Fisheries, therefore, with the ex- Defects of the 

 ception of those in the Tweed, continue to be regulated by the Acts of eryTcts F of h 

 1862 and 1868, which, however efficient in some respects, haveproved 1862 and 1868. 

 utterly inadequate to prevent or to check the pollution of rivers ; 

 to put a stop to the illicit traffic in salmon ; to provide for the 

 removal or rendering passable of obstructions in rivers ; to hinder the 

 sale of salmon caught during the extension of time for rod-fishing ; 

 to provide for the administration of the law in those fishery districts 

 where there are no District Boards ; to prohibit the use of hang- 

 nets in rivers ; to compel the putting up of smolt-guards in the case 

 of turbine wheels ; to prevent stroke hailing ; to fix minimum as 

 well as maximum penalties for offences ; and to facilitate the 

 removal of diseased nsh from infected rivers. 



On the 14th of last December, the Inspector of Salmon Fisheries l^^tra^m 

 had a meeting in London, at the Board of Trade, with Mr Berrington, t o English and 

 the English Inspector, and Mr Towse, Secretary to the Fishmongers French mar- 

 Company of London, on the subject of the illicit traffic in Salmon ie s * 

 from Scotland to English and French markets, which probably 

 amounts to more than 100 tons annually, and against which the 

 existing Scotch Salmon Fishery Acts afford a most inadequate 

 protection. After discussing the matter fully, the plan that 

 appeared to recommend itself most strongly was to endeavour to 

 get a short Act of Parliament passed applicable to both England 

 and Scotland specially directed against this traffic. In discussing ^^ l i j! n r g cot 

 the subject at this meeting it appeared that what is chiefly required 8£?to™rev!mt 

 in Scotland are powers of search and seizure, conferred on officers illicit traffic in 

 of District Boards, river watchers, police officers, &c, such as are sa mou ' 

 given with regard to game by the second section of the Poaching 

 Prevention Act of 1862 ; the prohibition of the sale, offering for 

 sale, or having in possession for the purpose of sale, of salmon 

 caught during the extension of time for rod-fishing ; and the 

 throwing on persons in whose possession salmon are found, in a 

 district where the annual close time has commenced, the onus of 

 proving that they got them in a district where it was still legal to 

 take them. All these advantages have been possessed for some 

 years past in England, and why they should be withheld from 

 Scotland, where the salmon fishings are three times as valuable and 

 the facilities for poaching so much greater, it is difficult to com- 

 prehend. Generally speaking, it may be said that the English 

 Acts throw the burden of proof to a great extent on the persons in 

 whose possession unseasonable salmon are found, whereas the Scotch 

 Acts, as interpreted by the decisions, throw it on the prosecutor. 

 It may also be stated that the Tweed Fisheries Act of 1859, 

 section 10, throws the burden of proof on persons selling or offering 

 for sale salmon caught during the annual close time, that such 

 fish were not taken contrary to the provisions of the act. It will 

 be seen from the 19th section of the English Salmon Fisheries Act 

 of 1873, how distinctly the burden of proof is thrown on the person 

 having the unseasonable salmon in his possession. That section is 

 as follows : — 



b 



