of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



7 



It humbly seems to me that it is somewhat unfair that the whole 

 expense of making obstructions in rivers passable for salmon should be 

 thrown upon District Boards. The persons who are chiefly to profit by 

 such obstructions being removed are the proprietors above the ob- 

 struction, who may obtain a right to salmon fishings ex adverso of their 

 respective lands. In the case of the Falls of Tummel being effectually 

 opened up, there is one proprietor, for example, who would have about 30 

 miles of lochs and rivers stocked with salmon. It, therefore, appears to 

 me to be but fair and reasonable that those, whoever they may be, 

 who receive grants of the new salmon fishings created by making hitherto 

 inaccessible waterfalls passable for salmon, should pay a considerable 

 portion of the expense incurred by the District Board in opening them up, 

 whether they may be the Woods and Forests as representing the Crown ; 

 a proprietor having a charter to follow salmon above the obstruction and 

 beyond his own lands, if such a right shall be held good in law ; or the 

 riparian owners above who may obtain a grant of salmon fishings.* 



In carrying out any general scheme for opening up the many natural 

 obstructions to the ascent of salmon which might profitably be made 

 passable for salmon, it may be found somewhat difficult to reconcile the 

 interests of the riparian owners above these obstructions with the rights 

 of a chartered proprietor below, who claims, under his charter, a right to 

 follow salmon beyond the obstruction J or, where there is no such char- 

 tered proprietor, with the claims of the Crown to the new salmon fishings 

 created by making an obstruction passable. 



It is well known that in Scotland, salmon fishings do not pass as part 

 and pertinent of lands, but form a separate property requiring a special 

 conveyance, mere riparian ownership giving no title, even to rod-fishing 

 for salmon without a charter of fishings ; and it sometimes happens that 

 one person holds the land on both sides of a river, while another has a 

 right to the salmon fishings, which entitles him to enter upon these lands 

 for the purpose of carrying out that right. Suppose, then, that A has a 

 chartered right to all the salmon fishings in the district of B, through 

 which a salmon river flows ; and suppose, further, that half-way up the 

 course of that river there is a natural obstruction in the shape of a fall 

 which totally prevents the ascent of salmon, and that this fall and the 

 land on both banks of the river for several miles above belong to D, who 

 has no right of salmon fishing. It is perfectly clear that it would be 

 very much against the interest of D to allow that obstruction to be made 



* It should be stated that great diversity of opinion exists with reference to this 

 subject. One proprietor of salmon fishings of great experience writes me as follows : 

 — 'I do not agree that it is unfair that the cost of removing obstructions should fall 

 on the District Board. Proprietors below the obstruction will benefit by an increased 

 number of fish, and proprietors above will benefit by having salmon where before 

 they had none ; and as all will be included in the district assessment, each will bear 

 a burden in proportion to the benefit received. It may be assumed that the Crown 

 will be proprietor of all the fishings above the obstruction, and it will sell its rights 

 to the owners of the estates or other persons who may be willing to buy at a price 

 regulated by two factors: (1) the number of fish expected to be taken, and (2) the 

 amount of assessment to be imposed. If it is to be a heavy assessment, the price will 

 be less than if the assessment be small. The riparian owner has no interest in the 

 matter except in so far as the right of salmon fishing involves the right of passing 

 over his ground ; and he probably would be entitled to some compensation for this 

 quasi right of trespass being constituted on his grounds. I don't know that there is 

 in Scotland any grant of salmon fishing in a district, there may be in a river generally 

 without any upper or lower boundary being specified ; but I cannot think for a 

 moment that such a grant would confer a right to the salmon fishing newly created 

 in miles of river and lochs which did not contain salmon at the date of the grant,— 

 undoubtedly the Crown would claim and get this right and it should bear its share 

 of the expense of creating so valuable a property for it. ' 



