96 



Appendices to Second Annual Report 



1 months, when the salmon nets are removed, these nets are set in 

 1 increased numbers, and take great quantities of salmon.' 



With respect to these Paidle nets, I beg to state that I 

 adhere to the recommendation made by Mr Spencer Walpole and 

 myself, in our Eeport of 1881, on the laws affecting the Salmon 

 Fisheries on the Sol way Firth. We then wrote as follows (page 13) : 

 — 4 We are inclined to think that the Legislature should regard with 

 ' great jealousy the erection of any new fixed nets in the Solway 

 ' Firth, and we recommend that all Paidle nets to the east of the 

 4 old house of Carsethorn of Arbigland should be declared illegal.' 



Even a reduction in the height of these nets to 3 or 4 feet, 

 as has been proposed, would not be sufficient to prevent them from 

 killing salmon. And upon this point I am glad to be able to cite 

 the opinion of Mr Jones, whose acquaintance with everything con- 

 nected with the Salmon Fisheries in the Solway is both extensive 

 and accurate. He writes as follows : — ' Paidle nets 3 to 4 feet 

 4 high, having the usual pockets, will take salmon as well as those 

 ' of a larger size. It depends more on where they are set than on 

 4 their height. As it is almost wholly flat fish, such as flounders, 

 ' &c, which the fisherman say they use these nets for, no pockets 

 ' are required, as it is principally with the ebb tide, when flounders 

 ' back off the feeding grounds and are caught in these nets, and as 

 4 these fish all swim close to the bottom, if a net of not more than 

 4 3 feet high were erected in the form of a large V, without any 

 4 pocket, it would catch as many flounders in proportion to the 

 ' quantity of net used as any Paidle net will do, and even that net 

 ' should only be allowed on banks or scaurs, not in runners or 

 4 channels. Further, two men with a boat and flounder trawl-net 

 4 will catch more flounders in one tide than all the Paidle nets on 

 1 the shore, and not a salmon would be caught in it therefore, the 

 ' Paidle nets, as used, are not the proper or best mode of taking 

 1 white fish.' Mr Jones further writes on the subject of these 

 nets : — 4 If the 14th section of 9 Geo. IV. cap. 39, were repealed, 

 4 the 25th section of 27 and 28 Vict. cap. 118, "The Salmon 

 4 Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1868," including 7 and 8 Vict. cap. 95, 

 ' would then apply to the Solway, the latter of which makes it an 

 ' offence to wilfully take salmon, &c, within a mile from low water 

 ' mark ; and as the 25th section of " The Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) 

 4 Act, 1868," provides that all nets, &c, may be searched, and if 

 4 salmon are found in possession of persons not having a right to fish 

 4 for salmon, the possession of such salmon shall be held primd facie 

 4 evidence of the purpose of the possessor to contravene the pro- 

 4 visions of the last mentioned Act. Therefore, salmon, &c, found in 

 4 the possession of any person fishing with Paidle nets, not having 

 4 a right to take salmon, would be an offence, and would soon put the 

 4 Paidle nets out of existence without any farther proceedings.' * 



It will be seen, on reference to the Memorandum by the Special 

 Commissioners on the Solway (Appendix No. II., page 13 7), that they 

 were clearly of opinion that these Paidle nets were set and used 



* See further on the subject of these nets, 4 Memorandum by the Special Commis- 

 1 sioners of Solway Fisheries as to their Proceedings under the Act 40 & 41 Vict. 

 4 cap. 240.' Appendix, No. II. pp. 53, 54, 57, and 58. 



