58 



Appendices to Sixteenth Annual Report 



each raising the water one foot in height, were placed across the 

 channel formed by the two arms of the dyke, and by this means the 

 water at the foot of the dyke were raised to within one or two feet of 

 the upper sill of the fish pass. 



The state of tlie There was a ffreat difference of opinion amonerst those whom I met 

 in the immedi- state of the bed of the river in the immediate neighbourhood 



ate neighbour- of the dyke. By some it was contended that the lower end of the fish 

 dvke P^^^ ^^^^ fallen into disrepair, causing the water, instead of keeping in 



' ' one channel, to spread out and form a shallow bank a short distance 



below the dyke, which prevented fish in low water from reaching the 

 foot of the pass. By others that no alteration had taken place either 

 in the lower end of the pass or in the gravel bank referred to. 



I am unable to attach much importance to this complaint. In the 

 first place, even if a few stones are out of place at the foot of the pass, 

 they do not cause any real obstruction to the passage of fish, as 

 the foot is entirely submerged when the river is at such a height that 

 fish are inclined to travel, I am, however, by no means satisfied that 

 there are any stones out of place, although this can be ascertained 

 and, if necessary, rectified when the river is low. In the second 

 place, the gravel bank referred to does not seem to me to present any 

 real hindrance to fish ; on the contrary, I believe it rather assists than 

 hinders their ascent, by helping to dam back the water on the foot of 

 the dyke. 



The com- The complaint with regard to the abstraction of water by the Kinnaber 

 tlie"volume of seems to me a more serious matter. It was complained, in the 

 ■Nvater abstract- first place, that since the introduction of turbines about six or seven 

 "^^^^ years ago, a greater quantity of water is abstracted from the river than 

 formerly ; and in the second place, that it is most unjust that the 

 Kinnaber lade should be exempted by the 12th section of the Act of 

 1868 from the provisions of the loye-law (Schedule G) as to the shutting 

 •of sluices at the intake. 



With regard to the first point, there can be no doubt that the 

 iibstraction of a greater volume of water by the Kinnaber lade increases 

 the difficulty which the dam dyke presents to the free passage of fish, 

 bvit it hardly seems that, as the law at present stands, using a method 

 of w^ater power which abstracts more water constitutes a contravention 

 •of the statute. The 7th section of the bye- law (Schedule G) refers 

 merely to the construction of the dam, and in this case the dam has 

 not been altered. It would seem probable, however, that at the time 

 of the passing of the bye-law the introduction of improved machinery 

 into mill lades, by which a greater quantity of water could be abstracted 

 from the rivers, was not contemplated, and that it was intended, by 

 providing that " no dam shall be so altered as to create a greater 

 " obstruction to the free passage of fish than at present exists," to 

 safeguard the salmon fishery interests, and to prevent anything being 

 <lone to increase the obstruction caused by mill dams to the passage of 

 fish. If so, modern inventions have rendered the b3^e-law insufficient, 

 and its amendment would seem to be required. The only power, 

 however, given under the Salmon Fishery Acts for the amendment or 

 4ilteration of the Commissioners' bye-laws would seem to be that given 

 in the 9th section of the Act of 1868. By this section it is enacted 

 that a District Board may petition the Secretary of State, whose duties 

 are now performed by the Secretary for Scotland, to do certain things, 

 viz. : — inter alia " to alter the regulations with respect to the construc- 

 tion and use of cruives and cTuive dykes or weirs within their 



lade- 



