of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



11 



attempt has been made to carry out the regulations contained in the 

 bye-law. With regard to the cruive 'at Cluden, I am informed 

 that the proprietor holds, as was held by the proprietor of the cruives 

 on the Deveron previous to the recent decision in the Court of Session 

 (Duke of Fife and others, 1897), that, in virtue of his titles and of the 

 proviso at the end of Section 6 of the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 

 1862, he is entitled to maintain and use his cruive in the form in which 

 it has been maintained from time immemorial. According to this 

 decision, however, it would seem that cruives must conform to the 

 regulations contained in the bye- law, unless a right under charter to 

 any particular size or description of cruive can be shown. I have been 

 in correspondence with the District Board as to the alterations which 

 are necessary to provide a free passage for the fish over these 

 obstructions. 



It is satisfactory to note that there seems a general movement on the Immediate 

 part of proprietors of salmon fisheries towards amalgamating the con- fesults trom 

 flicting interests which have hitherto stood in the way of regulations r^uktfons 

 being adopted for the protection of a proportion of every run of should not b« 

 salmon. During last year steps have been taken in this direction in expected, 

 the districts of the Kyle of Sutherland, the Deveron, and the South 

 Esk, either by lengthening the weekly close time, by removing obstruc- 

 tions, or by abolishing netting in confined waters ; while similar 

 steps have been carried out in other districts in previous years, or are 

 still under consideration. The evidence which I have put forward from 

 time to time in my reports to the Board (Eleventh Annual Report, 

 pp. 11 and 59; Thirteenth Annual Beport, p. 82; and Fourteenth 

 Annual Beport, pp. 7 and 8) seems to show that, in those districts 

 where this principle has been adopted, it has been followed by the 

 improvement of the fisheries both in the tidal as wxll as in the non- 

 tidal waters. Those, however, w^ho expect great and immediate results 

 will probably be disappointed. Nothing seems to be surer with regard 

 to the efiect of regulations for the improvement of the fisheries than 

 that the result only shows itself by good yeais becoming better and bad 

 years not so bad ; and, further, that the full benefit of such regulations 

 is not felt until eight or ten years after their introduction. Thus, if 

 the statement of the number and weight of the fish caught at the 

 salmon fishings belonging to the Aberdeen Harbour Commissioners be 

 studied, it will be seen that in only two, out of the first nine years after 

 the new regulations were adopted, did the yield of fish exceed 100,000 lbs., 

 whereas in the subsequent seventeen years it only fell short of that 

 quantity in four years (p. x., ante). On the Ballisodare Biver in 

 Ireland, where an entii-ely new^ salmon fishery was created by opening 

 up the obstructions at the mouth and allowing the fish to have free 

 access to the spawning grounds above, it seems to have been eleven years 

 before the fisheries wei-e fully established (Tenth Annual Beport, p. 11). 

 On the Galway Biver, where Mr. Thomas Ashwortli enormously increased 

 the value of an existing fishery by opening up a large extent of spawn- 

 ing ground by means of ladders, it was nine years before the marked 

 increase became apparent (Tenth Annual Beport, p. 13). On Sand's 

 Biver in Norway the average annual take of fish in the ten years 

 following the adoption of the new regulations was not half what it has 

 been in subsequent years (Eleventh Annual Beport, p. 59). The 

 evidence afi'orded by these examples would seem to show that no 

 immediate results are to be looked for from any regulations which may 

 be adopted, and that proprietors should not be discouraged even though 

 no improvement is apparent for nine or ten years. 



