7 
January 7, 1893] 
THE PISHING GAZETTE 
At a special meeting: of the committee of the 
Thames Angling Preservation Society, held at 
the society’s offices, 12, Regent-street, Pall Mall, 
on Wednesday last, with Mr. Alfred Nuthall, J.P., 
m the chair, the following suggestions w'ere 
unanimously passed : (6) The abolition of live 
and dead gorge fishing. (9) A limited number of 
privileged licensed fishermen to use the bait net, 
or the eniployment of more Conservancy river 
keepers for fishing only. (10) To add “night or 
day ^ in the use of fixed hook or night lines. 
(14) lo add “ Nothing in these bye-laws shall 
give any increased power or authority to riparian 
owners or claimants beyond their present power, 
and the size and kind of nets to be used shall not 
be different or of greater mesh than those now in 
/'on m permit the gaff in landing pike. 
P24) To make it aiii/ part of the River Thames, 
and to take out “ as lies above the City Stone at 
Starnes.” (27) Jack to be made 22in., and add 
gudgeon 4in. (ti) Take cut chub and add gud¬ 
geon. (35) River Thames, take out “through or” 
which occurs in line 8. 
THE l^ROPOSED NEW THAMES 
BYE-LAWS. 
[MPORTANT MEETING AT READING TO 
PROTEST. 
On Monday evening a well-attended meeting 
of the committee of the Reading and District 
Angling Association was held at the headquarters, 
the Great Western Hotel, Reading, on the subject 
of the suggested new Thames Fishery Bye-laws, 
which are creating much well-grounded opposi¬ 
tion on the part of all who have at heart the 
welfare of the important fisheries of the Thames. 
Mr. Alfred Hurley, V.P., was voted to the chair. 
The hon. secretary, Mr. Fred. Brown, having 
explained the special business for which the 
meeting was called, and read correspondence 
from the secretary to the Thames Conservancy, 
Mr. C. H. Cook (hon. sec. of Henley Thames 
Fisheries Preservation Association, which is 
affiliated to the Reading Association), Mr. Arthur 
C. Butler, V.P., proposed, in a brief explanatory 
speech, the following resolution : 
“That the Committee of the Reading and 
District Thames Angling Preservation Associa¬ 
tion, specially convened this 2nd day of January, 
1893, to consider the draft of the proposed new 
Thames Fishery Bye-laws issued by the Hon. the 
Board of Thames Conservancy, under date 
December 19th, 1892, desire to enter their most 
emphatic protest against the same becoming law 
in their present form, on the following grounds, 
among others, viz.: 
“1. That the substitution of Clause 32 in 
the proposed Bye-laws for Clause 14 in the 
Bye-laws of 1883 would be fatal to the fisheries 
of the Thames—which have been preserved and 
protected by voluntary effort at great expen¬ 
diture of trouble and money—by allowing any 
person setting up a claim to riparian rights, 
or the alleged agent to any such person, to 
net the river without check, and with hoop 
and drag nets of a mesh reduced (without 
any assigned reason) from 2in. to Hin. from 
mesh to mesh when wet. These facilities would 
undoubtedly be taken advantage of by un¬ 
scrupulous persons ; and accordingly this Com¬ 
mittee considers the proposal to abolish the 
netting licence and to decrease the mesh of 
licensed nets, not only merely uncalled for, but 
monstrous. 
“ 2. That the proposed bye-law (No. 15) ignores 
the vitally important suggestion of this and the 
other Dpper Thames Preservation Associations 
assembled in conference at Reading, on Feb. 22, 
1892 (hereinafter called the Conference) to so 
alter bye-laws 5 and 12 of the bye-laws of 1883 
as to prohibit the netting of flooded meadows, 
ditches, drc. 
“3. That the proposed bye-laws allow the 
laying of night lines by private owners during 
the fence months, which will lead to the killing 
of nnseasonable fish. 
“ 4. That the strong representations of the 
Conference are ignored (a) as to the prohibition 
of live and dead gorge-fishing, so ruinous to the 
pike fishery ; (b) as to the regulation of the speed 
at which steamboats shall be navigated during 
the spawning season; (c) as to prohibiting the 
disgraceful practice of worm-fishing for trout 
during the close season for coarse fish, which 
leads to many other abuses of the law, most 
difficult to detect; (d) the omission from the 
definition of the legal cast-net in the bye-laws of 
1883 of the words ‘the sack or purse thereof not 
being more than 6 inches in depth when extended 
to the utmost’ (section 6, sub-section 12. bye¬ 
laws 1883), the importance of which can only be 
appreciated by those who have a practical know¬ 
ledge of the river; and (e) that the recommenda¬ 
tions of the said Conference as to the sizes of fish 
and alterations of fence months have been totally 
Ignored, wdth the trifling exception of an increase 
of 3 inches in the length of barbel. 
“ So strongly do this Committee realise the 
evils which will be occasioned to the fishing 
should these proposed bye-laws (and more par¬ 
ticularly those to which exception is taken in 
paragraphs 1 and 2 of this resolution) pass into 
law, that they firmly believe their so passing 
would mean nothing less than the ruin of the 
River Thames as an angling resort, and would 
lead to the abandonment of the operations of the 
voluntary Associations which have done such 
good work in preserving and increasing the stock 
of Thames fish, thereby providing wholesome and 
innocent recreation for all. 
“They accordingly now determine, under the 
strongest sense of the gravity of the situation, 
and of the importance of protecting the public 
interest, that unless the Hon. Board of Thames 
Conservancy meet this their final expression of 
opinion, they will take the necessary steps to 
memorialise, and if necessary to be heard before. 
Her Majesty’s Most Hon. Privy Conncil in most 
strenuous opposition to the approval of the said 
proposed bye-laws. 
“ That a copy of this resolution be forwarded 
to the Hon. the Board of Thames Conservancy, 
with a copy of the Conference resolutions of 
February 22nd, 1892, and with an urgent request 
for an immediate reply; and that upon receipt 
of such reply the hon. sec. do at once convene a 
further meeting of this committee.” 
* The numbers refer to the sections of the proposed 
hye-laws so numbered. 
Ari’ENDIX. 
Suggestions for Ne^t? Bye-laws, approved at a 
meeting of the Upper Thames Angling and Fishery 
Preservation Societies, at Reading, Peh. 22, 1892. ‘ 
“ Bye-law 5.—To define River Thames, wherever 
Thames water flows, and all creeks and back¬ 
waters and waters other than tributary streams, 
frequented by Thames fish. 
“ Bye-law 0, Sect. 11.—To omit the word 
‘ small,’ and insert after ‘ landing-net ’ the wmrds 
‘of one-inch mesh from knot to knot, or four 
inches all round.’ . 
“ Sect. 12.—A strong recommendation to the 
conservators to license only a very limited 
number of fishermen to use cast-nets, and only to 
license bond fide fishermen, approved by the 
officers of the local angling association, where one 
may exist, and that where any fisherman be twice 
convicted of an offence under the bye-laws he be 
liable to forfeit his licence. 
“ Bye-law 7.—To omit the words ‘ having been 
taken ’ in second line, and after the words ‘ dimen¬ 
sions following ’ to add the words ‘ and any person 
found in possession of such undersized fish on or 
near the River Thames shall be guilty of an 
offence under these bye-laws, unless he can prove 
to the satisfaction of the justices before whom he 
is charged that such fish was not taken out of the 
River Thames.’ 
'• To alter the minimum lengths of fish as 
follows: Pike, 22in.; barbel, 18in.; trout un¬ 
changed (but some of those at the meeting wished 
power to be given to retain fish over 21b., though 
under IGiu.); grayling, 12in.; carp, 12in.; tench, 
12in. Omit gudgeon from the bye-law, the rule 
being invariably ignored. 
“ Bye-law 8.—Fence months for pike and perch 
to be from Feb. 15 to July 15. 
“ Fence months for all other coarse fish to be 
from April 1 to July 1. 
“Bye-law 10.—Trailing and gorge bait (live or 
dead) fishing to be absolutely prohibited, as being 
most harmful to the pike fisheries. 
“Bye-law 10, Sect. A.~Omit words ‘at the 
time of^ such possession,’ and add at the end of 
clause, or on any flooded meadow, or in any creek 
or^backwater communicating with the said river.’ 
Bye-law 10, Sect. B.—Omit words ‘ from any 
boat, or vessel, or punt,’ and for the words 
Richmond Bridge ’ substitute ‘ City Stone, 
Staines. 
4 --U Sect. F.—Throw onus of proof 
that fish were not taken out of the Thames on 
person charged, as in suggestion to Bye-law 7. 
ye-law 10, Sect. G.—Add, ‘and no steam 
launch or other vessel shall be navigated at such 
a speed between Feb. 1 and .1 uly 1 as to injure the 
spawn or brood of fish.’ 
Bye-law 12.-— Alter to read thus : ‘ No person 
shall put down in the River Thames, or in or at 
the mouth of any creek, ditch, or backwater, or 
on any flooded land, or at the mouth of any river 
commupicating with the river Thames, or at any 
mill, &c. •' 
“Bye-law 14.—Abolish night lines in private 
fasheries, or, failing their abolition, enact that no 
night line be laid baited with worms, but only 
with portions of dead fish, night lines baited with 
worms doing most serious injury to the trout and 
other fisheries. 
“To prohibit worm fishing for trout during the 
close season for coarse fish. 
impose a rod-tax of 23. 6d. annually on 
all ihames anglers, a fair proportion of the pro¬ 
ceeds being devoted to the support of the Thames 
1 isheries Preservation Societies.” 
The foregoing resolution was seconded by IMr. 
J. Sims, and carried by the unanimous resolution 
ot the meeting. 
Oo the proposition of the chairman, seconded 
by Mr. J. Lindars, the hon. secretary was 
instructed to send a copy of the foregoing resolu¬ 
tion to each of the other up-river preservation 
associations, to the two affiliated associations of 
London angling clubs, and to the other bodies 
interested. 
The Propo.sed Ruin of tub Tuaiies Fisheries. 
To the Editor of the Fishing Gazette. 
Sir,—As chairman of the special meeting of the 
Reading and District Angling Association, held 
on Monday, I desire most strongly to emphasise 
the resolutions thereat unanimously carried. 
Unless the Thames Conservators consent to meet 
the wishes of honest anglers on these vital points 
the Thames fisheries will be ruined. 
If an appeal should unfortunately be necessarj/ 
from the Thames Conservators to the Privy 
Council, I (and Mr. Frederick Brown, hon. sec. 
of the Reading and District Angling Association), 
will gladly receive subscriptions towards the 
necessary cost.—ii'ours faithfully, 
Reading, Jan. 2,1893. A. Hurley. 
FISHING ON THE EXETER CANAL. 
By Jes.se. 
Five a m. on a raw, wild July morning. Looking 
out of my bedroom window I see that it has rained 
heavily during the night. The path is all in 
puddles, the strawberry beds and raspberry canes 
are drenched with water, and the trees are bend- 
ing under the chill wind and dropping showers 
continually. 
“ I hardly expect Arthur will turn up,” 1 
mutter to myself. 
At this monient a tapping at the door was 
heard, and a voice said, “ Are you going fishing 
to-day, sir, and do you want tea ? It is going to 
be a wild day.” 
“ Oh, yes,” 1 replied to my landlady, “bring up 
tea; if Mr. Arthur comes we must be off by a 
quarter to six.” 
I had no sooner got on my shooting boots than 
Arthur arrived, and we both sat down to a good 
meal. 
Nothing is more vexing than having to put ofl’ 
an excursion. In the present case we had everj'- 
thing prepared for a day’s fishing on the Exeter 
Canal, and were determined we would have it, let 
the weather be what it liked. 
e had five miles of rough walking to do to 
catch the early train (7.15 a.m.) up from Exmouth, 
so, having a good deal to carry, we got away as 
soon as possible. What a lot of things one needs 
lor a day’s bottom fishing, and not one single 
