THE EISHING GAZETTE 
127 
Eebrttaut 25, 1893] 
CON TE NTS. 
N.B.—All rights reserved in articles published in this 
paper, 
Thames Fishery Bye-Laws ... 127 
The British Sea Anglers’ Society .127 
Death of a Famous Painter and Angler—Mr. John 
Pettie, It.A.128 
Scotch Notes .128 
The Book of the Roach .130 
The Spring Salmon Rivers of Scotland .132 
The Dean of Winchester.133 
Waltoniana.134 
Correspondence. 134 
- NOTICE. 
Communications relating to the Literary Department, 
Fishing Tackle for Notice, Books for Review, &c., 
should be addressed to R. B. Marston, Editor of 
the Fishing Gazette, St. Dunstan’s House, Fetter- 
lane, London. 
of Subsci7ipt:ion. 
The Gazette can be had by sending Postal Order or 
Stamps to Messrs. Sampson Low, Marston, and Co., 
Limited, the Proprietors, St. Dunstan’s House, 
Fetter-lane, London, to whom all money payments 
should be made. 
For One Year, post free to any part of Great 
Britain and Ireland . 10s. 6d. 
,, Six Months ditto ditto 5s. 4d. 
,, Three Months ditto ditto 2s. 8d. 
To America and the Continent, annual sub¬ 
scription, including postage. 128. 6d. 
Adveptisen-i.en.'ts. 
Applications respecting advertisements should be ad¬ 
dressed to the Manager of the Fishing Gazette, St. 
Dunstan’s House, Fetter-lane, London. 
Telegraphic Address.—" KIVSAM, London.” 
TELEPHONE No. 2679. 
~ mt — 
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25th, 1893. 
THAMES FISHERY BYE-LAWS. 
THE REVISED DRAFT. 
All kinds of rumours have been flying about 
concerning the alterations which the Conservators 
were making in the bye-laws, but we deemed it 
wise to publish nothing on the subject before we 
had the revised draft before us. This, in the 
exact form it will be published, we have now 
received, and are able to give our readers a 
careful analysis of its provisions. In many 
respects the conservators have met the wishes of 
anglers, more particularly in those cases where it 
was proposed to put restrictions on methods of 
catching flsb, but as regards the netting by 
riparian owners, we very much regret to say that 
the new bye-law on the subject, while it professes 
to meet the wishes of the public in the matter of 
licensing hoop and drag nets and the size of their 
meshes, is so ingeniously altered in other respects 
that, if anything, greater powers in the way of 
netting, &c., are conferred upon the claimants to 
private fisheries than they would have had under 
the first draft and far more than they have under 
the existing bye-laws. Anglers would have been 
content doubtless if the existing bye-law on the 
subject had not been altered, but the startling 
innovation now proposed can create nothing but 
opposition, and the conservators are not well 
advised in this matter. It must never be for¬ 
gotten in considering fishery bye-laws for any 
river that those bye-laws which aim at the pre¬ 
servation of fish are far more important than 
those which merely aim at putting trifling re¬ 
strictions on anglers. For instance, to stop the 
wash of steam launches while the spawn is on the 
weeds would do far greater good to the fishery 
than making anglers return fish under a certain 
size, or a bye-law saying that they shall only fish 
with a limited number of rods. As regards the 
most important bye-laws the new draft is un¬ 
satisfactory, but as regards the less important 
points the wishes of anglers have been fully met. 
As the best way of showing the full effect of 
the new draft we will first point out what appear 
to be improvements and then deal with what may 
be termed drawbacks. 
Improvements. 
No. 5, relating to trailing, still stands, but it 
is in the same ungrammatical condition as for¬ 
merly, natural and artificial hooks being referred 
to, the conservators apparently considering that 
anglers sometimes trail both rod and line after 
the boat. 
No. 7 reads as follows: “ No person shall fish 
for pike with any device or tackle that does not 
admit of the pike taken therewith being returned 
to the water without serious injury.” This aims 
at the unsportsmanlike practise of fishing with 
gorge bait. Neither this nor the previous bye¬ 
law apply to persons claiming private fisheries. 
No. 8. The limits of size for landing net are 
fixed at a diameter of two feet with a depth of 
three feet. No longer do we find the provision 
that the little net for taking minnows out of the 
well is to have a mesh of four inches. The mesh 
of the cast-net is fixed at half-an-inch from knot 
to knot, with a six-inch purse, and a circumference 
of twenty feet. 
No. 9. Only persons who have used nets during 
the year 1892 between Isleworth Church Ferry 
and London Bridge may continue to use nets in 
such portion of the river. When they die out 
netting will cease in that part of the Thames. 
No. iO. Casting nets to be only used by 
assistant river keepers, but to our copy of the 
bye-laws is appended a note that the conservators 
will be willing to appoint, from time to time, as 
assistant river keepers, such professional fisher¬ 
men in each district as may be properly recom¬ 
mended to them. This excellent idea, which 
emanated from the Henley Association, will lead 
to an addition to the river keepers of men who 
will be on their good behaviour for the sake of 
retaining the privilege of using the cast-net. 
No. 12. Rod and line may be used below 
London Bridge. This was evidently omitted by 
accident in the first draft. 
No. 16 allows the use of the gaff to pike 
fishermen. 
No. 20. The close season for trout, which was 
altered, is brought back to the old dates. 
No. 23 enacts that no one shall fish in the 
coarse fish fence months except for trout with 
rod and line and spinning or live bait. Live 
“ fish ” bait would be better, as a magistrate who 
knew nothing of fishing terms might term a 
worm a live bait. 
No. 24 allows roach, dace, gudgeon, bleak, 
and minnows to be used as a bait for trout in the 
coarse fish fence months. Roach might be 
excluded with advantage. 
No. 25. Night-fishing, which was permitted 
below Staines in the first draft, is now limited to 
fishing/rom the hank below Staines. 
No. 28. The size of grayling is increased to 
twelve inches. Chub not to be used as live bait. 
Gudgeon to be returned under four inches, but 
may be taken of any size for bait. Persons may 
have in their possession fifty undersized fi-h for 
bait at one time. 
Draw HACKS, 
No. 16. We are surprised to find that in this 
bye-law, which in the first draft was aimed against 
nets being placed at the mouth of any brook, 
creek, “ or backwater,” the word “ backwater ” 
is now cut out. Why should the conservators 
desire to allow nets to be placed at the mouths 
of backwaters ? 
No. 19. The conservators persist in prohibit¬ 
ing the laying of baskets for eels in the upper 
river. It is a great hardship on professional 
fishermen that this should not be allowed where 
no persons claim private fishery rights. There 
would be less illicit night-lining if it were per¬ 
mitted. The riparian influence which pervades 
the bye-laws is strong in this and in No. 16. 
No. 25. We have already suggested that roach 
should not be caught and used as bait for trout 
in the fence months. They are not good baits 
for the purpose, and are not required. 
No. 28. Pike are to be killed at 18 inches, 
tench at 8 inches. A jack of 18 inches weighs 
usually a pound and a half, and never more than 
a pound and three-quarters. 
No. 32 is very bad indeed. It is the bye-law 
to which so much objection was taken, which 
prevents the conservators giving a licence to 
persons to take fish for scientific purposes unless 
such persons have a right to take such fish. This 
is jjne of the conservators’ alterations in the 
existing bye-laws, and was introduced by the wish 
of the Riparian Owners’ Association. The old 
bye-law stood for many years, and ought not to 
be altered. 
No. 33 relates to the netting and other privileges 
conferred on persons claiming private fisheries. 
This new bye-law, contrary to rumour, is even 
worse than before. The existing bye-law provides 
that persons claiming private fisheries may do cer¬ 
tain things that are specified—lay night-lines, use 
cast-nets, lay eel baskets, and use hoop and drag¬ 
nets of a certain mesh—provided the licence of 
the conservators is first obtained. In the first 
draft of the proposed bye-laws the necessity of 
obtaining this licence was done away with, the 
mesh of the nets was made smaller. The outcry 
this raised has led the conservators to reintro¬ 
duce the words relating to obtaining a licence 
for drag and hoop-nets, but they now omit the 
li.st of things a person claiming a private fishery 
may do, and propose to enact that, except the 
bye-laws relating to the fence months and the 
sizes of fish, and .subject to the licence for hoop 
and drag-nets, the persons who claim private 
fisheries shall not be bound by the bye-laws at 
all. To put the matter shortly, the conservators 
propose to immensely increase the already con¬ 
siderable privileges of riparian owners, and to 
put it in their power to absolutely ruin the 
fisheries. On another page is a letter from Mr. 
C. H. Cook, in which the extraordinary and far- 
reaching effects of this proposed bye-law are 
considered. AVe also give, in parallel columns, the 
existing bye-law, the one first proposed, the one 
now proposed, and the section of the Act relating 
thereto, so that we need say no more on that 
point. 
No. 36 is one of the most important of tho 
bye-laws, but one which anglers would be the 
least likely to notice. It is the definition of the 
word “ Thames,” and we still find that, owing to 
the way the word is defined, the great majority 
of the backwaters would be altogether excluded 
from the operation of the bye-laws. If this is 
allowed to pass, all the operations of the preser¬ 
vation associations may go for naught. It is no 
use to preserve the main stream when the back¬ 
waters, which are full of fish in winter, are 
netted ad lib. 
So much for the drawbacks. A word on what 
we do not find in the bye-laws. (1) There are no 
provisions relating to the injury to the spawn 
and brood of fish by steam launches. (2) There is 
nothing to prevent the netting of all flooded 
lands and many backwaters by anybody so dis¬ 
posed. These two omissions are sufficient to 
undo all the good done by the bye-laws relating 
to the sizes of fish, &c. 
In a month’s time the bye-laws will go before 
the Privy Council. It is open to all persons 
interested to send in a written petition addressed 
to the “ Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty,” under 
cover to the “ Clerk of the Privy Council,” AVhite- 
hall. The petition must be signed, and should 
set forth the objections to any of the bye-laws, 
and the reason for such objections. There are no 
fees to be paid at the office of the Privy Council, 
nor need there be counsel employed. 
[In view of the necessity for joint action by all 
who are interested in preserving the Thames 
fisheries, we intend to call a public meeting to be 
composed of delegates from all clubs and associa¬ 
tions interested in the Thames, and hope to 
announce the date and place of meeting next 
week.—Ei). F. G.] 
THE BRITISH SEA ANGLERS’ 
SOCIETY. 
Anyone who is interested in sea fishing should 
send a postcard to F. G. Aflalo, Esq , Hon. Sec. 
of the “ British Sea Anglers’ Society,” 5, 
Beverley-road, Anerley, London, S.E., for a copy 
of an interesting pamphlet describing the recent 
founding of the society, its objects, &c. There is 
to be a committee meeting of the society early in 
March, and as the hon. sec. hopes to announce a 
large list of members, gentlemen who think of 
joining should write to him at once. AVe are glad 
to hear that Captain Lambton Young, author of 
that capital book “ Sea Fishing as a Sport,” 
published with fine coloured plates in 1872, has 
joined the society. 
