their habitat. Like cave-dwelling animals, or the lilac forced in
Parisian cellars, many of them are blanched and pale; but this is by no
means always the case. There is, in fact, no characteristic hue for the
deep-sea fauna. Many of the fishes are black, and many show the most
lovely metallic sheen. Burnished silver and black give a somewhat
funereal, but very tasteful appearance to numbers of deep-sea fish.
Others are ornamented with patches of shining copper, which, with their
blue eyes, form an agreeable variety in their otherwise sombre
appearance. Many of the fishes, however, present a gayer clothing. Some
are violet, others pale rose or bright red. Others have a white almost
translucent skin, through which the blood can be seen and its course
traced even in its finer vessels. Purples and greens abound amongst the
holothurians; other echinoderms are white, yellow, pink, or red. Red is,
perhaps, the predominant colour of the crustacea, though it has been
suggested that this colour is produced during the long passage to the
surface, and that some of the bright reds which we see at the surface
are unknown in the depths. Violet and orange, green and red, are the
colours of the jelly-fishes and the corals.
It thus appears that there is a great variety and a great brilliancy
amongst many of the bottom fauna. With the exception of blue, all
colours are well represented; but the consideration of one or two facts
seems to show that colour plays little part in their lives. Apart from
the fact that to our eyes, at any rate, these gorgeous hues would be
invisible in the depths, it is difficult to imagine that each of these
gaily-coloured creatures can live amongst surroundings of its own hue.
Again, it is characteristic that the colour is uniform. There is a
marked absence of those stripes, bands, spots, or shading which play so
large a part in the protective coloration of animals exposed to light.
Although there is no protective coloration amongst the animals of the
deep sea, the luminous organs, which make, for instance, some of the
cuttlefishes as beautiful and as conspicuous as a firework, may, in some
cases, act as warning signals. Having once established a reputation for
nastiness, the more conspicuous an animal can make itself the less
likely is it to be interfered with. One peculiarity connected with
pigment, as yet inexplicable, is the fact that, in deep-sea animals,
many of the cavities of the body are lined with a dark or, more
usually, a black epithelium. The mouth, pharynx, and respiratory
channels, and even the visceral cavity, of _Bathysaurus_ and _Ipnops_,
and indeed of all really deep-sea fishes, are black. It can be of no use
to any animal to be black inside; and the only explanation hitherto
given is that the deposit of pigment is the expression of some
modification in the excretory processes of the abysmal fishes.
It was mentioned above that the absence of eyes is to some extent
compensated by the great extension of feelers and antennæ. Many of the
jelly-fishes have long free tentacles radiating in all directions; the
rays of the ophiuroids are prolonged; the arms of the cuttle-fish are
capable of enormous extension. The antennæ of the crustacea stretch
widely through the water, and, in _Aristoeopsis_, cover a radius of
about five times the body-length. In _Nematocarcinus_ the walking-legs
are elongated to almost the same extent; and this crustacean steps over
the sea-bottom with all the delicacy of Agag. The curious arachnid-like
pycnogonids have similarly elongated legs, and move about, like the
‘harvestmen’ or the ‘daddy-long-legs,’ with each foot stretched far from
the body, acting as a kind of outpost. The fishes, too, show
extraordinary outgrowths of this kind. The snout may be elongated till
the jaws have the proportions of a pair of scissor-blades, each armed
with rows of terrible teeth; or long barbels, growing out from around
the mouth, sway to and fro in the surrounding water. In other cases the
fins are drawn out into long streamers. All these eccentricities give
the deep-sea fishes a bizarre appearance; their purpose is plainly to
act as sensory outposts, warning their possessor of the presence of
enemies or of the vicinity of food.
All deep-sea animals are of necessity carnivorous, and probably many of
them suffer from an abiding hunger. Many of the fishes have enormous
jaws, the angle of the mouth being situated at least one-third of the
body-length from the anterior end. The gape is prodigious, and as the
edge of the mouth is armed with recurved teeth, food once entering has
little chance of escape. So large is the mouth that these creatures can
swallow other fish bulkier than themselves; and certain eels have been
brought to the surface which have performed this feat, the prey hanging
from beneath them in a sac formed of the distended stomach and
body-wall. It has been said of the desert fauna that ‘perhaps there
never was a life so nurtured in violence, so tutored in attack and
defence as this. The warfare is continuous from the birth to the death.’
The same words apply equally to the depths of the ocean. There, perhaps,
more than anywhere else, is true the Frenchman’s description of life as
the conjugation of the verb ‘I eat,’ with its terrible correlative, ‘I
am eaten.’
Connected with the alimentary tract, though in some fishes shut off from
it, is the air-bladder, an organ which contains air secreted from the
blood, and which, amongst other functions, serves to keep the fish the
right side up. The air can be reabsorbed, and is no doubt, to some
extent, controlled by muscular effort; but there are times when this
air-bladder is a source of danger to deep-sea fishes. When they leave
the depths for shallower water, where the pressure is diminished, the
air-bladder begins to expand; and, should this expansion pass beyond the
control of the animal, the air-bladder will act as a balloon, and the
fish will continue to rise with a rate of ascension which increases as
the pressure lessens. Eventually the fish reaches the surface in a state
of terrible distortion, with half its interior hanging out of its mouth.
Many such victims of levitation have been picked up at sea, and from
them we learnt something about deep-sea fishes before the self-closing
dredge came into use.
One peculiarity of the abysmal fauna, which, to some extent, is a
protection against the cavernous jaws mentioned above, is a certain
‘spininess’ which has developed even amongst genera that are elsewhere
smooth. Such specific names as _spinosus_, _spinifer_, _quadrispinosum_,
are very common in lists of deep-sea animals, and testify to the wide
prevalence of this form of defence. A similar spiny character is,
however, found in many polar species, even in those of comparatively
shallow water; and it may be that this feature is a product of low
temperature and not of low level. The same applies to the large size
which certain animals attain in the depths. For instance, in the Arctic
and Antarctic Seas the isopodous crustacea, which upon our coasts
scarcely surpass an inch in length, grow to nine or ten inches, with
bodies as big as moderate-sized lobsters. The gigantic hydroid polyps,
_e.g._, _Monocaulus imperator_ of the Pacific and Indian Oceans,
illustrate the same tendency; and so do the enormous single spicules,
several feet long and as thick as one’s little finger, of the sponge
_Monorhaphis_. Amongst other floating molluscs at great depths, chiefly
pteropods, the _Valdivia_ captured a gigantic _Carinaria_ over two feet
in length. Of even greater zoological interest were giant specimens of
the _Appendicularia_, which were taken at between 1,100 and 1,200
fathoms. This creature, named by Chun, _Bathochordæus charon_, reaches a
length of about five inches, and has in its tail a notochord as big as a
lamprey’s. All other genera of this group are minute, almost
microscopic.
There are two other peculiarities common amongst the deep-sea fauna
which are difficult to explain. One is a curious inability to form a
skeleton of calcareous matter. The bones of many abysmal fishes are
deficient in lime, and are fibrous or cartilaginous in composition.
Their scales, too, are thin and membranous, their skin soft and velvety.
The shells of deep-sea molluscs are as thin and translucent as
tissue-paper; and the same is true of some brachiopods. The test of the
echinoderms is often soft, and the armour of the crustacea is merely
chitinous, unhardened by deposits of lime. Calcareous sponges are
altogether unknown in the depths. This inability to form a hard
skeleton--curiously enough this does not apply to corals--is not due to
any want of calcareous salts in the bottom waters. It is known that
calcium sulphate, from which animals secrete their calcium carbonate,
exists in abundance; but those animals which dwell on the calcareous
globigerina ooze are as soft and yielding as those which have their home
on the siliceous radiolarian deposits. Animals which form a skeleton of
silex do not suffer from the same inability; in fact, the deep-sea
radiolarians often have remarkably stout skeletons, whilst the wonderful
siliceous skeletons of the hexactinellid sponges are amongst the most
beautiful objects brought up from the depths.
The second peculiarity, for which there seems no adequate reason, is the
reduction and diminution in size of the respiratory organs. Amongst the
crustacea, the ascidians, and the fishes this is especially marked. The
gill laminæ are reduced in number and in size; and the evidence all
points to the view that this simplification is not primitive but
acquired, being brought about in some way by the peculiar conditions of
life at great depths.
When the first attempts were made to explore the bed of the ocean, it
was hoped that the sea would give up many an old-world form; that
animals, known to us only as fossils, might be found lurking in the
abysmal recesses of the deep; and that many a missing link would be
brought to light. This has hardly proved to be the case. In certain
groups animals hitherto known only as extinct, such as the stalked
crinoids and certain crustacea--_e.g._, the Eryonidæ--have been shown to
be still extant. The remarkable _Cephalodiscus_ and _Rhabdopleura_, with
their remote vertebrate affinities, have been dragged from their dark
retreats. Haeckel regards certain of the deep-sea medusæ as archaic, and
perhaps the same is true of the ascidians and holothurians; but, on the
whole, the deep-sea fauna cannot be regarded as older than the other
faunas of the seas. The hopes that were cherished of finding living
ichthyosauri or plesiosauri, or the Devonian ganoid fishes, or at least
a trilobite, or some of those curious fossil echinoderms, the cystoids
and blastoids, must be given up. Certain of the larger groups peculiar
to the deep sea have probably been there since remote times; but many of
the inhabitants of the deep belong to the same families, and even to the
same genera, as their shallow-water allies, and have probably descended
in more recent times. There, in the deep dark stillness of the ocean
bed, unruffled by secular change, they have developed and are developing
new modifications and new forms, which are as characteristic of the deep
sea as an Alpine fauna is of the mountain heights.
BRITISH SEA-FISHERIES
ἂγει
...πόντου τ' εἰναλίαν ϕύσιν σπείραισι δικτυοκλώστοις,
περιϕραδἠς ἀνήρ.
SOPHOCLES: _Antigone_.
To contemplate all the legislation concerning English sea-fishing and
the administration of this vast industry during the last century is
alike to bewilder the reason and to fatigue the patience. The industry
is an enormous one, and of the utmost value to the dwellers in these
islands. At the present time there are over 27,000 vessels, manned by
more than 90,000 seamen, fishing from the ports of Great Britain. They
land over 900,000 tons of fish, worth some £10,000,000, during the year.
In addition to the fishermen who remove the fish from the sea, a
considerable population of packers, curers, coopers, hawkers, etc., is
employed. For instance, out of the 20,000 hands employed in the Shetland
herring-fishery summer of 1906, 11,000 have been at sea, and 9,120, of
whom 7,560 were women, have been employed on shore, not to mention the
large number of railway employés who are engaged in the transport of a
very perishable article. Apart from the material interests of the trade
(the capital invested in steamers, sailing-boats, and gear of all kinds
being estimated at more than £11,000,000), the fishing industry is of
great importance to the country as a training-ground for sailors and
marine engineers, and as affording a means of livelihood to a vigorous
and an independent population.
Like any other industry, and--because the life-history of the
inhabitants of the sea is still so obscure--perhaps more than any other
industry, sea-fishing is liable to arbitrary fluctuations. There was,
for instance, a partial failure in the herring-fishery in the summer of
1906 on the north and north-east of the Shetlands. The total number of
crans landed was 438,950, as against 632,000 in 1905, a record year; and
some of the Shetlanders have been hard put to it to live. Such a failure
sets thinking those whose livelihood is threatened; but fishermen,
although keen observers in what immediately concerns them, are not
widely educated men, and cannot take into account in estimating causes,
the many factors of the problems, some of which usually escape even the
most talented of marine biologists. Fishermen seek a sign, usually an
obvious one; in the present case, the bad season was attributed to the
presence of certain Norwegian whaling companies, which a few years ago
established themselves in the Shetlands and are destroying the common
rorqual, the lesser rorqual, Sibbald’s rorqual, the cachalot, the
humpbacked whale, and more rarely the Atlantic right-whale. These are
killed for their blubber; the flesh is made into sausages, largely
consumed in Central Europe; and the bones are ground up for manure.
It is, however, doubtful if whaling is in any way responsible for the
scarcity of the herrings. According to the evidence collected by Mr.
Donald Crawford’s Committee on this subject in 1904, it would appear
that practically the only point on which the fishermen were then agreed
was that the spouting of the whales was often a good guide as to the
position of the herring-shoals. But the whales do not bring the
herrings; and the fishermen are not even agreed that they serve to
concentrate them. It is probable that the general migrations and
shoaling habits of the herrings are far more dependent on the physical
character of the water--a relation which is particularly clear, as the
international investigations have already shown, in areas where sharply
contrasted ocean-currents are constantly striving for the mastery as
they are in the neighbourhood of the Shetland Isles. The hydrographical
bulletin of the International Council recorded a distinctly lower
temperature for the Atlantic current between Iceland and Scotland at the
beginning of the year 1906 than at the corresponding season of 1903,
1904, or 1905; and an unusually low temperature has been characteristic
of the Shetland waters throughout the summer of 1906. The Gulf Stream
could more justly be blamed for the comparative failure of the Shetland
fishery in 1906 than the Norwegian whalers, whose operations have
probably done no more injury to the herring-fishery than they did in
1905 or the year before. Such failures are often real disasters to a
seafaring population--a race who are, as a rule, of small versatility
and unable to turn readily to new trades. Their occurrence usually
provokes a cry for legislation.
Such an outcry is in this country usually met by the appointment of a
Commission, or of a special Parliamentary Committee. Seventeen such
inquiries into sea-fisheries have been held since Queen Victoria came to
the throne, an average of one every four years. The usual process is
gone through; a certain number of more or less influential gentlemen
(one of them perhaps an expert) are given a ‘wide reference,’ and they
proceed to take evidence. An energetic secretary, usually a young
barrister, collects facts; a great number of witnesses, like Mrs.
Wititterly, ‘express an immense variety of opinions on an immense
variety of subjects.’ These are written down and printed; and the
Commissioners, with the aid of the energetic secretary, seek to distil
wisdom out of the printed evidence of the multitude, and base on it
their recommendations. Legislation is sometimes recommended; but in the
case of the sea-fisheries of this country it has, perhaps fortunately,
seldom followed the presentation of any of these reports.
It seems, indeed, that the time is hardly yet ripe for deep-sea fishery
legislation, much as it may be needed; and the reason is that our
knowledge of the questions involved, although rapidly increasing, is
still too deficient to form a sound basis for law-making. We propose to
confine our attention mainly to the North Sea, and, from another point
of view, mainly to the English fishing authorities, as opposed to those
of Scotland and Ireland, in each of which countries the fishing industry
is controlled by a separate Board. The fundamental and central question
to be settled is whether there is a diminution in the fish generally, or
in any particular species of food-fish in the North Sea area, by far the
most productive of our fishing-grounds. If the answer is affirmative, we
may ask, What is the cause of this diminution? and, How can it be
arrested?
In 1863 Professor Huxley, Mr. (afterwards Sir) J. Caird, and Mr. G. Shaw
Lefevre were constituted a Royal Commission to inquire--(1) whether or
not the value of the fisheries was increasing, stationary, or
decreasing; (2) whether or not the existing methods of fishing did
permanent harm to the fishing-grounds; and (3) whether or not the
existing legislation was necessary. Three years later the Commission
reported; and their Report forms an important milestone on the road of
English fishery administration.
Since 1866 great progress has been made in our knowledge of the
life-history of food-fishes; yet even to-day we are hardly in a position
to answer the questions set to Professor Huxley and his colleagues. At
that time nothing was known about the eggs or spawn of the food-fishes.
Even while the Commission was sitting, in 1864, Professor G. O. Sars for
the first time discovered and described the floating ova of the cod, and
succeeded in artificially fertilizing the ova and rearing the young. The
following year he did the same with the mackerel; and Professor Malm of
Göteborg about this time obtained and fertilized the eggs of the
flounder. Since that time we have found out the eggs of all the valuable
food-fish, and artificially hatched most of them. But the facts about
the cod’s eggs appear to have been unknown to the Commission. They had
to rely upon such data as the return of fish carried by the railway
companies, the current prices of fish in the market, the return on the
capital invested, and the impressions of leading merchants and
fishermen. They had little scientific knowledge of sea-fisheries to
guide them, for the knowledge scarcely existed; and they had no
trustworthy statistics. Nevertheless, as was usually the case when
Professor Huxley was concerned, they arrived at very definite
conclusions--conclusions which subsequent writers have felt to be, for
the time when they were formulated, sound. There was no doubt that at
that date, both in Scotland and in England, the fisheries were
improving; the number and the value of the fish landed at our
fishing-ports were annually increasing; the capital invested in the
industry yielded a satisfactory return.
The Commissioners strongly opposed the bounty system, which had done so
much to build up the herring-fisheries in Scotland. They recommended the
policy of opening the ports and the territorial waters to foreign
seamen. They regarded the sea as free to all, just as the International
Congress of Lawyers in the autumn of 1906 declared the air to be. They
found no reason to believe that the supply of fish was diminishing.
They were aware of the enormous destruction, especially of immature
fish, consequent upon the methods of fishing, but regarded this
destruction as infinitesimal compared with what normally goes on in
Nature, and held that it did no permanent harm to the fisheries. They
recommended that all laws regulating fishing in the open seas should be
repealed, and, with two exceptions, that similar laws dealing with
inshore fisheries should also be repealed; and they suggested that an
Act should be passed dealing with the policing of the seas. The Sea
Fisheries Act of 1868 carried these recommendations into effect, removed
from the Statute-book over fifty Acts, some dating back for centuries,
and rendered it possible for a fisherman to earn his living ‘how, when,
and where he pleased.’
But since 1868 much has changed. Beam-trawls continued to be
increasingly used down to 1893, since which date they have been
replaced, in steam-trawlers, by the more powerful otter-trawl. There has
been an immense increase in the employment of steam-vessels. In 1883 the
number of steamers was 225, with a tonnage of 6,654 tons; in 1892 the
steamers numbered 627, with a tonnage of 28,271. During the same time
the number of first-class sailing-vessels had sunk from 8,058 to 7,319,
whilst the tonnage was practically stationary--244,097 tons in 1883, as
compared with 244,668 tons in 1892. The introduction of the use of ice,
which took place about 1850, and the invention of various methods of
renewing and aerating the water in the fish-tanks, enabled the boats to
remain much longer on the fishing-grounds, and to waste much less time
in voyaging to and from the ports where the fish is landed. Further, the
time spent on the grounds was appreciably lengthened by the employment
of ‘carriers,’ which collect the fish from the fleet of trawlers and
carry it to port. This process of ‘fleeting,’ as it is called, at first
confined to the sailing-smacks, is still used by the large Hull fleets
of steam-trawlers which provide Billingsgate and more recently, Hull,
itself with daily supplies of trawled fish fresh from the
fishing-grounds. There has also been a great growth in dock and other
accommodation.
With the tendency to use larger vessels and more complex machinery came
the tendency to form companies and syndicates. The fisherman ceased to
own his boat, and now retains at best a share in it. The increase in
size of both the vessel and the gear necessitates increased intricacy in
the operations of fishing and increased specialization on the part of
the hands. The old fishing community, whose fathers and grandfathers
have been fishers, is disappearing before the advance of modern economic
forces. The fishing-village is turning into the cheap seaside resort.