To the Editor of "The Times."

The attempt which is now making to amend the laws relating to the

Salmon fisheries, appears to run such a great risk of failure,

from the opposition of interested persons, that I think a short

sketch of the defects of the present laws and their effects on the

breed of fish, and a comparison of them with the proposed

amendment, may be interesting to some of your readers, and may,

perhaps, induce some influential gentlemen to throw their

influence into the right scale, in the approaching discussion on

this subject.

The Salmon fisheries in former times appear to have supplied food

for a large portion of the people, as there are still traditions

current on the banks of various rivers in the north, that the

indentures of apprenticeship always stipulated that the apprentice

should not be compelled to eat Salmon more frequently than three

days a week, and however exaggerated this story may appear at the

present day, I hope to succeed in showing that it is neither

improbable that it has been so, nor impossible that it may be so

again,--if good laws are made for their protection, and these laws

are properly enforced. At present there is no doubt the fisheries

are rapidly declining, and in some rivers which used to have a

good many Salmon in them, and which used to swarm with Smolts (or

fry) in the spring within my remembrance, they are now rarely

seen. To show their scarcity I may mention a circumstance which

occurred in the Wharfe, which was formerly one of the finest

rivers in Yorkshire for Salmon. A few years ago a pair of Salmon

were seen on a spawning bed in the Wharfe, about forty miles from

its mouth. This became known at the anglers' club, and it was

deemed so important to preserve them, that the club divided

themselves into three or four watches, and guarded the spawning

bed night and day, whilst the fish were spawning, and this

spawning lasted about a week.

Here in the Ribble the Salmon fisheries are not quite so near

extinction (though they are rapidly progressing in that

direction), for although we are very seldom allowed to see or

catch fish in seasonable condition, a good many come up the river

to spawn, though very few of them ever do so, and very few of

those that do ever reach the sea again. The reason is obvious, no

one here has any interest in preserving the spawning fish, and

they are openly killed by the poachers, who never dream of being

prosecuted for it. I am credibly informed that in a stream not

five hundred yards from where I write, sixty spawning fish were

killed last winter. Some years ago one gang of poachers killed

three hundred Salmon on the spawning beds in one season, and sold

potted Salmon roe (which is a most destructive bait for Trout) to

the value of L20.

In the Lune the proprietors of the fisheries near Lancaster sent

men to protect the spawning fish in the streams above; but these

men were warned off by the landed proprietors, who said, If you

catch all the good fish you must at least allow us to catch the

bad ones. In the Tweed and its tributaries it used to be quite as

bad (what the new Scotch law has done I do not know), but a

poacher who gave evidence before the Committee of the House of

Commons in 1825 said that he had assisted to take four hundred

Salmon at one haul in close time in the Tweed.

Sir Walter Scott's vivid description of burning the water, which

occurs in "Guy Mannering," shows that he knew how to kill Salmon

in close time. In fact, his account, and that of Hogg (the Ettrick

Shepherd), show that both were regular black fishers.

There are various devices for killing the fish in close time: they

are speared, netted, and hooked on the spawning beds, and when the

rivers get low, gangs of idle fellows range up and down on the

banks, stoning and beating the water by poles, or, what is more

effective still, a large bone, or horse's skull, and by fastening

a cord to it, one end of which is passed to each side of the

river, they draw this skull up and down in the pools where they

know there are Salmon, and the fish are so foolish and timid, that

they thrust their heads under any stone or cover they can find,

and are taken without trouble; it being common enough in such

cases to slip a noose over the tail, then tightening it, and the

fish is hauled out immediately.

Then again, gentlemen who want to have the reputation of being

skilful anglers, employ their game-keepers to find the Kippers

(Scottice Kelts) or spawned fish in the pools, which is a very

easy matter in low water, and dropping a hook baited with a lob

worm before their noses, it is greedily taken, and the poor fish

(which are unfit for food) are caught. It is then trumpeted forth

to the angling world that Mr. A. B. has had splendid sport--he has

caught a dozen Salmon with the rod in a single day, meaning it to

be understood that these fish have been caught with the fly. I by

no means uphold these practices, neither do I think them very

deserving of censure in the present state of the law, for all the

good fish are taken near the mouths of the rivers.

This leads me to consider the defects of the present law, which is

by no means adapted to protect and increase the breed of Salmon.

In the first place, the close time is too short. It commences in

the Ribble nominally (for in reality the fish are openly killed

all the year through) on the 15th September, and ends on the 31st

of December; whereas it ought to extend to the end of April, for

the following reasons. A very large proportion of the fish are

spawning in January and February, and I have even seen a spawning

fish as late as the 3rd of April. In the evidence given before the

House of Commons in 1825, it was proved by a fisherman from the

Tweed, that in March for one clean fish that was caught there were

ten caught that were not so, as they were either fish that had not

spawned, or Kelts, that is, fish which have finished spawning but

have not returned to the sea, and are then flabby, unwholesome,

and unfit for food. A very large proportion of these Kippers or

Kelts do not go to the sea until April, and not then without there

is a fresh in the river, for, like the Smolts, they seem disposed

to remain in the rivers until they can avail themselves of the

assistance of a flood, to enable them more easily to reach the

sea.

Another defect in the present law is that it fails to secure a

supply of good fish to the upper proprietors. There are no

provisions in it (or they are not enforced) for giving the fish a

free passage, no prohibition of nets, traps, or devices for

stopping them in their progress up the rivers. No daily or weekly

close time, but everywhere there is so short-sighted a selfishness,

that it is completely realizing the fable of the man who killed the

goose which laid the golden egg. The fisheries are declining so

rapidly, that unless something is done, and done quickly, the breed

of Salmon will be extinct in the rivers in this neighbourhood.

Again, there is no power to appoint or pay conservators, and

without their assistance there is no chance of preserving Salmon

in the spawning beds. Game-keepers are most certainly not to be

depended upon.

In pointing out the defects of the present laws I have, in fact,

given an opinion how they should be remedied. I would extend the

close time from the end of September to the end of April. I would

establish a daily close time, allowing no net, device, or engine

to be employed in taking Salmon between sunset and sunrise above

tideway in any river; and below, I would only allow nets to be set

for twelve hours per diem. I would appoint conservators, whom I

would pay by a tax on the fisheries on the whole course of the

river, which tax should be determined by a valuation of the

fisheries, and paid accordingly. I would fine every one who sold,

used, or had in his possession any potted or prepared Salmon roe

for the purpose of angling, and I would give conservators the

power of examining all mill goits and races, for the purpose of

seeing that no unfair practices were resorted to for the taking of

Salmon or Salmon fry; and I would give the upper proprietors the

power of making any alterations in mill weirs and dams which did

not impair their stability or the efficiency of the water power.

If some such enactments as these were made and properly enforced,

there is no doubt Salmon would swarm in every river, for their

fecundity is such, that a very few Salmon spawning in a river

under favourable circumstances stock it abundantly with Smolts. A

large Salmon having not less than 25,000 eggs in it, how soon,

with a little forbearance and care, would every river swarm with

this delicious fish, even to such a degree as to be a cheap food

for the poor! But to obtain such results it must be made the

interest of every person to protect them.

In reading over the evidence on the Salmon fisheries, which was

given before the House of Commons in 1825, I was exceedingly

amused by the reasons given by the tenants of some of the

fisheries in Scotland why there should be no weekly close time,

and the shifts and evasions practiced by others. One said he paid

L7,000 a year rent to the Duke of Gordon for his fishery, and if

one day in the week were allowed for close time he would lose

L1,000 a year. Another said he kept the close time, but he would

allow nobody to go and see whether he kept the free gap open or

not. Another proved that he kept open the free passage, but it was

also proved that he had a crocodile placed in the gap, painted

with very glaring colours, in order to frighten back any fish that

attempted to pass. Another sent his boats to break down the stake

nets which were set in the estuary, but acknowledged that he kept

his own nets set across the river day and night. There would be no

difficulty in stocking every suitable river in the kingdom with

Salmon, either by putting into them a few pairs of breeding fish,

or by artificially fecundating the eggs, and placing them in

artificial spawning beds. It is a plan I have frequently adopted,

and sometimes successfully; but in other experiments I have

failed, from the difficulty of choosing a suitable locality in the

river. If too rapid a stream was chosen, the eggs and gravel were

all washed away; and if too calm and still a place was selected,

the gravel was filled up with sand and mud, and the eggs rotted

instead of hatching. I am even of opinion that where there is

already a breed of Salmon fry in a river, it is not absolutely

necessary that any male Salmon should come up the river in the

spawning season, the male Par, or Penks, as we call them in the

Ribble, being sufficient to fecundate the eggs. If this is

doubted, I would ask how it happens that in the autumn they have

fluid milt in them? for as nature makes no unnecessary provisions,

for what purpose is this, if not to provide for the possibility of

a female Salmon coming alone? These Pars swarm on the Salmon

spawning beds.

* * * * *

Essays in Natural History and Agriculture · 第 7 / 65 题