One of the least understood, although one of the most hotly-contested parts of the salmon question, is the relation between the upper and lower proprietors. A great salmon river may pass through the estates or mark the property boundaries of a large number of gentlemen; and some portions of this river are sure to be much more valuable than others. As has been already stated, some of the proprietors on the river Tay derive a large revenue from their fisheries; while others only obtain a little angling, although they very likely furnish the breeding-ground for a few thousands of the fish which aid in producing the large rentals lower down. This part of the salmon question has been so well argued by my friend Mr. Donald Bain, that I here reproduce a portion of one of his letters on the subject:—
“Considering that at present the only chance of having fish in the rivers depends upon the excellence and care of the breeding-grounds at the river-heads, while the river-head proprietors, by disturbing the shingle (which should be protected) at the period of depositing and hatching the roe, could destroy all chance, and yet be legally unchallengeable, these river-head proprietors are hardly recognised as proprietors at all, which therefore should be altered.... I propose that the river, from its highest breeding-ground to its mouth, and so far into the sea as private or public interests can extend, should be made a common property and a common care; improved where improvable, at the general expense of the whole proprietors along its banks; fished, not savagely, and as if extermination were a laudable object, but prudently, and with a view to permanent interests; the fish allowed to go unmolested to the breeding-grounds, at least so far as to secure a full brood, and protected against destruction in returning when unfit for food; and the expense and the profit to be divided pro rata, according to the mileage along the banks; unless, in the judgment of intelligent and equitable men, a degree of preference should be given in the case of grounds of acknowledged excellence for breeding or feeding.
“It may be said it would be malicious in the proprietors of breeding-grounds to consider it necessary to repair their gravel-walks with shingle from the river at the very time when depositing or hatching the roe was going on; but could it be prevented?—and would it be more inequitable than anticipating every fish worth catching at the mouth of the river or along their course, and allowing the proprietors of the head-waters no share?”
In the meantime, it is satisfactory to see that all classes of the community are thoroughly aroused to the danger which menaces our king of fishes. There must of course be a limit to the productiveness of even the most prolific salmon river; and if this be overpassed and the capital stock be broken upon, it is clear that a decrease will at once begin, and that the production must annually become weaker, till the fish are in course of time completely exterminated. Considering the constant enormous waste of fish life, there ought at least, I think, to be twice as many fish left in a river as are taken out of it. A care as to this would in time have a good effect.
An evident anxiety to improve the salmon-fisheries is now apparent, and the problem to be solved is how to restore the status quo, and obtain a supply of salmon equal to the demand. There are but two ways to a solution of the question. The experience of the Tweed, though still imperfect, shows that the decay of that river has been arrested, and that large salmon of some age—the best and surest breeders—now abound in its waters, and that this result is in the main to be attributed to improved legislation. The first thing therefore to be done is to extend our legislation for all our salmon rivers in the same direction that has been so successful on the Tweed; in other words, to eradicate, as soon as may be, those dams, engines, and fixed nets still really left untouched. The other, and as it seems to me the principal field for improvement, is the adoption of artificial culture wherever it can be carried out. Why should we not cultivate our water as we cultivate our land? Few measures could be more effectual than some check on the annual destruction of grilse; but, especially on the rivers in the hands of many proprietors, such as the Tweed, it is not easy to say how this can be practically effected; but might not artificial breeding supply the deficiency caused by this slaughter of the innocents? By means of pisciculture the French people have recreated their fisheries; why should not we try what they have done? Let us by all means clean our rivers by removing impurities of all kinds. Let us do our best to prevent poaching; and, above all, let us take care not to encourage legal “overfishing;” and, as gentlemen occasionally give their grouse a year of jubilee, let me prescribe an occasional similar indulgence to the salmon. Every little helps; and as we have now a considerable knowledge of the natural history of the fish, we should avail ourselves of it not only in our legislation, but also in the practical management of the fisheries. If in our greed we still continue to overfish, after the numerous warnings we have had, we must take the consequences in the probable extermination of the salmon and its numerous congeners.
CHAPTER VI.
THE NATURAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE HERRING.
Description of the Herring—The Old Theory of Migration—Geographical Distribution of the Herring—Mr. John Cleghorn’s Ideas on the Natural History of the Herring—Mr. Mitchell on the National Importance of that Fish—Commission of Inquiry into the Herring-Fishery—Growth of the Herring—The Sprat—Should there be a Close-time?—Caprice of the Herring—The Fisheries—The Lochfyne Fishery—The Pilchard—Herring Commerce—Mr. Methuen—The Brand—The Herring Harvest—All Night at the Fishing—The Cure—The Curers—Herring Boats—Increase of Netting—Are we Overfishing?—Proposal for more Statistics.