220
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.
-îé
least which produces little or no
spat, is still shr0uded
in mystery.
The solution of the difculties connected with
.:L
_
this subject would be a protable and a worthy eld for the
"
energies of the F ishery Board—more productive than a search
ÎÏ"
for benets from the closure, or a costly and unsatisfact0ry
-Î
‘
chase after marauders within the boundaries.
;
,
A careful review of the subject and of the sh-fauna in the
Moray Frith indicates the absence of substantial data (1) for
instituting the closure, and (2) for its continuance. If the
_
_
results of the experiments in St Andrews Bay and in the Forth
had been such as to warrant the closure of a single square
mile
‘
Of the Moray Frith, then the bold step of shutting trawlers out
.
of 2000 square miles in this area would at least have merited
the respect due to resolute and masterful methods.
So
”
responsible a body as the Fishery Board for Scotland will
probably produce its reasons for such a step.
So far as they
'
have been disclosed, they are by no means convincing; indeed,
a
careful search of the entire work of the “ Garland,” of
collateral shery evidence, and of the history of the Scotch
sheries, fails to a’ord an explanati0n.
The Fishery Board
'
had the control of a large annual grant for the solution of such
questions, and its manipulation of the funds was .more or less
__
untrammelled. The results of its experiments must have
-
»
either conclusive or inconclusive, unless it is
be supposedthat sentiment and not fact pervaded its deliberations. It may
‘
be that the laudable View of keeping the peace'between the tWO
Ï
r
more pronounced classes of
formed the guiding
-
of the Boards action; but this is a feature
any rate
.
‘
_
which was not included in the remit by Parliament, as the result
-
Ï
of the Royal CommiSSio under Lord Dalhousie. - The country
'
'
_
has notdeèided that the closure is to be applied to the whole
'
,
of
the 3—mile limit, or to
limit, to keep the peace
between the Various classes of sher—men. All that has been
_
Pdone“îs
‘proVide the Board with the
fbr p‘roVing or
disproviiig the allegations of 1883 and 1884«, and of satisfying‘
î_
and .Ïthe_ country ”as
to facts
to: take
,
Yet what ldo_We nd? —
-
j ‘ _î
’as ' the ;glr0unds for imp0rtant" measures;
twothousand ‘
- _Ï Ï È;
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.
-îé
least which produces little or no
spat, is still shr0uded
in mystery.
The solution of the difculties connected with
.:L
_
this subject would be a protable and a worthy eld for the
"
energies of the F ishery Board—more productive than a search
ÎÏ"
for benets from the closure, or a costly and unsatisfact0ry
-Î
‘
chase after marauders within the boundaries.
;
,
A careful review of the subject and of the sh-fauna in the
Moray Frith indicates the absence of substantial data (1) for
instituting the closure, and (2) for its continuance. If the
_
_
results of the experiments in St Andrews Bay and in the Forth
had been such as to warrant the closure of a single square
mile
‘
Of the Moray Frith, then the bold step of shutting trawlers out
.
of 2000 square miles in this area would at least have merited
the respect due to resolute and masterful methods.
So
”
responsible a body as the Fishery Board for Scotland will
probably produce its reasons for such a step.
So far as they
'
have been disclosed, they are by no means convincing; indeed,
a
careful search of the entire work of the “ Garland,” of
collateral shery evidence, and of the history of the Scotch
sheries, fails to a’ord an explanati0n.
The Fishery Board
'
had the control of a large annual grant for the solution of such
questions, and its manipulation of the funds was .more or less
__
untrammelled. The results of its experiments must have
-
»
either conclusive or inconclusive, unless it is
be supposedthat sentiment and not fact pervaded its deliberations. It may
‘
be that the laudable View of keeping the peace'between the tWO
Ï
r
more pronounced classes of
formed the guiding
-
of the Boards action; but this is a feature
any rate
.
‘
_
which was not included in the remit by Parliament, as the result
-
Ï
of the Royal CommiSSio under Lord Dalhousie. - The country
'
'
_
has notdeèided that the closure is to be applied to the whole
'
,
of
the 3—mile limit, or to
limit, to keep the peace
between the Various classes of sher—men. All that has been
_
Pdone“îs
‘proVide the Board with the
fbr p‘roVing or
disproviiig the allegations of 1883 and 1884«, and of satisfying‘
î_
and .Ïthe_ country ”as
to facts
to: take
,
Yet what ldo_We nd? —
-
j ‘ _î
’as ' the ;glr0unds for imp0rtant" measures;
twothousand ‘
- _Ï Ï È;