§ Mr. PIRIEasked the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the fact that since the Trawling in Prohibited Areas Prevention Act came into operation sixteen months ago forty-six foreign trawlers have been reported as fishing in the Moray Firth on 303 occasions, he can give any estimate of the number of days these same foreign trawlers have fished in these waters without being reported?
§ The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure)The Moray Firth is patrolled continuously by one or other of the Fishery cruisers, and I have no reason to believe that foreign trawlers working in the Moray Firth often escape observation. It is impossible to give any estimate of the kind suggested.
§ Mr. PIRIEasked how many, respectively, of the eight Dutch, of the nine, respectively, Belgian, Danish, and Norwegian, and of the eleven German trawlers, habitually fishing in the Moray Firth, in waters closed to British trawlers, attempted to land their fish in British ports; on how many occasions was the fish condemned; and why it has hitherto been considered inexpedient to disclose the number of the vessels of the various nationalities exploiting the waters which the Government preserved for their benefit?
§ Mr. URETwo Danish trawlers and one Norwegian trawler, after being observed at work in the Moray Firth, attempted to land fish in a British port, and on each occasion the fish were condemned. The reason why it has hitherto been considered inexpedient to disclose the names and numbers of the vessels of the various nationalities observed trawling in the Moray Firth is that it would give to the trawlers so observed information as to when they had and when they had not been observed, and so aid them in disregarding the by-law.
§ Mr. PIRIECan the Lord Advocate explain why the information was only obtained through my asking the question of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and why it was withheld from me when I persistently asked for it from the Scotch Office?
§ Mr. PIRIEasked the Lord Advocate, with reference to the case of the conviction of Durrant, trawl master, on 16th January, and as to which he stated that all the attendant circumstances were considered, is it the case that no proper nautical bearings were taken of Durrant's supposed position, which was fixed by-cross bearings taken from the land, one on the 13th June by Fair Isle fishermen, and the other on Sunday, 9th October, by the Fiscal from Lerwick, it being admitted that Durrant's trawler was not there at that time; and if he can explain how a vessel's correct position can be ascertained by bearings taken in such a manner?
§ Mr. UREQuestions as to the bearings taken in connection with this case were raised at the trial, the defence alleging that the bearings were not properly ascertained. The Sheriff, however, found that the case was sufficiently proved. I cannot admit as accurate my hon. Friend's description of the methods by which the trawler's position was fixed. According to the evidence accepted as reliable by the judge who tried the case, the offences were committed within a mile and a half of the shore, and therefore well within the three-mile limit.
§ Mr. PIRIEasked the Lord Advocate, with reference to the conviction of the master of the trawler "Sarah," of North Shields, as to which it was explained that the special circumstances of the case, namely, the presence of foreign trawlers fishing alongside and the unblemished record of forty-three years' service as a trawl master, presumed a modified sentence of a fine, will he consider the possibility of restoring the trawling gear, of the value of £70, which was also confiscated?
§ Mr. UREThe forfeiture of the trawling gear is a matter independent of the fine. The trawling gear is presumably the property of the owner of the trawler and not of the master, and it was sold on 24th March.
§ Mr. PIRIEasked the Lord Advocate if his attention had been called to the case of Captain Powdrell, who was fined £ 150 at Wick for illegal fishing in the Moray Firth on the 29th instant; if he is aware that when" Captain Powdrell was arrested by the fishery cruiser "Norna" there was a fleet of foreign trawlers, mostly Norwegian, 1040 trawling round a dan between Captain Powdrell and the land; can he state the number of such vessels and where it is supposed that they landed their catch; and if those vessels are included in the number of foreign trawlers already reported?
§ Mr. UREMy attention has been called to the case to which my hon. Friend refers, in which Captain Powdrell, of the trawler "Sunshine," who has been convicted of illegal trawling on various previous occasions, was fined £100 for illegal trawling in the Moray Firth, and an additional £50 for disobeying the orders of the officer of the fishery cruiser. I am informed that the trawler "Sunshine" was trawling in company with three foreign trawlers (two German and one Danish) about five miles from the land outside a dan placed about three and three-quarter miles from Wick Head. On observing the cruiser the "Sunshine" trawled out to sea for about thirty-five minutes before being overtaken. There were no other trawlers in the vicinity except those referred to. I have no information as to where the foreign trawlers landed their fish, except that they did not land them at any British port. These foreign trawlers are included in the number of those already reported.
§ Mr. PIRIEIn view of the numerous cases of doubtful justice, and that these cases are constantly occurring, can the Lord Advocate say what steps are being taken to ensure an appeal from the sheriff's decision in similar cases in future?
§ Mr. PIRIEasked the annual cost of patrolling the Moray Firth, the total amount of fines imposed on British trawlers since October, 1909, and the number of fishery cruisers employed in that service; whether their time is more occupied in reporting the presence of foreign trawlers or in arresting the masters of British vessels; and if it is considered that the results hitherto obtained by that patrolling can be considered satisfactory or as achieving the supposed end the Government had in passing the Trawling in Prohibited Areas Prevention Act?
§ Mr. UREIt is impossible to state the annual cost of patrolling the Moray Firth with any reasonable degree of accuracy, as the different cruisers, whose cost of maintenance varies, relieve one another from 1041 time to time in the Firth. Apart from His Majesty's ship "Ringdove," there is, as a rule, one, and there are sometimes two, of the Board's cruisers on duty in the Moray Firth. The total amount of fines imposed upon British trawlers since October, 1909, is £425; but only £25 has been paid, the convicted men having in most cases gone to prison. The cruisers report all trawlers observed, whether British or foreign. The degree of success to be attributed to the operation of the Act of 1909 referred to is a matter of opinion which cannot well be discussed in a reply to a question; I may state, however, that in the opinion of the Government more experience must be obtained before a decided view can safely be expressed on the subject.
§ Mr. PIRIEAre we to understand the Government propose to allow this state of things to continue, in which these waters are preserved for the special use of the foreigner at the expense of the British trawler?
Mr. CARLISLEWill the Lord Advocate take steps for the removal of this mischievous Act from the Statute Book?
§ Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAYWill the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of getting more preventive cruisers?