HL Deb 29 June 1922 vol 51 cc145-53

Order of the Day read for the House to be put into Committee on recommitment of the Bill.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Earl of Ancaster.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The EARL of DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clauses 1 to 7 agreed to.

Clause 8:

Protection of waters containing fish from poisonous matter and trade effluents.

8.—(1) No person shall cause or knowingly permit to flow, or pat or knowingly permit to be put, into any waters containing fish, or into any tributaries thereof, any liquid or solid matter to such an extent as to cause the waters to be poisonous or injurious to fish or the spawning grounds, spawn or food of fish, and if any person contravenes this subsection he shall be guilty of an offence against this Act:

Provided that— (a) A person shall not be so liable to any penalty for any act done in the exercise of any right to which he is by law entitled, if he proves to the satisfaction of the court before which he is charged that he has used the best practicable means within a reasonable cost, to render harmless the liquid or solid matter complained of;

LORD ERSKINE moved, in subsection (1) (a), after "entitled," to insert "or in continuation of a method in use in connection with the same premises prior to the passing of this Act," and also a further Amendment, in subsection (1) (a), to leave out "to render harmless the liquid or solid matter complained of," and to insert "to prevent such matter from doing injury to fish or to the spawning grounds, spawn or food of fish." The noble Lord said: I must apologise to the noble Earl for not being in my place when the Bill was first in Committee, and I hope I have not put him to any inconvenience. I beg formally to move the Amendments.

Amendments moved— Page 4, line 23, after ("entitled") insert ("or in continuation of a method in use in connection with the same premises prior to the passing of this Act") Page 4, lines 20 to 28, leave out ("to render harmless the liquid or solid matter complained of") and insert ("to prevent such matter from doing injury to fish or to the spawning grounds, spawn or food of fish").—(Lord Erskine.)

THE EARL OP ANCASTER

I accept these two Amendments.

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 9 to 26 agreed to.

Clause 27:

Weekly close, time for salmon.

27.—(1) No person, shall fish for, take, kill, or attempt to take or kill salmon (except with a rod and line or putts and putchers) during the weekly close time.

(2) If any person contravenes this section he shall be guilty of an offence against this Act.

(3) The weekly close time shall be in any place the period which has been fixed in that behalf by a bye-law under this or any other Act, or, if there is no such bye-law, the period between the hour of six on Saturday morning and the hour of six on the following Monday morning.

LORD BLEDISLOE moved, in subsection (3), to leave out"six on Saturday morning" and insert "twelve noon on Saturday." The noble Lord said: I put down certain Amendments in the interests of those fishing in the estuarial waters of the river Severn to be taken on the Report stage. I find these Amendments have been advanced to this stage, and, as I understand it will be for the convenience of the noble Earl that they should be taken now, I am prepared to move them, but with this caveat, that I come only partially instructed to-day, because I had not intended, until I found these Amendments on the Paper, to move them on this occasion. However, I will do my best.

Clause 26 of the Bill provides, in the first place, for an annual close season for salmon, and, in the second place, for a weekly close time for those who fish in the tidal waters of a river, but it does not apply to those who fish with rod and line by way of sport on the upper waters of a river. I desire to speak on behalf of a certain body of men, who, I fancy, are not to be found anywhere except in the tidal waters of the Severn. They are what are known as lave net fishermen, and they owe their existence to certain encroachments, which were made with the full authority or assent of the owners of fisheries in the lower waters of the Severn of whom certain ancestors of mine certainly had the largest rights and gave the largest concessions. These lave net fishermen are men employed normally in other industries, mainly in mining and in tinplate works. In their slack time, and especially in times of unemployment, they go out some hundred yards at most into the river, armed with what noble Lords might not unreasonably call a glorified shrimp net. They catch but few salmon, but what salmon they do catch are an enormous help to them in times when industry is slack. But it is noticeable, if you look at the report of the Severn Fishery Board, that these men contribute no less than half the income to the, fishery board to pay the expenses of the maintenance of the staff for the purposes of the upkeep of the fisheries in the river.

This Amendment is moved with a view to ensuring at least to these men that they shall have as long a time to fish as they have had up to the present time. Your Lordships will notice in Clause 27 that the weekly close time, which applies only to these men fishing with nets, or with what are called fixed engines in the lower waters of the river, is to be in future from six on Saturday morning to six on the following Monday morning. In other words, the period is to be extended from 36 hours, as at present, to 48 hours, as proposed in the Bill.

It may be said that this will operate, except as regards those who fish with a rod and line, equally on all those who are engaged in every kind of fishing. But these men can only employ this particular device some three hours after high tide. They have to fish on the ebb, and they cannot commence until three hours after high tide. The result is that, whatever close time you provide in your Bill, these men are, in fact, handicapped to the extent of at least six hours in every period of forty-eight hours. It is obvious that the men above all others who contribute the bulk of the income of the fishery board, and who are concerned in an industry as distinct from a sport, are the men who will have their rights still further curtailed.

In this connection, and in connection with other provisions of this Bill, these men are feeling a very serious grievance at the present time, and are, not unnaturally, holding indignation meetings in the district to express their dissatisfaction. If there is one person upon whose rights they encroach more than another it is myself, as I own the most valuable fisheries in that part of the river Severn. But, so far am I bound, as the result of my own experience and of history, to recognise their rights, that I cannot honestly say that they are not justified in asking that these rights should be maintained. So far as this particular Amendment is concerned, as the hour is late, I do not, desire to say any more, but I venture to think that unless this Amendment is accepted more will be heard of it in another place. I hope that the noble Earl will see his way to make the concession I propose.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 18, leave out ("six on Saturday morning") and insert ("twelve noon on Saturday").—(Lord Bledisloe.)

THE EARL OF ANCASTER

The Amendment moved by the noble Lord goes a good deal further, I think, than the river Severn, because it practically means the alteration of the close time throughout England. At the present moment a weekly close time of forty-two hours is observed, as fixed by the Act of 1861. The noble Lord now wishes to make it a close time of only thirty-six hours. The proposal we have put in the Bill is that the weekly close time for net fishing shall be forty-eight hours. This was recommended by the Royal Commission on Salmon Fisheries in 1902, and at the present moment is being pressed for by the representatives of the fishery boards throughout the country. We have been especially asked by all the fishery boards to amend the law and to make it forty-eight hours. That is the reason why that period has been put in the Bill, and I am afraid that I cannot accept the noble Lord's Amendment.

LORD BLEDISLOE

Does that apply to the Severn Fishery Board?

THE EARL OF ANCASTER

Yes.

LORD GAINFORD

It is very important, at any rate for other rivers—I have no knowledge of the Severn—that the period should be extended from forty-two to forty-eight hours to enable a large number of fish to get up to their spawning grounds which at present never reach them. If the fishing industry, for the benefit of those employed in it as well as for the few rod fishers in the rivers, is to be considered, it is very important that this arrangement should be agreed to, and I hope that the extended period of forty-eight hours will be preserved in the Bill.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

Does that cover the Amendment in line 19, to leave out "six on the following Monday morning" and insert "twelve midnight on the following day"?

LORD BLEDISLOE

Yes.

Clause 27 agreed to.

Clauses 28 to 32 agreed to.

Clause 33:

Registration of sellers of salmon or trout.

33.—(1) No person shall sell salmon or trout unless he, or the person on whose behalf the sale is made, is registered in accordance with this section:

LORD BLEDISLOE had on the Paper an Amendment, after "No person," at the beginning of the clause, to insert "other than a person fishing with a lave net in the river Severn." The noble Lord said: If, as I understand, an Amendment was introduced on the Committee stage to meet this point, I shall not trouble your Lordships with this Amendment, or any of the Amendments on this clause of which I gave Notice.

THE EARL OF ANCASTER

Yes, an Amendment was introduced.

Clause 33 agreed to.

Clauses 34 to 61 agreed to.

Clause 62:

Limitation of licences.

62.—(1) A fishery board may by order confirmed by the Minister limit the number of licences to be issued in any year for fishing for salmon or trout in public waters within the fishery district with any instrument other than rod and line specified in the order, and provide for the selection of the applicants to whom licences shall be issued where the number of applications exceed the number of licences which may be granted:

Provided that—

  1. (a) the Minister before confirming an order under this section shall direct the order and notice of his intention to confirm the order to be published in such manner as he thinks desirable by and at the expense of the fishery board, and shall take into consideration any objections to the proposed order which may be received by him within the time prescribed by the notice; and
  2. (b) if the number of licences as limited by the order is less than the number of licences issued in any one of the previous three years, and objection to the order is duly made by any person who has during each of the previous two years held any such licence, the Minister before confirming the order shall cause a public enquiry to be held in the locality by an officer of the Ministry.

(2) The Minister may, with the consent of the fishery board, vary the order before confirmation, after publication by the fishery board, if the Minister so directs, of the proposed variation in such manner as such directions may require.

(3) An order under this section may be revoked by the Minister, or by an order made by the fishery board and confirmed by the Minister in like manner as the original order.

LORD BLEDISLOE moved, at the beginning of the clause, to insert "except in the case of lave net fishermen in the river Severn." The noble Lord said: This Amendment raises the most serious issue so far as these lave, net men in the Severn are concerned. The clause provides, as your Lordships will see I think, for selective activity on the part of fishery boards who, henceforward, will be able to discriminate between those, to whom they issue licences. This might be easy to do assuming it were directed against those who fish with rod and line; and certainly, in the neighbourhood of spawning beds an immense amount of damage is done by irresponsible gentlemen of this description who cannot claim to be sportsmen. As a matter of fact, those who fish with rod and line are entirely ruled out by the terms of this clause: so what is left?

This selective activity is to be exercised as between all those who fish in tidal waters. If you come to consider who do fish in tidal waters you will find that of those who fish with stop nets, those who fish with draw nets, those who fish with putts and putchers—of whom there are a good many in the river Severn, and I confess that I am one of them—and those who fish with lave nets, the lave net fishermen, as I have said, pay at least half the income of the fishery board but they do not get anything like half the fish. Although they are engaged in a most important industry they do not catch half as many fish as those who fish with other nets, or one-twentieth of the fish caught by those who fish with rod and line. If the noble Earl were to go to Margate and fish from the shore or enter the water up to his waist, as these men do, and fish for shrimps or prawns he would take just about as large a proportion of the total catch in those waters as the lave net men take by fishing in a similar fashion in the tidal waters of the river Severn. These are the men obviously amongst whom alone this selection can be made.

It cannot apply to the lessees of fisheries. Most of them have been there for years and they hold under lease from private individuals. It might conceivably apply to those who fish with a tuck net, a net which, curiously enough, has been encouraged by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries until these very men made their protest against it; a net which was carried right across the fishable part of the estuary of the Severn with the approval of the Ministry of Agriculture. Who are left? These unfortunate lave net men. Although the estuary opposite my home is about a mile wide, they cannot fish more than a hundred yards out at the very most. They cannot even stand together so as to block the access of fish to the waters above. There are two agencies blocking fish going up the Severn to-day. One is the sewage from the City of Gloucester, and the other undoubtedly is, or was until recently, these long tuck nets of which I have spoken. It has never been suggested that those men have blocked the progress of the fish to the upper reaches of the river where they can be caught with rod and line. Why, then, is it desired to exercise this right of selecting between them who shall have licences and who shall not? I should be very sorry to think that anyone had to go into my district and select as between these gentlemen which of them should have licences and which should not have them. If the fishery board attempted to do it I venture to think they would have a very poor time. If it is impracticable, why put it into the Bill?

I cannot put the case for the Amendment any stronger than I have done. I represent something like 150 to 200 working men who carry on, as I say, in their slack time occasional fishing, and who do as little harm as the noble Earl opposite might do with a shrimp net at Margate. What is the good of putting this provision into the Bill to interfere with—and these men feel that they are going to be interfered with—this most legitimate kind of fishing, which is a source of occasional income to these unfortunate men when the industry in which they are ordinarily engaged is slack. I hope the noble Earl will concede something to me in this matter, because I feel confident that these men will not, if I may use the expression, take this clause lying down. I hope that this concession may be made in your Lordships' House in order to avoid the further development of what is becoming a somewhat serious agitation.

Amendment moved— Page 48, line 1, at the beginning insert ("except in the case of lave net fishermen in the river Severn").—(Lord Bledisloe.)

THE EARL OF ANCASTER

We have put into this Bill a general power to fishery boards to limit the number of licences granted to fish with nets in a river. There have been and will be cases of over-netting gradually ruining a river, and we feel that, with the safeguards provided in this Bill, it is but reasonable to give those fishery boards power to limit the number of licences granted for this purpose. The Amendment of the noble Lord applies chiefly to the river Severn. I think the fishermen on whose behalf he has spoken so eloquently will be amply safeguarded by subsection (b) of the clause. If it is the wish of a board to limit the number of these licences, the order has to be confirmed by the Minister, and he has to hold a public Inquiry in the locality by an officer of the Ministry. If, by any chance, the Severn Fishery Board did intend to get an order limiting the number of licences to these net fishermen, that would not come into force until it was confirmed by the Ministry, and before the Ministry confirmed the order they would have to hold a public Inquiry on the spot, at which all objections would be heard. If it be true that these net fishermen destroy very few fish going up to the spawning beds, it is almost inconceivable that there should be any proposition to limit the number of licences granted to them.

I should also like to inform the noble Lord that one or two bodies of fishermen from different rivers have consulted me on this subject of net fishermen. The noble Lord says that in the river Severn a great I deal of damage is done by pollution, which very likely is perfectly true. Supposing that under this Bill you stop pollution to a great extent, as I hope you will, and you therefore greatly improve the river, and have more, fish running up, it will become more profitable to go fishing with a net. Would these men who have been in the habit of fishing with the lave net like to see another hundred or more men come in and fish with the lave net because the fishing has improved? There are two ways of looking at it, and it may cut both ways. It is very important that the fishery boards should have power to deal with this question of excessive, netting, and there is now in the Bill a strong safeguard permitting of the men coming forward and stating their case, which will be fully heard and justly considered. I hope, therefore, that my noble friend will not press his Amendment.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 62 agreed to.

Clauses 63 to 93 agreed to.

Schedules agreed to.