Abstract
FIVE years ago the pivot round which fishery investigation turned was the question of the productivity of the North Sea grounds. It was agreed that the enormous development of catching power since the last third of the nineteenth century had produced no apparent change in the abundance of herring, had dock, whiting, and possibly some other species, but that, on the other hand, plaice, sole, turbot, and some other edible fishes had been affected. In January, 1913, the Plaice Committee of the International Fishery Council stated that it then had evidence that large plaice were becoming scarcer in the North Sea, and that small; plaice were becoming more abundant, and this was taken to be proof that there was “impoverishment,” or excessive exploitation of a natural resource. The conclusion is not free from ambiguity, for, on the whole, the total quantity of fish landed increased up to 1913; what had happened, it appears, was a reduction in the average expectation of life of a plaice living in the North Sea. Now if that change was a result of “intensive” fishing up to 1914, what has been the result of the very great decrease in fishing during the years 1915–18? Drs. A. C. Johansen and Kirstine Smith seek to answer this question by discussing measurements of plaice landed from a Danish North Sea area which was tolerably free from military restric ticns during the period of war. They find that the pre war tendency has been reversed; that large plaice are now relatively much more abundant than they were, but that their rate of growth has decreased—a curious result. We were justified, they say, in concluding that intensive fishing could reduce a natural stock of fish, and we are also justified in expecting that a slackening of this intensity of fishing, even for a relatively short period, will have the opposite effect.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
J., J. Retent Fishery Investigations1. Nature 105, 216–217 (1920). https://doi.org/10.1038/105216a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/105216a0