- Email: [email protected]
The issue of the effects of pollution from whaling on the Shetland herring fishery in the early 20th century
Volume 28/Number 6/June 1994
Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 6, pp. 389-391, 1994 Copyright O 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0025-326X(94)E0014-Y
0025-326X/94 $7.00+ 0.00
The Issue of the Effects of Pollution from Whaling on the Shetland Herring Fishery in the Early 20th Century JAMES R. COULL
Department of Geography, Universityof Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, AberdeenAB9 2UF,Scotland With the scale of the marine environment, and the many interacting variables which affect the life within it, it is still often difficult to separate out the effects of pollution from those of other variables. At the same time the effects of pollution have been building up during the industrial age, and neither marine pollution nor concern about it is confined to our own times. In the early 20th century, the people in Shetland became convinced that pollution from shore-based whaling was having a definite effect on the herring fishery, then the main industry of the islands; and protests against whaling were vocal and sustained. When the modem method of whaling with the harpoon gun and the powered catcher began late in the 19th century, it was very much an activity developed and dominated by the Norwegians. However there was a very strong reaction in Norway from coastal fishermen, who became convinced that their livelihood was being threatened by the pollution caused by whaling, and as a result whaling was severely restricted in Norway itself. Norwegian whaling companies at the start of the 20th century were already looking for new opportunities elsewhere, and the restrictions at home gave them added impetus in searching out new fields. One result was that four companies were established between 1903 and 1905 in the north-west of the Shetland Islands, fronting the waters in which whales were most frequent around the islands. Whaling therefore came on the scene just at the time when the herring fishery, which was in many ways the making of modern Shetland, was reaching its peak in the years before World War I (Coull, 1988). It was just at this time, when the general trend in herring catches was upward and while Shetland generally was sharing in a new level of prosperity, that the herring fishery in the north-west part of the archipelago failed badly during a succession of years. The Sheflanders, particularly the fishermen and curers operating in the north-west, were very much convinced that whaling was to blame for their adverse fortunes, and in their efforts to have it banned they had the support not only of virtually the whole Shetland population, but also of the many
fishermen, curers and shore workers who came to Shetland from different parts of Britain for the herring season. Most whales were killed at some distance from the islands, mainly at distances of over 30 miles; they were then towed to land to the whaling stations for processing, and the offal was thrown in the sea at the stations. There was an overlap between the whaling a n d herring fishing areas, and indeed in the days before the echo-sounder the presence of whales in attendance was one of the main 'marks' for the herring fishermen. Also, the whales deteriorated relatively rapidly after being slaughtered; and there were also whales which were wounded but not killed, and others which were lost to the catchers on the way to the whaling stations. It was the case of the sustained lobby that was rained against whaling, that in addition to the fairly intense pollution effects around the whaling stations, the water offshore was also sufficiently tainted to affect the herring adversely. A total of 6272 whales were brought to shore by the time of the outbreak of World War I (33rd ARFBS, 1914); the catch rate was already decreasing by 1914, and between 1920 and 1927 another 2847 were caught (Thompson, 1928). The response of the government to the concern of the fishing industry was to license and regulate the whaling, but it was never banned; and this despite an official recommendation from the Fishery Board for Scotland in 1919 (38th ARFBS, 1919) that a ban should be imposed. A leading Scottish fisheries scientist DArcy Thompson was against the principle of a ban, although his judgement was suspect to the anti-whaling lobby, as he had passed from being a shareholder in one of the companies to being a director on its board. On the other hand, one of the few people who had both experience as a fisherman and possessed a scientific training at the time, James Robertson, passed from being a supporter of whaling to being one of its leading opponents. He was to make the journey to Burtonport in 1908 in County Donegal at his own expense to voice spirited opposition at an official inquiry when there was the threat of whaling being started there (P.W.S.C.D.). What is indubitably the case is that fish landings in this part of Shetland took a sharp downward turn, as is recorded in the detailed figures kept by fishery officers, and published in the 'creek returns' in the annual reports of the Fishery Board for Scotland. These for Shetland show landings at small groups of creeks (that is landing places); and for the area they are shown from 1901 to 1914 in Fig. 1, which may be contrasted with the general Shetland trend shown in Fig. 2. The fluctuations shown in Fig. 2 could be considered as normal for a fishery, and certainly have many comparable instances in Scotland; the type of precipitous decline shown in Fig. 1 is on the other hand unusual. Most documented parallels to it in various fisheries have occurred later, and tend to be associated with situations in which fish stocks collapse, although this is unlikely to have occurred here. The situation is complicated to an extent by the fact that the stations in the north-west of Shetland were dominated by what was for years thought of as the somewhat separate 'early 389
Marine Pollution Bulletin
Unst aCnU~, ~rOe a
TONS]~i Fig. 1 Fish landings (herring and white fish) in the north-west part of the Shetland Islands, 1901-1914.
herring fishery', which was prosecuted in May and June, rather than July and August which was the main time elsewhere. While it is possible that the early fishing was partly dependent on a separate stock or sub-stock, herring landings at the leading early herring port of Balta Sound o.n the Isqand of Unst were much less affected, and these landings came from the sea area to the east in which there was much less whaling. In the creek returns herring and white fish landings are grouped, although at this time fishing activity was very much dominated by the herring. Between 1901 and 1907 the total landings in the north-west collapsed from over 21 000 t in 1901 to under 800 t in 1907, and continued about that general level till World War I; this collapse synchronized closely with the development of whaling, and led to a sustained outcry against it. It is 390
clear that the collapse occurred throughout the area, and was at its most severe in the case of the Ronas Voe fishing stations; as well as two of the whaling stations being on Ronas Voe, this district was closest to the main area of whaling activity. While it is still difficult to make a definite judgement of the effects of pollution from whaling on the Shetland herring fishery, it is difficult to accept that the occurrence at the same time of the precipitate decline in the fishery in the north-west of the archipelago and the rise of the whale fishery were unconnected. Certainly the Fishery Board for Scotland came round unanimously to this view (38th ARFBS, 1919), although it was not able to convince the government of the need for a ban on whaling.
Volume 28/Number 6/June 1994
120, 0 0 0 - 1 TONS I
I00,000
!
-
ill
iiil
i.i.i.i.i. iiiiii
i!!i!!ii~i
;ii:l iiiiiiiii!
iiill ..........
50,000 ::::'::::
ii!ii;!i!i "£""
::::::::k ::::.'.-:::: ::::-:::: •.. ~... ::::-:::: ::::-::::
.:.!.:.:.:
E:!:!!:!!: :::i:::::;
....~.... ....~....
....~.... ....~.... ....~.... ....~....
....~... ....~....
":T::': I
1901
1905
1910
1914
Fig. 2 Shetland fish landings, 1901-1914.
CouU, J. R. (1988). The boom i n the herring fishery in the Shetland I s l a n d s , 1880-1914 Northern Scotland 8, 25-38. Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland. Fisheries. Proposed Whaling Stations in County Donegal. (Referred to as P.W.S.C.D.) Report of Inquiries held at Burtonport, County Donegal on 17th and 18th February 1908 and at Londonderry on 19th
and 20th February 1908, HMSO, Dublin, 22-46. 33rd Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (ARFBS), 1914. 38th Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (ARFBS), 1919. Thompson, D~. W. (1928). On Whales Landed at the Scottish Whaling Stations during the Years 1908-1914. Fisheries, Scotland, Scientific Investigations III, 3-40.
391
Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 6, pp. 389-391, 1994 Copyright O 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0025-326X(94)E0014-Y
0025-326X/94 $7.00+ 0.00
The Issue of the Effects of Pollution from Whaling on the Shetland Herring Fishery in the Early 20th Century JAMES R. COULL
Department of Geography, Universityof Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, AberdeenAB9 2UF,Scotland With the scale of the marine environment, and the many interacting variables which affect the life within it, it is still often difficult to separate out the effects of pollution from those of other variables. At the same time the effects of pollution have been building up during the industrial age, and neither marine pollution nor concern about it is confined to our own times. In the early 20th century, the people in Shetland became convinced that pollution from shore-based whaling was having a definite effect on the herring fishery, then the main industry of the islands; and protests against whaling were vocal and sustained. When the modem method of whaling with the harpoon gun and the powered catcher began late in the 19th century, it was very much an activity developed and dominated by the Norwegians. However there was a very strong reaction in Norway from coastal fishermen, who became convinced that their livelihood was being threatened by the pollution caused by whaling, and as a result whaling was severely restricted in Norway itself. Norwegian whaling companies at the start of the 20th century were already looking for new opportunities elsewhere, and the restrictions at home gave them added impetus in searching out new fields. One result was that four companies were established between 1903 and 1905 in the north-west of the Shetland Islands, fronting the waters in which whales were most frequent around the islands. Whaling therefore came on the scene just at the time when the herring fishery, which was in many ways the making of modern Shetland, was reaching its peak in the years before World War I (Coull, 1988). It was just at this time, when the general trend in herring catches was upward and while Shetland generally was sharing in a new level of prosperity, that the herring fishery in the north-west part of the archipelago failed badly during a succession of years. The Sheflanders, particularly the fishermen and curers operating in the north-west, were very much convinced that whaling was to blame for their adverse fortunes, and in their efforts to have it banned they had the support not only of virtually the whole Shetland population, but also of the many
fishermen, curers and shore workers who came to Shetland from different parts of Britain for the herring season. Most whales were killed at some distance from the islands, mainly at distances of over 30 miles; they were then towed to land to the whaling stations for processing, and the offal was thrown in the sea at the stations. There was an overlap between the whaling a n d herring fishing areas, and indeed in the days before the echo-sounder the presence of whales in attendance was one of the main 'marks' for the herring fishermen. Also, the whales deteriorated relatively rapidly after being slaughtered; and there were also whales which were wounded but not killed, and others which were lost to the catchers on the way to the whaling stations. It was the case of the sustained lobby that was rained against whaling, that in addition to the fairly intense pollution effects around the whaling stations, the water offshore was also sufficiently tainted to affect the herring adversely. A total of 6272 whales were brought to shore by the time of the outbreak of World War I (33rd ARFBS, 1914); the catch rate was already decreasing by 1914, and between 1920 and 1927 another 2847 were caught (Thompson, 1928). The response of the government to the concern of the fishing industry was to license and regulate the whaling, but it was never banned; and this despite an official recommendation from the Fishery Board for Scotland in 1919 (38th ARFBS, 1919) that a ban should be imposed. A leading Scottish fisheries scientist DArcy Thompson was against the principle of a ban, although his judgement was suspect to the anti-whaling lobby, as he had passed from being a shareholder in one of the companies to being a director on its board. On the other hand, one of the few people who had both experience as a fisherman and possessed a scientific training at the time, James Robertson, passed from being a supporter of whaling to being one of its leading opponents. He was to make the journey to Burtonport in 1908 in County Donegal at his own expense to voice spirited opposition at an official inquiry when there was the threat of whaling being started there (P.W.S.C.D.). What is indubitably the case is that fish landings in this part of Shetland took a sharp downward turn, as is recorded in the detailed figures kept by fishery officers, and published in the 'creek returns' in the annual reports of the Fishery Board for Scotland. These for Shetland show landings at small groups of creeks (that is landing places); and for the area they are shown from 1901 to 1914 in Fig. 1, which may be contrasted with the general Shetland trend shown in Fig. 2. The fluctuations shown in Fig. 2 could be considered as normal for a fishery, and certainly have many comparable instances in Scotland; the type of precipitous decline shown in Fig. 1 is on the other hand unusual. Most documented parallels to it in various fisheries have occurred later, and tend to be associated with situations in which fish stocks collapse, although this is unlikely to have occurred here. The situation is complicated to an extent by the fact that the stations in the north-west of Shetland were dominated by what was for years thought of as the somewhat separate 'early 389
Marine Pollution Bulletin
Unst aCnU~, ~rOe a
TONS]~i Fig. 1 Fish landings (herring and white fish) in the north-west part of the Shetland Islands, 1901-1914.
herring fishery', which was prosecuted in May and June, rather than July and August which was the main time elsewhere. While it is possible that the early fishing was partly dependent on a separate stock or sub-stock, herring landings at the leading early herring port of Balta Sound o.n the Isqand of Unst were much less affected, and these landings came from the sea area to the east in which there was much less whaling. In the creek returns herring and white fish landings are grouped, although at this time fishing activity was very much dominated by the herring. Between 1901 and 1907 the total landings in the north-west collapsed from over 21 000 t in 1901 to under 800 t in 1907, and continued about that general level till World War I; this collapse synchronized closely with the development of whaling, and led to a sustained outcry against it. It is 390
clear that the collapse occurred throughout the area, and was at its most severe in the case of the Ronas Voe fishing stations; as well as two of the whaling stations being on Ronas Voe, this district was closest to the main area of whaling activity. While it is still difficult to make a definite judgement of the effects of pollution from whaling on the Shetland herring fishery, it is difficult to accept that the occurrence at the same time of the precipitate decline in the fishery in the north-west of the archipelago and the rise of the whale fishery were unconnected. Certainly the Fishery Board for Scotland came round unanimously to this view (38th ARFBS, 1919), although it was not able to convince the government of the need for a ban on whaling.
Volume 28/Number 6/June 1994
120, 0 0 0 - 1 TONS I
I00,000
!
-
ill
iiil
i.i.i.i.i. iiiiii
i!!i!!ii~i
;ii:l iiiiiiiii!
iiill ..........
50,000 ::::'::::
ii!ii;!i!i "£""
::::::::k ::::.'.-:::: ::::-:::: •.. ~... ::::-:::: ::::-::::
.:.!.:.:.:
E:!:!!:!!: :::i:::::;
....~.... ....~....
....~.... ....~.... ....~.... ....~....
....~... ....~....
":T::': I
1901
1905
1910
1914
Fig. 2 Shetland fish landings, 1901-1914.
CouU, J. R. (1988). The boom i n the herring fishery in the Shetland I s l a n d s , 1880-1914 Northern Scotland 8, 25-38. Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland. Fisheries. Proposed Whaling Stations in County Donegal. (Referred to as P.W.S.C.D.) Report of Inquiries held at Burtonport, County Donegal on 17th and 18th February 1908 and at Londonderry on 19th
and 20th February 1908, HMSO, Dublin, 22-46. 33rd Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (ARFBS), 1914. 38th Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (ARFBS), 1919. Thompson, D~. W. (1928). On Whales Landed at the Scottish Whaling Stations during the Years 1908-1914. Fisheries, Scotland, Scientific Investigations III, 3-40.
391