Mr. McKENZIE:

I knew we have them around the northern part of Nova Scotia, but how it is in the southern waters of the province I do not know. Certainly, among the fishermen there is nothing that is so much talked about because of the destruction of nets, trawls, and everything else they put in the water. These creatures being so pernicious in their habits and character, perhaps if they found that they were being turned to a profit they would leave the country altogether. So far, unfortunately, there is m>

indication of their leaving. Of course, they come only at certain periods. In my early days, and until ten or twelve years ago, I never heard of such a thing as a dogfish. Perhaps the minister hopes that the good. Lord himself will interfere and drive this pest away. But I hope he will not wait for any divine interference.

Mr. MICHAUD:

At what time of the year do they appear?

Mr. McKENZIE:

In September or October.

Mr. DAVIDSON:

I was wondering if the minister had ever considered the possibility of distributing this dogfish scrap in smaller quantities.

Mr. HAZEN:

It is limited to a quantity not exceeding five tons.

Mr. DAVIDSON:

I think there ought to be a smaller quantity than that. Inasmuch as this fertilizer is nearly all nitrogen and that the amount of nitrogen that the farmer needs is not very great, the amount distributed might be limited to two tons, and the orders filled as received. That is to say, fill all the first orders until the supply is exhausted this year, and next year do not allow the persons who were provided with the dogfish scrap the year before to be supplied until others are first supplied.

I think that the distribution of dogfish scrap in the Annapolis valley has been attended with favourable results. It has been appreciated by the farmers, and has done a great deal to stimulate agriculture. I should not like to see the price of the commodity greatly increased; certainly the distribution of it should be made as general as possible.

I understand that tne dogfish season is not a very long season, and that when they come, they come in great numbers, with the result that the dogfish reducers are

taxed to the utmost, often receiving more dogfish from the fishermen than they are able to reduce. I was wondering whether it would not be a good idea during the season to put on a larger staff and to allow the reducers to work both day and night.

Mr. HAZEN:

That is done. They work day and night whenever there is plenty of material.

Mr. DAVIDSON:

I am very glad to hear that. I agree that this fertilizer is of great benefit to the farmers and I hope and believe that the department will do everything they can to make the supply as great and the distribution as equitable as possible.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

As a matter of fact I

do not think that the farmers usually take advantage of the five tons. If a five ton order is given it is usually the case that a number of farmers club together to give the order. I was going to suggest to the minister that we have not yet hit upon a method of destroying this pest. It would seem that this is a matter which should be submitted to the Fisheries Advisory Board.

Mr. HAZEN:

The matter has been submitted to them, and they are now considering it. A 'committee from that board has visited the factories especially to make report on the subject. -

Mr. WILLIAM CHISHOLM:

Has the

minister or his department been looking into the matter of trying to destroy this pest otherwise than through these dogfish reduction factories? Perhaps he can tell us all also whether similar factories are conducted elsewhere, and if their operations have tended to lessen the number of dogfish. It seems to me that the establishment of the reduction plant at Canso has not in the slightest degree reduced the number of dogfish, and if, as the minister says, the plant is run at a loss, I do not know whether it would be good, policy to embark on any extension of the plant. Of course,

I should like to have one in the county that I have the honour to represent, for the purpose of disposing of the dogfish that come along that shore by the thousands, but the question is, will the establishment of these plants tend in any way to destroy the pest?

Mir. HAZEN:

'This nuisance is very widespread. I believe that during certain seasons of the year these fish may be found all the way from the Carribean sea to the gulf of St. (Lawrence. The question of de-

stroying them' has been the subject of discussion by many biologists and scientific men for years past, but no satisfactory method seems to have been agreed upon. The suggestion was made that they should be destroyed by poison. The idea was that a few of these fish should be inoculated with some kind of poison, and that they would spread it among the others. Up to the present, however, nothing practical seems to have resulted from this theory. Certainly it is doubtful, from the standpoint of protecting the fisheries, if the destruction of the comparatively few fish that have been done away with through the operation of these reduction works justifies the expense of carrying them on. I believe that in the United States they are trying to turn the attention of the people to the value of this fish as a food. Our people have a prejudice against them; I do not think that they are ever used as food in our country. I am told, however, that they are excellent food, and that they can be canned in such manner as to be very nutritious and palatable. In the United States I believe there is some legislation this year looking to the taking of some step to advertise and to make known the valuable properties of this fish as a food, in the hope of inducing fishermen to catch them for food purposes and in that way effect a reduction in their numbers. So far as I am aware, there is no place where these fertilizer factories are carried on outside of Canada. I believe that efforts were made at one time to induce the United States authorities to establish these factories all along the coast for the purpose of protecting the fishermen from the depredations of these dogfish, but the movement was not successful and nothing has been done in that direction.

Mr. HUGHES:

It is not the intention of the Government to build any more of these factories?

Mr. HAZEN:

It is not our intention at present to build any more.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

If the minister could take steps to change the name of this fish, the desired effect might be obtained. I am told that this fish is very palatable. A story is told that in a Nova Scotia town, not far from where I live, an enterprising hotelkeeper got a few of these fish fresh from the sea and had his chef prepare them and put them on the table in attractive form. On the menu they were

described as Japanese halibut. Everybody in the house asked for a second helping, and was very much delighted with this new kind of fish. Every one knows that these fish are used in Europe as food. Some years ago a member of this House, who is not here .now, had the idea that the whole question could be settled by establishing canneries and encouraging the canning of this fish so that it could be put on the market. These are matters, of course, for the Fisheries Advisory Board to consider. I have no doubt that there is some better method than the one that we are following, and I hope that the minister will give the matter hie attention.

Mr. HUGHES:

Some years ago, before the present minister took charge of the department, some of these fish were canned in Prince Edward Island and put on the New York market. It was found, however, that they had to compete with certain grades of salmon put up in British Columbia more cheaply than these dogfish could be canned, and for that reason they were not a success. As a matter of fact, these fish-I have eaten them-are pretty good food. It is a strong fi6h, but palatable, and, I presume, of good food value.

To pay customs officials for services in connection with issuing modus vivendi licenses, $900.

Mr. HAZEN:

The issue of these licenses to United States fishing vessels is entrusted to customs officers, who receive for their trouble 5 per cent commission on the fee collected. The amount spent for 1914-15 was $478.80.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

What is the minister's view with regard to the issuing of licenses to boats propelled by engine.

Mr. HAZEN:

That whole question is under negotiation with the United States, and at this stage I would not like to give my own opinion. When the modus vivendi was >

established, fishing vessels were all propelled by sail, but' since then a different state of affairs has arisen, and now many of them are propelled by steam or by combustion engines. I think it was in 1904 that the question arose, and an Order in Council was passed which any hon. gentleman can see for himself, declaring that that modus vivendi applied only to vessels propelled by sails, and not vessels propelled by steam or other propelling power. That was declared, and put on record, as the policy, I believe, of the Government

241C

of that day. Evidently, it was their construction of the modus vivendi agreement. I think there is grave doubt as to the correctness of that view, but I do not wish to express my own opinion. The matter is now under negotiation with the United States which urges that it. should be allowed under the changed conditions to have the modus vivendi licenses granted to vessels that are propelled by steam power, or by gasolene or oil. Correspondence is now being exchanged on the subject.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

Is the minister con-

1 acting the correspondence in his own department?