The 1911-12 annual report refers to concern that Victorian vessels were abusing the "concession" and using craypots below 40 degrees 38 minutes south. The northern crayfishermen found an able advocate in the new Labor member of the House of Assembly Joseph Lyons. Lyons later became both Premier of his State and the only Tasmanian to become Prime Minister of Australia. On the 24 October 1913 Lyons successfully moved in the House of Assembly that a Select Committee be established to examine the claims of the Victorian and northern Tasmanian crayfishermen seeking an extension of the area in which pots were allowed (and relaxation of the length restrictions on nets). The southern ishermen's claim was that the crayfish pot was an instrument of destruction but, the Commissioners had refused to evaluate them.

In moving the motion for a Select Committee Lyons said "He was only putting the case from the standpoint of fishermen and asked for an inquiry." .... the fishermen asked for an opportunity to bring their case before a Select Committee and offered to demonstrate that the pots were not harmful." Premier Solomon doubted that Lyons had provided enough evidence to warrant the inquiry but did not oppose the motion and a four man committee. Lyons and his friend and colleague James Belton from the Opposition were joined by Sadler and Hays for the Government in their investigations. With thoroughness and fairness he ensured that both sides had a fair hearing - allowing the rival groups of fishermen to be represented by Counsel and conducting a controlled trial of the pots at Burnie.

The Committee which took evidence during November and reported on December 11. Included in the evidence were the following exchanges involving Seager and Noetling and the Committee members and Counsel appearing for the Victorian and southern Tasmanian fishermen. Seager, then Chairman of the Board, gave evidence and was asked whether he was aware of the purpose of the enquiry, he replied -

The Lyons Enquiry found that pots were not destructive and recommended they be legalised. As a beginning they proposed that they be allowed as far south as Schouten Island. Soon after the Commonwealth Director of Fisheries, H C Dannevig, reported on the biology of crayfish and estimated that two thirds of the stocks were not fished at all. He also proposed that both pots and rings be used. . Later the report of Royal Commission conducted by Prof. T T Flynn in 1915 agreed with the Lyons Committee recommendation to legalise the craypot. However the Fisheries Commissioners again rejected the recommendations and prepared a detailed defence setting out the history of the craypot question and sent it to the Chief Secretary. Their 1916-17 annual report repeated the objection to the use of crayfish pots but in the next year there was a repeal of some of the 1905 regulations relating to the size of crayfish and the use of the pots. It seemed likely that craypots would not be allowed south of Bass Strait whilst the Fisheries Commissioners were in charge.

The first World War diverted attention and resources from peripheral matters such as fisheries: over 9000 Tasmanians had enlisted in the services and Sir Walter Lee's new administration had campaigned on a platform of a reduction in public sector expenditure. Reform in fisheries administration had to wait its turn. In 1919 there had been further talk of the formation of a Fisheries Department the Commission's response was continued to complaints of lack funds but also criticism of other State departments for wasting money. The Commission acknowledged that some Tasmanian fishermen now wanted the pot to be legalised but it stood firm. In 1920 there was another campaign by local fishermen to legalise craypots, but again the Commission unanimously rejected their use.

It is often difficult to always know whether the objections of fishermen to innovation is genuine concern for the conservation of the stocks or a desire of the conservative elements in this most competitive industry to shackle their more progressive rivals. In this case independent proof could have been easily obtained within the limitations of the Board's resources but they refused to change their minds. The only fishermen on the Board were committed to the status quo. The Commissioners had now maintained for more than a quarter of a century that the pot was "an instrument of destruction" in that if a pot broke loose from its moorings crayfish could not escape from it after the bait was exhausted. The proponents of the pot offered to demonstrate that this claim was false, they gave the Board pots to test but no tests were done. Despite their lack of resources effective tests could easily have been carried out. When the Lyons Committee carried out tests at Burnie to prove crayfish would readily leave a pot when the bait was gone the Commissioners said the pots were "fakes".

The Myrtle Burgess Saga

By this time fishermen from as far south as Dunalley were legally taking crayfish with pots from the grounds in Bass Strait and occasionally, illegally, further south. Southern fishermen had vociferously criticised the police for their failure to stop the illegal use of the pots. The Myrtle Burgess a large fishing vessel was reported to be illegally using crayfish pots in Binnalong Bay and the police went to investigate. As Constable Smith moved along the beach near the vessel and the skipper Brunett Burgess, attempted to evade apprehension in the vessel's motor boat. Constable Smith fired at the vessel "to hit the fuel tank" but Burgess was hit and killed. The vessel was apprehended, taken to Hobart, and held during the legal proceedings. Over the succeeding months considerable public sympathy for the Burgess family was aroused. A short time later police sergeant Tom Challenger, the specialist fisheries officer, attempted to apprehend the another vessel Dauntless apparently illegally potting off St Helens Point; again a shot was fired and Challenger was thrown into a dinghy tied alongside and injured.

When the Myrtle Burgess was seized the vessel’s log went to the Fisheries Commissioners and they were not keen to give it back. The Chairman, Phillip Seager, claimed it provided proof that crayfish stocks had been depleted and the fact the vessel had never fished in Victorian waters. He deduced that this was because was the use of pots had rendered those waters unproductive. Furthermore the log showed that between 1913 and 1920 the Burgess family had caught 20,850 dozen crayfish of which 12.603 dozen were taken from waters where pots were illegal.

In the light of the debate which followed the Myrtle Burgess case, the Attorney-General, told the Mercury in January 1921 that his Department was considering the question of fisheries and preparing a cabinet submission which "may include radical changes". The Examiner judged the Government's proposals to be wasteful. At a meeting the Chairman, Secretary and Assistant Secretary had with the Attorney-General, Propsting indicated his desire to appoint a Chief Inspector and an Advisory Board, but all the Commissioners, including T.T.Flynn who had proposed a similar course in his Royal Commission in 1916, were reported as opposing the Attorney-General with complaints that the idea was too expensive for the State to bear. In 1920 47 Hobart based crayfishermen petitioned the Commissioners to legalise pots in all Tasmanian waters. A counter petition from 106 members of the industry quickly followed and then 67 residents of St Helens also backed a continuation of the ban. Two years later J P Piggott MHA and William Spaulding representing Dunalley fishermen asked the Commission to suspend the ban for a year to allow the effect of pots to be tested. Again a counter petition was arranged and again the Commission decided to maintain the ban.

When J.A. Lyons became Premier in October 1923 he and his Attorney-General, A.G. Ogilvie, set about reforming Tasmanian fisheries and revived the debate about the use of craypots. When some fishermen petitioned the Commissioners to retain the existing prohibition they responded by announcing another committee of inquiry. When the Commissioners requested Ogilvie's assistance with funds, a secretary and information regarding the earlier inquiries, he replied by requesting that the inquiry be deferred until after the forthcoming elections.

Philip Seager had died in June 1923 and the new Chairman H.T. Gould chaired the fourth enquiry into craypots that began in May 1925. He was assisted by Tom Murdoch MLC, Flynn, the Curator of the Museum, Clive Lord, representing the Royal Society, and ex-fisherman William Gates. The conservative faction - Gould, Lord and Gates found "that the evidence failed to show that the Tasmanian crayfish grounds could stand wholesale working with crayfish pots." Thus the regulations should continue and they would not be convinced of the case in favour of their use until a "two or three year investigation .. by a fisheries expert of high qualifications and free from local influence" had been conducted. Murdoch and Flynn submitted a minority report recommending that pots be legalised under certain conditions including prescribing the design of the pots. The recommendations in the minority report were almost identical to those of Lyons in 1913 and Flynn in 1916.

The Commissioners constituting the Fisheries Board finally lost credibility when a Hobart Magistrate found that none of the Fisheries Regulations were valid. The ineffective handling of the craypot question and a fiasco over the Regulations strengthened the resolve of Ogilvie and Lyons to legislate for the replacement of the Commission with a new body and then legalise the craypot. Safely re-elected with an increased majority and recalcitrant Legislative Council mollified, the reforms could begin. Ogilvie instructed Colonel J E C Lord, the Police Commissioner and Flynn (both members of the Fisheries Commission) to consult with the Parliamentary Draftsman on a new Fisheries Bill which was introduced when Parliament resumed in October 1925 and passed by Parliament in December. Somewhat surprisingly when the Bill reached the Legislative Council later in November there was no debate on craypots. The new Act placed responsibility for sea fisheries with a new Sea Fisheries Board chaired by Col. Lord.