By 1660 captains were forbidden to transport passengers to Newfoundland. In 1670 Additional Rules limited the fishery to British subjects and reaffirmed its migratory and seasonal nature by prohibiting ships from leaving England before 1 March. Each captain had to post a £100 bond with the mayor of a West Country town as surety against carrying any but seamen or fishermen. No one was to over-winter and one in five of the crew must be a "fresh man", a seaman of not more than one year's experience. An annual renewal of personnel would expand the available pool of skilled seamen and reaffirm the importance of Newfoundland as a nursery for seamen and a source of fish, the twin imperial interests which sustained the migratory fishery. West of England calls for a seasonal governor in 1675 were repulsed by a Privy Council report:

besides the charge of forts, and a governor, which the fish trade could not support, it was needless to have any such defence against foreigners, the coast being defended in winter by the ice, and in summer by the resort of the King's subjects, so that unless there were proper reasons for a colony, there could be none for a governor.

Furthermore, settlers would likely trade with New England, whence they were already "furnished with French wine and brandy and Madeira wines, in exchange for ... fish". Newfoundland as a colony would only follow New England "to the loss of many of the advantages which, by the present method of things, are yet enjoyed by the mother country".⁹

The increased attention paid Newfoundland in the late 17th century was not a response to the fact of settlement, legally prohibited in 1675, informally permitted two years later, and thereafter ignored. Rather, a wealthy, powerful, popular and assertive France seemed poised to push her interests in the New World against a less powerful England weakened by the Civil war, Jacobitism and constitutional revolution in 1688. Although France retained a presence on Newfoundland's south coast and a fort at Placentia, her ambitions lay in Europe and Louis XIV never shared his minister Colbert's enthusiasm for developing a closed colonial and commercial system from which all but the mother country would be excluded. But the French threat was credited in London. The result was an uneasy compromise. Permanent settlement was inconsistent with a migratory fishery. But because of her almost constant war with France between 1689 and 1713 Britain could not prevent it. The treasury was exhausted and decrees dating back a century prohibited taxing the fishery. Britain could not afford to leave, surrendering an international staple and its markets to France. The solution was to hold the ring, ignore settlement and reaffirm the status quo in statutory form.