FRESHWATER RESEARCH COMMITTEE AND ITS SUPPORTERS
T' -.}'! IDIIOI Of THE PH«»S. ?'r May 1 crave space for this r'tr'r bvJatcd reply to "Black Gnat's" i-r:\.'::::r. of the South Canterbury Acfi.rr.at:iiit!"!i Society's attitude tp■uirci the F:c;!i Water Research Com'C:'U r'li!. uu ly I missed this article v "Tne Pre:.-/' of December 8, and ■• v;. ! ' ly recently that I heard com- !■'■'••' (■'■ this matter, which induced 71. ' " > procure a back number. The i:o , .r> 'j.-iih the South Canterbury 'r--;--r<y s that ii lias fallen into the i rrr ■'•■' '■: ;'or of regarding this rc- ..-;-!•'- ■ "-ipric as a .scientific investi- ;...:;'■■ ,-. , -d i eon,mi!t'ng the obvious ■:;■■• r , f blaming science for the ?:.■■:•■<- of ;jn enterprise that has proi • <-trri :;-■'•'i;shf)iit '.villi a complete i : -'r:.."'i l"i- Mieutilic principles and t:,-rvrr; This so-called research is :'.• ;.•' ■••■■!-■ •.ligation of the geneva) rie- '. -r.'.\ ■■••,r.-> of inuit fish in a. but is <■:■■,■ '< ra'lT-r feeble attempt to de • ■■'•:•■ i-c)-i;':n preconceived thcori ': !.. unnecessary to no further ..... - r r cr.iise of the present dispute ■ <••<:<•-: to demonstrate this. The -•■■:. • -'co- ,ict;on in commencing an ■•'■■.•■Mi-tioM of the possibility of dis- • -:' : :;:'" between hatchery fry and; : .vur-.'Jh 'pawned ones without this • < i:-m having first been indicated as i (--,:';.• b.y previous investigations • •<■: • •■]•.'! .< .<; from the starting point, is < ..•■;•:;.'.■ opposed to the principles of ■ '.'■ ■'■■; iiiici is typical of the spccula- • •. - • i iliods employed by (his body. "'■::- !■■ .:;'.riijti''or" chooses a rather •-.i:< :•■:<■ example v. lien he quotes • ■- :crr;i -: foi naturally spawned fry ■) ■••■■,.,]> of th-> 'hovou^hnefs : Ii ihe ciimmitice carries out 'i'i-'ie ;ire very grave doubts • ■ ■ .■..'■ "v .if :my society that an- !..' -ah; largo carnitines of ■ ■ i■■;■ to ■■upply fish that arc . ■■:■(':-.■ "'itn»-.-h 1:_-.- spawned, and any ■ ■•:;;-;•<:- who base> his work on :■•■■■.:,': .■!' ruch questionable value ■ . : ■ -.>• he surnn.-efl if his pro- ■.'■ ',.'.- -ire not taken very scri- ;,".•■;< (ha'" furllvr states that it . :.'"■ wuh ihe whole-hearted sup- • •■■ of ail anglers that this work can r'rrrrri <-,,-,.-,o'bl.v: but there do not . :■■:<:■■ io he many anglers in the • •':!:!■ •■ wiio wo,|i 'j( to "proceed at b was not desired by the anglers <■■'. :.'.'-.'■ Zealand. nor even by the . ■;■■."■ is of the various societies, but. -.»..-- foi-ted on them by a few indivi- ..:;-;■ who are now receiving substan- : f \ •■.<,'. .etary benefits from it. Simi- '?>:-;.' the recent request for a statutory -; r.-c; :a- in the license fee. the in- < y w-c to be allocated to the eoinmit- ••■• w-> ■ not put forward by those who -• .1 have to find the money, but by • •■ - -ho will have the handling of Th: : proposal was not put for- '\ '...•■ an affiliated society as a rc- • • u, 'ii.. conference, but was intro- ••■ ■■ "i . urrrpiitiously by a special eom- ■ ■■.'• dominated by research mem,v.d the proceedings appear to .- imp hiithly irregular. If this -< <■ .i ■■ ;., :;vrn effect to by the Gov••.•rr.i.t the matter will pass com- ; '»r.v out rf the hands of acelimalis- ,•: • ;-. '..r-j>iif... and anglers may shortly j .-n themselves saddled with a perman- <: • ■...•rcii/f in license fees, and a ■■<■ ■■•:•.,tt.ee that enjoys 'he unique : ■. -;cgi of administering public ■'-:•■"•. v. :thotit periodically submitting ;• <-'.•' kt re-election. —Yours, etc.. CHRISTCHURCH ANGLER. t v. , ; ,iber 'l3. IMI. •P:-.-.'e-.:or K. Percival staled that f ■- ~iN]j.:>t to determine whether it v.- jo,,,hie to distinguish between ] :.o-.o;-.-reared and naturally proc :.ryn '<■:■ was a worthy object, and ■ ! •• i the:- ':!;e attempt to make such a e M.i-t.on was successful was a mat- '.'.•.- :>;. tin- future. The methods which --.. ■■■. and would be. employed were •■ .-■ erciiuarv metheds of observation :■■•■': a v.-erc familiar to any scientific vh„r; , ;• to any intelligent student. V'r.c ■.:.(. samples collected from i i-.'.i:-:>: i oi,rj;;:oiis could be regarded ■ ■ r.; 0,.■;,;!-,. produced depended upon ■■•..'.;;:'•.• liberations had been made in i '.:.■;.et. It ~ , . , a s quite clear that .'■■.:■: ~!:;;, h..r the purposes of the : o- ,-. . ommittec would not be ; -i 'nrj-i were any doubt.J
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19341224.2.46.2
Bibliographic details
Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21355, 24 December 1934, Page 11
Word Count
605FRESHWATER RESEARCH COMMITTEE AND ITS SUPPORTERS Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21355, 24 December 1934, Page 11
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.