ROD AND GUN Tongariro Power And Fishermen

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30578, 22 October 1964, Page 18

ROD AND GUN Tongariro Power And Fishermen

[Specially written for "The Press" by

J. SIERS

In spite of the weak-kneed effort of the Nature Conservation Council and the Cabinet decision to go ahead with the Tongariro power project immediately, Mr Shand need not think he has won the final round. And the final round will be fought over the necessity of diverting the Tongariro River. How much power will you lose if the river is not diverted to Lake Roto Aira, Mr Shand? Is this small amount, which will certainly not be critical in the final output, worth the ruination of the finest river of its type in the world? In the arguments presented to date this one fact has been quietly omitted. Two dams will use the water in the Tongariro, why not make one small concession and stop the diversion? Could Be Ruined Militant anglers, who recognise the Tongariro as a

unique feature and a recreational asset worth millions of pounds, are not prepared to accept that it is necessary to cut the flow of the water by half. As Dr. J. T. Salmon, one of of two members of the Nature Conservation Council to vote against the scheme, says, this reduction of flow is bound to have profound effects and could be responsible for the ruination of the fishing. Anglers should feel obliged to Dr. Salmon for the forthright way he has defended their interests on this occasion. But they will obviously feel equally distressed with the way the rest of the council, excluding the chairman and the Auckland member have acted in this matter. Why was the council asked for its opinion in the first place when by its own admission it has no power to act? The Government then

makes a further joke of the council by disregarding the only recommendation it makes; that the scheme township be sited away from Turangi. This has been unsavory business. What irks anglers is the bland and unprofessional manner of the arguments the Government has presented. Cabinet Decision First came the assurance that, “subject to interested bodies being satisfied,” when the interested bodies showed no interest in being satisfied, came the announcement of urgency. When opposition to the scheme stiffened from anglers who are not represented by the Nature Conservation Council, the Cabinet made its overriding decision. Who looked after the interests of fishermen. The Marine Department . . . Yes. The Marine Department objected to any proposals affecting the Tongariro. Who

listened to them? And what has the Department of Internal Affairs accomplished? Tourism. Everyone says we must promote tourism, but not all tourists want to look at scenery. Some want to catch trout in scenic surroundings. Isn’t the tourist department promoting our unexcelled fishing. But even now, every day of the week, when trout are running up the Tongariro there’s a fisherman to every pool. Cut the flow of the water and you not only reduce its capacity to accommodate fish, but also fishermen. Other Needs If Mr Shand is a student of the needs of a modern community he will know that electric power is only one of its many demands. American and Continental examples show that advanced, technical societies have an incredible need for constant identification with nature. Young persons want adventure and older persons who can no longer tramp long distances in the bush, want the comfort of rivers like the Tongariro. These persons are getting fed up with the way their interests are being disregarded and steps are being taken now to make these matters political issues. In the next election he will find the views of outdoorsmen reflected in the polling booth.