Irrigation schemes affecting salmon

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32861, 9 March 1972, Page 16

Irrigation schemes affecting salmon

An estimated 4000 to 5000 salmon parr had been lost from a Canterbury river recently through the use of just one irrigatior pump, the president of the North Canterbury Acclimatisatior Society (Mr N. I. Voyce) told a meeting of the council lasi evening.

Proposals on salmon management were put before the council — at the council’s invitation — by Mr D. J. Hughey, a critic of the society’s salmon policy.

After an hour and a half of occasionally spirited discussion, Mr P. C. Dawson commented that in many ways Mr Hughey’s suggested policies were the council’s policies, and that the discus-

sion had cleared the air. Mr Hughey said he was glad he and the society seemed to share the same aims.

He did not agree that enough was being done in some areas, and he was not satisfied, but he was happy at the agreement that had been reached, Mr Hughey said.

Mr Hughey disagreed on which matters — and rivers — were the responsibility of the North Canterbury Society and which were those of the South Island Salmon Committee of the South Island Council of Acclimatisation Societies. IRRIGATION SCHEMES

But he agreed with council speakers on the grave danger posed to sea-run salmon by irrigation schemes, a subject on which there was considerable discussion. Mr G. R. Burrows said that every year the flow of water in the rivers became less because of irrigation schemes. The number of fish could not be increased with the present flow of water.

Mr Voyce said the society had long been fighting for a reasonable flow of water in the rivers. “This is one of the most important things we can do. If we do not have water, we will not have fish. I am very scared about it — we are going to have to fight damned hard.

“We must stop the salmon par being spewed over the countryside by irrigation. If we can do this, we will have more fish than we know what to do with.”

The Rangitata River was case in point, said Mr C Ferris. “The irrigatic people want more and mowater. The extra they war would dry up the river.” Separate body

Several spoke against suggestion of Mr Hughey that the South Island Salmoi Committee should be a sep arate body, and Mr G. Mug ford spoke against his suggestion that the North Canterbury Society should have a separate salmon committee. Mr Dawson said the society did much work to see that salmon could get up the rivers and were taken fairly It had been looking into the shortage of spawning areas in the Waimakariri River and was most concerned about it.

Mr Voyce told Mr Hughey that he had been told that the South Island Salmon Committee was considering or had under action many of the points he had raised.

Dr I. D. Blair said therr were many areas of agree ment between the counci and Mr Hughey. The counci would have to decide if if would set up a separat salmon committee.

Salmon society If the salmon fishernc were not satisfied, th should form an organisati within the society, he said He did not want anyone think the society was ju “sitting around” on th salmon question, Mr Voyc said. By all means a salmoi society could be formed, h« said, but it must figii urgently to stop the loss o: water from the rivers.