Society’s views on fish farms

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32959, 4 July 1972, Page 17

Society’s views on fish farms

Fishing Industry Board suggestions that regulations governing the control of fish farming should, as far as they relate to diseases, apply to acclimatisation societies as well as to commercial organisations breeding fish for ! sale are supported by the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society.

The society's secretary (Mr H. B. Barker) said yesterday that the likelihood of fish diseases being spread to wild fish stocks from fish farms or breeding areas of any artificial type was causing grave concern to acclimatisation societies throughout the country. Wherever fish or animals' were being artificially bred or raised, and intensively' farmed, the possibility of disease occurring and spreading very rapidly was high. The society was concerned not only about the need for regulations, but also about the implementation of inspection procedures, so that a close watch could be kept on any fish stocks to make sure that no disease was occurring. The Marine Department’s force of inspectors was considered by the society to be completely inadequate for the work expected of it, even with no fish farms to inspect. The society was also concerned about the shortage of fish pathologists and scientists who could identify diseases when they occurred. There had been recent cases where diseases had been detected, but the cause and exact nature of the disease had still not been discovered.

But not all of the proposals of the Fishing Industry Board relating to trout farms are support by the society.

The proposals at present include the establishment of commercial fishing farms in inland waters. This would lead to the discharge of effluents and wastes from these farms into inland waterways, Mr Barker said.

The society's concern was that if any disease occurred —as sooner or later almost certainly would happen—the disease could in this way spread throughout the coun-l try’s inland waterways, perhaps severely damaging wild fish stocks, which were an important natural resource. The society’s policy wasi such that fish farms should be in estuarine waters, so that; [any wastes, diseased or not. [would go out to sea. where any disease would probably be destroyed by the sea conditions and salt water. At least, he said, the danger of any disease being spread to wild fish stocks would be reduced to a minimum. The society's worries had been made known in representations to the then Minister of Marine (Mr McCready), Mr Barker said. I Asked about a comment by 'the chairman of the Fishing

< Industry Board (Mr 1 T.; I Cook) rhat commercial fish; J farmers would work on a .[scale which would enable ; them to provide the! best conditions for dislease control, and that their; [ properly-qualified staff would; [ensure that disease was kept' ’under strict control, with' proper supervision. Mr Bar-' jker said that at present there! '[did not appear to be any pro-; jperly qualified staff available ; in this country for such ' work. Mr Barker also said that an outbreak of disease in a large; r fish farm would lead to the [ i destruction of stocks in that; » farm, and a consequent loss; which could run into many; I thousands of dollars. It was conceivable, he said. - that anyone running such a) - farm would be reluctant to I make a quick decision leading] to such destruction and loss.: ; For this reason, it would be[

essentia! that there should be i i strict, independent, and qualiqfied supervision of all such : i facilities. :j In February of this year thel ■[Denmark Sports Fisheries or•;ganisation published a report I [expressing its concern about lithe adverse effect which had i [been noted on Denmark's: •[trout rivers as a result of ! commercial fish farming >n -■that country. Mr Barker said. ' The North Canterbury Acr climatisanion Society would continue to express its coni|cem about proposals to . establish fish farms in any > I inland waters to the utmost. Hof its ability, and it was; jlanxiously awaiting the pub-; plication of any regulations. [Mr Barkier said. Spokesman's comment it Those who wanted to set. II up commercial fish farmst : | strongly supported the] .[board’s recommendation that ‘[regulations governing fish

f Arm mg should applx t r everyone. including the ac iclitnatnation societies. Mr \ i Isaac, a spokesman for fisb ■'farm hoence applicants, said •‘lf the acclimatisatior i hatcheries and pends wen classified as tarms—which (they really are — it would emphasise to acchmatisatioi societies and opponents ot commercial trout tanning ion trout farming.’ he said “We advocate that the .treatment of waters dis charging from trout farms 'should be identical in the cases of acclimatisation i societies and Government hatcheries. If their hatcheries have disease communicable by water they can spread it iin the same way as any other ifarm. and in recent experience I these hatcheries hat e had disease which could be spread '