New fish ‘could ruin N.Z. trout fishing’

Press, 2 December 1978, Page 22

New fish ‘could ruin N.Z. trout fishing’

PA Rotorua The illegal introduction of rudd, a British freshwater fish, to New Zealand could result in the destruction of this country’s trout-fishing reputation, according to Mr P. J. Burstall, conservator of wildlife with the Department of Internal Affairs, Rotorua. He said there was evidence that rudd were present in waterways in New Zealand, and the result could be extremely bad for. trout fishing. “One of the reasons New Zealand has the best trout fishing in the world is that our waterways are relatively free of competing ' fish,” said Mr Burstall. “Now, with the illegal introduction of rudd the trout have to compete for the food which has always been theirs.”

A Massey garage owner. Mr S. Smith, was reported as saying over the weekend that he began introducing rudd into New Zealand in 1967. He said he began with only nine rudd but now there were only a few places around Taupo and Rotorua still without them. He said he was aware that the introduction was illegal but he wanted young anglers to have the chance to catch fine little fighting fish. "They said the rudd would destroy the trout and it hasn’t,” Mr Smith was reported saying. “They also said it would destroy the whitebait and it hasn’t done that either.” Mr Burstall said that although the rudd did not eat the trout, they ate their food. “New Zealand trout fishing brings in many millions of dollars each year, both in tourism and

internal recreation, and the introduction of rudd could easily reduce our trout-fishing quality.” Mr Burstall said that recently the Wildlife Division of the Department of Internal Affairs, in conjunction with the North, land group of acclimatisation societies, had established some first-class trout fisheries in Northland.

“We are only able to do this in waters where the illegal introduction of rudd has not taken place,” he said. The removal of rudd from New Zealand’s waterways would cost New Zealand “hundreds of thousands Of dollars,” Mr Burstall said. “We cannot really remove the fish because to do so we would probably have to wipe out all fish and their food. Once they are introduced they are virtually here to stay.”