Hopes for krill dashed by study

Press, 22 April 1980, Page 14

Hopes for krill dashed by study

NZPA London Hopes that the Antarctic’s shrimp-like krill could become an important new protein source have been dashed by an evironmental impact study. The report on “the management of the southern ocean” was released in London to predate the meeting at Canberra next month of the 13 Antarctic “powers,” including New Zealand. The Antarctic Treaty powers will decide a convention on the management of the southern ocean and its resources — including the huge concentration of protein-rich krill. But the report, by members of the International Institute for Environment and Development, warns that the great untapped resource should be largely left alone.

Surmising that the high cost of krill fishing makes krill an unlikely big food source even for an increasingly hungry world, the report says even relatively low krill catches could

have disastrous consequences for fish and whales in the southern ocean.

It also warns that the draft convention is deficient and that unless care is taken, the unique legal framework which has allowed the treaty signatories to administer the continent could be challenged by those outside it. Limited and largely exploratory krill “harvesting” has already been started by West Germany, Japan, Poland and the Soviet Union.

The report says there are severe constraints on building it into a big industry. The colour and strong flavour of krill make it an unlikely competitor to the shrimp for human consumption; its main commercial future is seen as a high protein animal feed in the form of mill meal. But it rots quickly, needs special processing gear, and can be caught only in a very short fishing season.

All. of this makes it extremely expensive to

catch and makes extensive exploitation unlikely with existing technology, the report says. The authors admitted at a news conference that their conclusion depended on normal economic criteria being applied. Countries could decide to catch krill for political reasons and shipowners with idle fishing capacity might use spare ships rather than lay them up. If the regime for managing the Antarctic waters was to survive, it would have to be acceptable to the international community. Attempts to involve the international community — probably by linking the convention to the United Nations and the Law of the Sea conference — have been resisted by the signatories.

The 13 Antarctic nations are New Zealand, Argentine, Australia,. Belgium, Britain, Chile, France, Japan, Norway, Poland, South Africa, the Soviet Union, and the United States.