Channel catfish

Press, 26 July 1989, Page 16

Channel catfish

Sir, — Can the Minister of Agriculture inform the public through these columns what research has been done here on channel catfish, currently under consideration for liberation into New Zealand waters for commercial reasons? Has an environmental impact study been carried out to gauge what damage to other species these large predators could do once they escape into rivers and streams, as inevitably they will do if the example of koi carp is anything to judge by? All freshwater fish, whether native or introduced, are at great risk here and I believe some concrete evidence to the contrary is urgently needed. — Yours, etc., B. W. MOYSE. June 7, 1989.

[Mr R. R. Maxwell replies for the Minister of Agriculture, Mr Moyle: “The proposal to import channel catfish is a joint venture between the Runanga o Muri whenua and Northland Support (Presbyterian Services). Their purpose is not to liberate channel catfish into New Zealand waters for commercial reasons but to create employment opportunities in the Northland area. They intend to create an industry based on farm-raised fish in land-based freshwater ponds. The aim is to establish a processing facility in the north, and to sell produce both on domestic and international markets. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is not an advocate for this proposal, one way or another; it is the Ministry’s responsibility to ensure that all the necessary information has been submitted, and the risks and benefits have been weighed up. An extensive environmental impact assessment has been completed and distributed to other Ministries and specialist organisations for their comment. To date, there is no evidence of detrimental effects that would be caused by the introduction of catfish. The catfish would be in quarantine for up to approximately four years and then sterile fish would be used in specific environmental impact experiments, e.g., experiments designed to determine whether catfish competed with eels and koura for the same habitats. Authority for destruction of stocks either on disease or environmental grounds does exist, if the need arises.”]