100-2 response against trout farming

Press, 21 October 1989, Page 26

100-2 response against trout farming

GONE FISHING

with

PETER SHUTT

I read in a recent “Press” article that rainbow trout are favoured for fish farms. That is logical because of the conversion rate of food to meat, although I wonder about reports that suggest other strains of fish are better food converters. Would trout farming encourage importation of these, and if so, under what conditions?

The M.P. for Tasman, Ken Shirley, claims to have about 5050 support for the concept of trout farming, but I wonder if he’s counting the votes recorded in a poll taken by the Waitaki M.P., Jim Sutton. The documentation for that poll belittles the intelligence of thinking anglers, and as might be expected in any emotive argument, is weighted in favour of an affirmative reply from those responding. The only letters I’ve received through this column favouring trout farming have come from one English couple (reminiscing on conditions as they once knew them, and mentioning Australian trout farms as a practical option), and a Canterbury salmon farm that presents a good case for trout farming.

More than 100 other letters took the opposing view, and some readers phoned their concern. It just shows that opinions appear to be polarised in both camps, and that experts such as the Canterbury salmon farm might well take the financial risk, observe the necessary hygiene and mandatory regulations — and achieve success. But the

price will be high and maybe unsustainable for ventures of less capital and technical expertise. It certainly will not be an employment bonanza for the district, and it’s financial reward is problematical. Two American trout farmers have told me they are having a hard time surviving at present, and the successful farms in Australia seem to be where the local market is large enough to accept the product (often smoked to enhance an otherwise anaemic presentation). If one likes smoked trout, that’s fine.

Trout fresh from our rivers is not necessarily a great taste either, so perhaps the solution would be for prospective fish farmers to add colouration and flavour to the product by chemical means. That has already been done overseas. Some trout farms have survived in the market place by chemically treating the product while it grows. If only someone could devise a method of making the hatchery water that returns to any stream pure and unpolluted. On the basis of my rather unscientific but nonetheless interesting poll of readers, the score of two for and 100 (plus) against trout farming, indicates the genuine concern for the New Zealand recreational fishery and habitat, and is saying, “Hold back, don’t damage the resource as it’s presently known for the sake of some unknown returns that have yet to be demonstrated and for which legislation might not be adequately funded or policed.” It won’t be the expert company that will cause the problem, but more likely to be the inept and undercapitalised operator who will cut corners, and in the process of going broke will contribute to the very problems we all want to avoid:

disease, pollution, poaching, etc. It’s been that way with deer, and other species that New Zealanders have poached over the years. If it’s of value, someone wants it for nothing!

I’d hate to be held accountable for any problems I might cause if I started a fish farm in the present environment, but that could well be what operators will be charged with if the Bill proceeds.

The price of next season’s fishing and shooting licences is expected to rise by $5. But before you start complaining, what about considering the excellent value you get for money when you buy a licence? You DO buy a licence don’t you?

Even at the new rate, an angler will be able to legally participate in the sport for less than 13 cents a day. I can hear you say this is impractical, but so, too, is the assumption that one might play other sports at a cheaper fee. Golfers pay a subscription of vastly greater size and still have transport costs and daily fees to meet. Squash players have an annual subscription that’s larger than the fishing licence fee, and they still have to insert coins to

operate the lights. Transport, while obviously less extensive, is still required.

A recent conversation with a private pilot and a golfer confirmed that flying, at $33 per half hour, was significantly less expensive than that particular golfer’s recreation. Angling, even with travel expenses added, was least expensive of all. The rise in the angling fee is a combination of the GST increase and an inflation adjustment. The actual increase on present society costs equates to only $2. But if you want to do something constructive to keep your fees down (and maybe reduce them), take just one new angler and introduce him or her to the sport. The present fee equates to the number of Licensed anglers out on the water, and if every angler encourages just one new licenced participant, the fee base would double for very little increase in acclimatisation society cost.

The solution is in your hands, and easily obtainable. Or can I hear you saying you don’t want more anglers on the river? Maybe we’re never satisfied, unless we’re complaining!

As for pressure on the waters, let’s consider what some overseas streams endure. In Yellowstone National Park, Califor-

nia, there are often up to 42 anglers per kilometre. Fishing certain stretches of the river during any given 24-hour period.

The 126th annual meeting of the New Zealand Acclimatisation Societies at Wellington last week-end should be the final one of this body before the Conservation Law Reform Bill establishes the new Fish and Games Councils.

But members were told the bill might not be enacted before Christmas, indicating the majority of the present fishing season will come under the administration of the current authority. Some delegates expressed concern that apathy and uncertainty was evident as the time drags on. Dr . Donald Scott, national executive and chairman of the Otago society, said the transition committees would need “poised thinkers.” He also reiterated the society view against trout farming and channel catfish.

Constant changes on the Conservation Law Reform Bill select committee mean that few members can claim to have evaluated all the many submissions presented on behalf of interested parties. Thus one wonders how

the eventual decision might reflect the best interests of all concerned. It’s been said that one committee member actually read the newspaper during a presentation and another was unaware of the presenter’s credentials until given a script.

Such revelations came as a shock to delegates at the Acclimatisation Societies’ conference in Wellington, but, according to informed sources, it’s the truth. And to think one delegate had suggested “take an M.P. fishing” as a promotional activity to alert city-oriented parliamentarians to the pleasure of angling, and the need to retain the present recreational fishery. But on reflection, perhaps a couple of the committee members have already had all the excitement they can handle.

. No licence fee was set for the species, and no consensus opinion covered under-size parliamentarians that might have to be put back.

The central South Island will benefit from an appeal by the South Island Salmon Committee to have salmon smolt released into Canterbdry rivers in an effort to reverse the decline in angler-caught fish in these

A total of $75,000 has been granted for the project, which Matthew Hall (chairman of the Salmon Committee), says “is hoped to be a one-off project, after last year’s efforts along the same lines indicated it might save the salmon runs in Canterbury.

“We have to do this now,” he said. “To wait another year may be too late.”

A new fish bait has come on the market in the North Island. An Auckland farmer tells me he developed the special blend of top-grade lean mutton and saturated it with tuna oil.

Long-line operators off Waiheke Island are using it successfully, according to correspondence received from operators — and the product, delivered in plastic containers, looks like reaching the South Island market soon.

The photo competitions in this column should keep New Zealand Post profitable. The mail starts flowing in on Monday mornings and, much to my surprise, continues. But keep it coming. There have been some correct entries, but it’s not an easy one this time. Write to me at 88 Pages Road, Timaru, with your pick as to which West Coast lake appeared in the photograph with the “Gone Fishing” column on October 7.