FISH HANDLING

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 56, 9 March 1929, Page 11

FISH HANDLING

AT ISLAND BAY

COMMISSION OPENS

THE AERIAL SCHEME

The question of tho landing flud handling of tho fish supply for Wellington at Island Bay was advanced a stage io-day, when a commission consisting of the Chief Engineer of the Public 'Vorks Department (Mr. P. W. Furkert) anij 1-Jjq Secretary of the Marine Department (Mr. G. C. Godfrey) commenced its,sittings.at Island Bay. The Chief Inspector of Fisheries (Mr. A. B. Hofford.).' and Town Cleric (Mr. B. P. Norman) ..were present. . The scope of the commission is to inquire, into the; provision of improved facilities, for,.the handling of iish to bo landod.at Wellington, and the prevention: bf pollution of tho shores by the. fishing industry. ' The commission, is*'to Teport upon whether (a) the proposals of the City Engiueor as adopted fey the City-Council on the 20th October, 1927, and' for portion of whicliS tenders had been called in London, were, in the opinion of the' commission, the most suitable for the handling of fish at- Wellington and prevent pollution; (b) if not, to report upon the site and scheme which, in its opinion, would, bo, the most suitable; (c) the commission to note that tho City Council had resolved that tho eastern side'of Island Bay..be not granted for. a fishing wharf, itu..account of the best bathing beach iii the .city'being nearby; (d) the -'coblt of working and upkeep should^boreoouped by fees payable by the fishermen., '■ Mr.-Fm'ker' presided. :. v ; -east'side out, ; -.Mr..-.Furkert said that it was clear that the City, Council would not havo the eastern scheme, and that the fishermen would have to. pay.for the lot. He understood that there was to be a wharf and; shed on. the. island, and that the fish were to be conveyed by motor aerial to the western .beach, the cost to be not more than 4d per Ib. ;Mr.' J.-Q.'Shorlandsaid that the'residents.had. been willing to havo the iish discharged .on tho western shore, but the fishermen were not agreeable to being restricted to the use of that side. Kesidents. had no complaints against fishermen; but' everybody in the Bay thought that the conditions of the fishing industry 'required investigation. Some of the best seamen in the world were fishing out of Island Bay. As far aa the commission was concerned the investigation was ; limited •to the western beach. : " '■■ • ' ■ Mr. Furkert said- that the commission was not limited- 1 to-that at all. They could say that the fishermen should not land their (fish at Island Bay at, all, but perhaps at Eona Bay or Seatoun. It waa the landing of fish "at Wellington" that was to be considered. ", CHARGES UNCERTAIN. -Th,o Town. Clerk..(Mr. .Norman) said that" he had not .'.come prepared to go into the charges to bo levied. It would cost the '.;fishcrmen•■ the- absolute minimuifl. ■;.-." -„'-. .' ■ '.. ■Mr.iPurkert: "Yes, but is that going to be &l a week or &l a year?'? Mr. Norman replied that it. might cost -Jd per lb.; That, said : Mr. Furkert, was. a rather difficult basis for, the fishermfeu to decide, upon.;: -Could not. a. maximum bo stated? s-i ';■; ':<■:. . '•> ■■'■.■' '■ iMrc--N6Tmaasjfiaidrlh.at.-it'.was ,ift>t 'ex-- . pected =tbat.-the rchargff would be more than Jdyibubit might be id. .He had not been, able- to, find out tho quantity of- f.m .to .be handled. ' There would have to .be: an attendant to handle the apparatus,/and on an.-expenditure of 59500 the cost per-lb should not be mora than $&. The scheme was not to be a charge on ratepayers, but one standing on Jits- pwit-basis.- It might have to pay for itself, but when it was in working order the charge to the fishermen might not s exceed actual working costs. : Mr. Furkert pointed out that the commission they were given did not say so; it merely provided for upkeep and . working,. . Mr. Norman said tha' the", .council '.:■ had hot- yet deeid6dVh!ow the scheme was to be paid for." /The'charge'forthe slipway would be si'milcf to charges levied in other places for similar works. Tho hours worked would depend oh the fishermen. Mr. furkert'pointed out that if the institution on tho. island closed at .a certain-hour^fishermen would.not have the same landing, facilities',as they had now;.;;; "..'. ".y.;. ..',.-',-'".■. ■ "'.' ',' .. ..'.-. ...;' THE AERIAL DESCRIBED • ~ MrV'W/Ak'e'd; the -council's designing.engineer], said that the scheme was for a. jgtty-projecting from the island, the floor of which was' two feet above high water iriark, with provision for a cleaning' house and digester for the offal. The.fish Sver'd'ito-be placed in cases holding 1 '.cyft, including the weight of tho' case. Four" cases would be placed on the carrier. The receiving platform" would be 10 feet : above high-water mark. Both-wero to be loading ends, if needed. The carrier.was to be operated by an electric motor on the inland. ,The transporter was to be operated by the fishermen at all hours of the day or night. The transporter must carry 15 tons of goods per hour. The containers were to be fly-proof, suitable for taking ther fish'into town, They were to be provided by the: fishermen; ,-3ir. Wilson, chairman of the Cook Strait Fishermen's Association, said it was regrettable ■ that the Commission could-not! consider: the eastern beach, as it was the only place that would suit' the-fishermen. They, had told the Mayor that the 'proposed wharf on the island would not be suitable on account of the weather. It could not be used during:nirie months ofthe year. It was an open wharf;' and the swell went through.-. Their.boats wore delicate and ' not meant for. handling against a wharf at, all.- .They; wero not built like the fishing .boats-.-at Home. Herp the Jannclres wore made to be worked from dinghies, but dinghies might swamp at the .wharf, as they wero loaded to the gunwale; v . ; Mr. Furkertsaid that ho had repeatedly Been launches unloading against the Tockaon the western creek. That, said Mr. Wilson, was only in calm. weather, which' was not the rule. The island made a lee shore only in south winds, but these started a heavy swell,'which broke heavily on the site of the proposed wharf. The fishermen were now handling their fish twice, but the fish could'not always be cleaned at sea, and cleaning them on the island, with the use of the aerial, would make a great deal more handling than they received now. He had understood that the charge was to be per fish. Mr. Norman agreed that he had made a mistake; it-should be Jd a fish. Mr. A. Wilson said that he had understood, from the Mayor that there was to be-a standing charge by the council of £15. a year per boat, in addition to the charges for the aerial. There seemed to be some doubt about this in the minds of witnesses, but Mr, Furkert said he had noted the point. Mr. G. Baxter, secretary of the. Cook Strait Fishermen's Association, produced photographs showing tho effect of the winds on the bay and the entrance in a heavy southerly. IMBSIDENTS AND EASTERN BEACH. Mr, Shorland said that the residents flid.nofr object to the eastern beach being used in exceptional conditions. JTheMi wore. <iay.l jvhea {here jsras no

wind, yet a tremendous sea. This had happened recently.

Mr. John Tait said that beforo the island schemo was to bo of any use to the fishermen, a scheme costing £100,000, something like the Wellington boat harbour, would have to bo carried out.

Mr. Shorland said that tho fishermen had had the .run of tho Bay so long that it was going to be hard to regulate thorn. Ho had no doubt that if tho suggested facilities were put in on tho island the fishermen would bo better off.

Mr. Wilson said that tho fishermen would nover agreo to any wharf in Island Bay except on the eastern side. In.the Old Country no such plans wero carried out without the consent of the fishermen. It was all very well for tho residents to say that the fishermen wore fine bold fellows, but what they really wanted to see was the fishermen put oil the island, and crushed out thoro by heavy dues. .

Mr. Tait said that the island wharf could only be used half the time.

Mr. Wilson said'that the fishermen's objections were'that the wharf could not be used 99 days out of a hundred.

A resident: "That's a wild statement."

Mr. Wilson: "Of 'course, if you risked it, you could use it every day."

Mr. Furkert asked - whether a longconcrete, slipway, or beach, similar, to that" at tho boat harbour in the city, would not be useful on the island. ■

Fishermen said-that they had to land their dinghies on the beach to. get homo. What was wrong with casing the fish on the launches? ' . ,

Mr.. Shorland said that the residents wanted the beach, for bathing.' It was all':.very'well.for fishermen to taili of good suggestions,' but would they keep to them?' They, had a regulation" now on a pole.at the head of tho stops to the beach, stating that no fish were to be brought up the steps except properly boxed,, but he had seen fish stacked round the pole itself. (Laughter.) Mr. Wilson said that if a boathar-. bour were put in, destroying, the'present anchorage, it would mean making tho harbour big ' enough to hold 30 boats at anchor. ...' ■ Mr. Tait said that if a boat harbour were mad'eit would take the.. present anchored boats away from the beach. A bridge would improve • matters, but would be expensive. , . . : Mr. Wilson s.aid they did not object to the aerial, but if its cost fell on the fishermen they could not bear it. He did not favour a concrete beach on the island for dinghies. Supposing a "dinghy were loaded with 100 fish and two men, in a fresh northerly it would bo sunk before reaching the island. " KEEPING BEACHES CLEAN. . ; W.. A,■'. Dicker, representing the life--saving clubs, said that the erection of any'wharf, or slipway on the eastern side would contaminate the beach. Now tho- position jwas that' there was" a', plague of blowflies 'and-a stench,.blood' on the steps, etc., and in his opinion a boat harbour built between. Taranaki street, and, Clyde quay, .with, an, up-to-date market and cold storage, etc., was. the proper.'course. Mr. Wilson said that tho landing" of the fish in Wellington had. never bceii ; considered,, as it'was out of .the, question. It would mean five extra hours travelling to Wellington and back again, and even then the cost of tak-. ing the fish, from Taranaki -.Street Wharf to tho shop .'would bo thb-sainc-as .-from Island Bay.. .. . .. ' air." Furkert; "Why .not" shift."tire 1 whole settlement to Seateun?"' It was stated that tho Seatoun residents would at once be up in arms. Mr. C. F. Rockel, acting head of the' school, said that on tho children's account the cleanliness of the beach was imperative,.lsland Bay was a pleasure, resort and an important swimming traip.-' ing ground.;. The school committee- was;against a. landing wharf anywhere near■ the swimming area, on account of the fish refuse, which frequently defiled tho ■beach. : Mr. J. Tait said that often residents gutted, fish sold ■ to them, on the, rocks, but the "greatest offenders were 'the; small; buyers.. and shopkeepers. who: cleaned their fish on the beach, though some fishermen • also were to blame. A? heavy' penalty for cleaning fish in the bay would stop it. None of the British fishermen cleaned fish in the bay. Mr. Godfrey asked if it would be wise to pass a regulation that no ungutted fish' be, brought into the Bay. Mr.' Wilson said that some fish were sent ungutted to the shops. It was generally possible to gut the fish in the launches; at sea.. They':had promised the City Council not.to gut fish in the bay. .. ■ ' . . .. ■ ■■ •■ | Mr. Norman said that only recently it had "been necpssary for the City Council to bury fish . refuse on the bea,ch."lt was impossible to stop the. putting of offal in the Bay without patrolling the ..island as .well, as -the beach. ■■ "■ ■'■■'■ ' '■■ " ' . : , •'-., ■ ■'■■ ■ " j Mr.: J. H. Cowdray; Inspector of Health," a -resident of ■ the. Bay, said' that it was time to abate the nuisance on the" beach, though it was not as | 'bad as it was twelve months ago. Blood and offal were splashed about, and fish loft lying, to attract blowflies. The storage.of bait was still a serious, quesr tion. Bait Was stored until it was too putrid to-use, when it was dumped anywhere. It was impossible tor find out who was responsible. The Italians never understood questions. Bait should be stored on the island, not in the Bay. Boxes of. offal brought back from town wero also left lying about. S WHY GO TO THE ISLAND? ■ Mr. A, E. Hefford, Chief Inspector of Fisheries, said that it was not a question of to-day only but of the future. In the past it had been ','raflerty. rules." The nuisance existed. Tho position was: "Get the fishermen away." Getting the fishermen to the island was expensive arid problematic cal. It should be possible to abolish the nuisance without abolishing • the fishermen. There was no reason why the destructor should not be ashore, as modern plants of this description were not offensive. In his opinion the eastern reef, if not the eastern beach, was the ideal place for a wharf, which, if kept clean as it must be, would even provide a good diving point. He could not see the-.fishermen using a wharf and plant on tho island without working from midnight to midnight. The cases would have to bo cleaned and taken back there. , Questioned, Mr. Norman said that he had never heard fly-proof boxes mentioned in connection, with other land-ing-places, but from Island Bay there was a long drive to tho city. ' Mr. Wilson said he understood that there was a regulation stipulating that all fish on lorries should be covered up, but there wore many who broke the law. The cases proposed would cost 6s each, and would not last more than a month, as they were heavy and dumped about a good doal. Fish were landed in the city in bulk, and in the case of tho James Cosgrove the fish were taken through the city in open baskets.

Mr.- Heffotd said that it might surprise many people to learn that fish kept better exposed to the air than when cased up. He could-not speak of the dffiiculties of landing on the island, as he did not know the weather conditions, but a long jetty would take up some of the present mooring space in the Bay. He thought that a chop would make it awkward for dinghies on an artificial beach on the island. What had surprised him, after seeing idyllic fishing villages at Home, whore more fish was landed and yet the fishormon and their industry was an attraction to visitors, was tho suggestion that bathing and fishiug were incompatible on the one beach,. It seemed to him that the thing tjj do was to enforce the clean handling of .offal, which, instead of being thrown away, as $& psesent,

should bo turned to profit by a modorn fish-reduction plant. One of these plants was working in London it.splf,, quite free from offence. The quantity of fish refuse would determine tho economic success of such a plant here, but the aerial seemed to him an unnecessary expense.

COST OF AERIAL." ■ Mr. Wilson said that the aerial would have to work every..hour of the day and night. The aerial would mean a great loss of time. Now fishermen could get rid of the catch of, perhaps, a dozen launches in an hour and a half. Moorings were picked up, the fish wer^ dumped in a dinghyl' and taken to the beach—a matter of minutes. ■ After twolve hours .at sea; the fishermen, did not want to waste time. With an aerial, launches would have to wait their turn. He offered to put iv a record of tha quantities of- fish landed. •■' ,

Making the position of the ratepayers clear, Mr. A. B. Croker said that the island schpmo .was. not tho choice of the ratepayer"?. ■.-. All they asked for was. cleanliness.' They ' had nothing against' the fishei-nien,' but wanted . a properly-controlled', industry. If a. freezing works 'were put in that residential area, the Supreme Court would probably decide that it would'have to bo removed. ; They claimed that the fishing'.■industry, should not be a nuisance to ' a-; residential suburb...

Mr. .Godfrey: '."If' the whole business :wore..managed in a cleanly way the residents would, not .'object to tho use of the"eastern beach 1" _

Mr. Croker: "Oh, no; but we would object to".tho .installation of a. complete plant there;.. .We would not pb^ ject' to ".the landing of dinghies there if thebeaeh were kept'dean." -s"

'•■ MrV WilSo'ir skid/that;- at Scarborough more interest was' taken; in tho fishing industry than-'rn".th.Q.--,bathing.

i Mtv Hefford ;cpr~orborated this. i Tho commission • adjourned at 1 p.m. to take further -evidence: '■'•"' :,