FISH FOR AUSTRALIA

Evening Post, Issue 50, 27 August 1935, Page 8

FISH FOR AUSTRALIA

New.■ Zealand is advised by the Australian Trade Commissioner, Mr. R. H. Nesbitt, to export fish and timber to Australia, in order to reduce the adverse balance of trade. He makes the preliminary point that Australian waters cannot supply the volume of quality fish that New Zealand waters can supply: a statement that would not be accepted by all Australians, but we can let that pass. Assuming, as Mr. Nesbitt says, that we have the fish'and that Australia wants them, the next question is whether the New Zealand fisheries indusby is prepared to compete with the same energy as is shown by the Australian fisheries industry, which sends trawlers across the Tasman Sea to New Zealand waters, where they take fish which are later marketed In. good condition in Sydney, and apparently with profit. At first glance it might be regarded as a matter of course that the country nearest the fishing banks must win in fishing competition, but that assumption may need examining. In modern times the distance range of commercial fishing has greatly increased because of the development of new methods of treatment by artificial cold (preserving the quality in fish) and new ships and equipment suitable therefor. In describing these developments, Mr. Julian Huxley has drawn attention, to the remarkable fact that a British company fishing in Arctic waters employs a factory fishing ship of no less than 10,000 tons, the Arctic Queen —a sort of young cousin to the whaling factory ships. An adventure like Jhat may be dependent

on certain special circumstances, but Mr. Huxley has laid down the general principle that distance and lime factors are being conquered at a very rapid rale by commercial lishing companies possessed of initiative and capital. Without those advantages, it is not to be assumed that a fisheries industry (for export as well as local consumption) can be developed on a big scale. Merc proximity to the fish will not suffice, if they can*be commercially reached by a more adaptable competitor 1200 to 1500 miles away. Mr. Nesbilt is in fact propounding a policy of greater energy for our fisheries and limber. Concerning' the latter the Tariff Commission has already had something to say.