ANGLING

Southland Times, Issue 19172, 16 February 1924, Page 12

ANGLING

(By “ Creel.”) WHERE THE GOOD FISH COME FROM. The enthusiastic angler, after a long and unproductive tramp, accosted a coun try boy leaning over a gate. “Boy,” he exclaimed, “is there no good fishing about here?” “Good fishin’?” replied the boy. “Yessir.” The angler’s heart rejoiced. "Splendid!” he cried. “Where will 1 find it.” “Well, you go down that path there—” “Which path?” asked the angler, puzzled. "That one you're starin’ at. The one marked ‘private.’ Keep along it till you come to the sign, ‘trespassers will be prosecuted’ cross the field with the bull in it, and mind the dog at the end cottage, and then you’ll see a sign, ‘ No fishing allowed.’ That’s it.”

“Can fish become mad?” asks an angler. “Not half as mad as we can become when they won’t bite!” Bright sunny weather for last week-end apparently made the fish very shy during the course of the “sun’s motion round the earth,” so that the early morning and late evening were the most opportunte times for successful operations. A large number of enthusiasts and their friends visited Lady Barkly, and although they found the trout very quiet, an enjoyable few hours on the river bank were spent. Messrs R. Friend with 13 fish, and A. Tapper (Jnr.) with 11 fish (including one two pounder), were the most successful anglers. A word of praise is due to the executive and the secretary (Mr A. L. Whelham) of the Southland Anglers’ Club, for the very satisfactory arrangements made in connection with the Field Day. The thanks of the club are also due, too, to those kind friends who placed their cars at the disposal of the committee. SALMO SALAR. (By “Red Spinner.”) A friend in the North wired me: “Would you advise me come South for salmon fishing in Upukerora,” I replied: “No—salmon fishing in Upuk. almost as tame as shooting ducks in a barn yard, besides shortly after Xmas the fish in this stream will be pretty well wiped out; but if you want to add ten years to your life and see some of the best scenery in New Zealand, perhaps in the world, by all means come along; put in two or three days on the I Waiau between Clifden and Wairaki for salmon, then make for Te Anau. If you cannot spare the time to make the Glade House, Milford Sound walk try the Eglington or some of the streams running into Te Anau from the North or South Arm for salmon. It is well worth while.” Iknow many would not agree with one of my statements that the Upuk. could be fished out, but that is realty what has happened and what between the Government’s action in stripping and taking North all the available ova and the excessive fishing there is just a chance of the goose that laid the golden egg being killed or so severely wounded that it may take some considerable time to recover. It may be said there are other streams running into the Lake that holds salmon, but this has not been actually proved, so in my opinion we cannot afford to take any undue risks. Now the Marine Department, under whose jurisdiction salmon are, have adopted a dog in the manger attitude by refusing the Southland Acclimatisation Society the right to take any ova from streams other than those where the yare stripping. This debars the Society from any further exploring work and securing ova to stock other adjacent waters —Mataura, Aparima, or Oreti. I would suggest that the local society get in touch with the Otago and Lake Societies with the view of stocking the Mataura. The honourable member for Mataura has twice cleverly side-stepped th's ova question, but backed by two other societies and members of his own electorate, more particularly as another election will shortly be due, I bet on this occasion he would acquiesce. It was a pity weather conditions were so bad about New Year when several visiting sportsmen from the North made a visit to Te Anau for the salmon fishing and I believe did not put a rod up. More particularly would I have liked Mr Stead to have landed a decent specimen or two, so that he could have given us his opinion in regard to them. Any previous fish or photos he had seen gave him the impression they were a mighty poor lot of kelts. I understand he is still of the opinion these are not salmo salar but the Canadian variety (salmo onanniehe). His only reason for this is that the weight corresponds, he can have no other reason for his theory. True, in 1905, the S.A. Society received 10,000 ova of the Canadian land locked variety, but though these hatched out well in .our hatchery at Wallacetown, a flood came down and the majority escaped down the race into the Makarewa river. Only 100 were saved, and not deeming it worth while incurring the expense of taking these to Te Anau, they were liberated in the Oreti at Lumsden. So much for his theory. Now as regards the weight of our salmon. These range from five to ten pounds and would average about six. This is low compared with the 20’s, 30’s and 40’s up to 60 lbs we read of as being caught in the waters of Norway and Scotland. Weight is not so much a matter of age as food supply, ’ and the herring grounds together with the multitude of fish life brought to their coasts by the warm gulf stream must be one reason for the wonderful growth the salmon make after returning to the sea; they litterally pile on flesh. It is on record that a smolt of one pound and a half and a salmon of 25 pounds were of the same age, ova from the same fish, but whereas one had been to the sea the other had not.

The reading of salmon scales has become quite a fad, so says the “8.G.” In fact the catching of a salmon is quite a secondary consideration, if it was not for the fact that you have to catch a salmon first before you can scale it, the catching would not matter. There are quite a number of ways in playing the game; one, which we do not think is quite the one, is to catch a salmon, carefully examine it, making a note of its weight, size and mannerisms, then take off a few scales, sending one to

each of your friends who are students of the cult, asking them to furnish a descrip tion of the fish, whence it came, age, weight, school, club, morals, politics, etc. Then you produce your note and other evidence to show your superior brand of cleverness as to scale reading. According to the reading of some scales sent to Hutton one of the Upuk. fish was approximately six to seven years old, had spawned on return from the sea at least three times and yet weighed only ten pounds. From this you can draw at least two conclusions, perhaps three. First, that the food supply around oour coasts adjacent to the river mouth is not to be compared with that round the British Isles; second, that we have a smaller breed of salmon; thirdly, that the salmon have not been to the sea, but have spent the interval between the various spawning periods in the Lake where there was only a moderate amount of food available. This scale reading at Home has become quite a fad; some of the most eminent authorities beg to differ on vital points. For instance P. D. Mallock held the theory that salmon added only 16 rings to their scales in each year while J. A. Hutton states this as being absolutely incorrect, for one may find as few as five or six rings and as many as twenty or thirty put on in a single year. Again one authority has it that the parr rings are closer together than the sea rings because the fresh water does not contain as much mineral salts as salt water, therefore, scale growth is less, but according to Hutton the reason is simply because the sea contains much richer and more nourishing food than fresh water, and, consequently the fish grows more rapidly and the scales also grow more rapidly to cover the increasing bulk of the fish. So much for our leading British authorities. Now, my theory ia that whereas the scale reading of the Upuk fish shows better feeding after each spawning, it doet not follow that this better feeding has been in the sea and the low condition factor may mean lake feeding. Again, all authorities agree that the migratory instinct must take the salmon parr to the sea, that the salmon is really a sea fish only coming to fresh water to spawn and then return to its native element. It has been noted that salmon smoults confined to a pond have been found dead on the bank, where they had leaped, their natural instinct for seeking the salt water being so strong; that was the natural inference taken from it, but some years ago I handled some two, three and four-year-old salmon hatched and reared in the ponds at Clinton and they never acted like this. Now for my theory. That all salmon sooner or later make for the sea in British waters is unquestionable, but that they make it sooner or later is because they are given a lead by the parent fish. Now here there were none to lead, [ therefore the general run does not extend beyond the lake limits, but as time goes tn more and still more will find their way, following the crowd as it were, till it becomes general. A few were caught at the Waiau mouth last year, many more this year and as time goes on the run will become general. Exactly Ihe same thing happened to our trout. They were liberated first about Dipton, where for tome years they were only to be caught; gradually they made their way seaward until we have now practically established a breed of sea trout, which, like the salmon, run into the rivers ‘from the sea throughout the season. When the annual migration of the salmon becomes general then we will secure some of the heavyweights reached by the British salmon. In a nutshell my theaory is that our salmon have not been long enough acclimatised for their migratory instinct to have become fully developed through the lack of parent fish to give them the lead and for the same reason one could hardly expect godwit hatched in New Zealand without leaders to find their way to Siberia till necessity breeds a habit and a habit begets a custom. —RED SPINNER.