THE COST OF FISH.

Colonist, Volume LII, Issue 12767, 8 February 1910, Page 1

THE COST OF FISH.

I It is curious that while we in New Zealand would eat more fish if it wero I cheaper, the people of Great Britain - do not take advantage of the enor- - ißous supplies of cheap food round . their coasts. Indeed, it is said that fc the very cheapness of fish at Homo I makes many people avoid it. To their . mind it is associated with poverty and s the work house. The consumption of I fish i n tho Old Ccuntry is relatively so small that the National Sea Fisheries 1 rotection Association has started a • campaign to popularise fish-eating. It is pointed out that tho kinds of fish Englishmen oat can be numbered on the fingers of one hand, and 0 f the many other cheap and nutritious varieties they know nothing. So prominent authority as Sir James CrichtonHrowne has pointed out that the sea has provided the sole or principal animal nourishment of many races of mankind celebrated for their energy. Japan, with a population of about it, 000,000, employs over 3,000,000 people in her fisheries, while in the United Kingdom, there are probably not moro than 200,000 people employed in catching and curing fish. It is stated that fishing boats are sometimes kept at sea so as not to land an unusually heavy catch when supplies are heavy, and so depress the market, while good fish is sometimes actually thrown overboard or sold for manure. "Clearly something is wrong, when there are many thousands of people with not enough to eat, and an abundant supply of cheap food not far from their doors. "Cheap fish should bo at everyone's door," says an English writer. "Tho adequate cooking of ifc could easily be taught, and a new Source of nourishment thereby provided." The National Sea Fisheries Protection Association has theso laudable objects in view. j,