Angling comparisons

Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 2, Issue 22, 30 October 1984, Page 20

Angling comparisons

In the late 1940s and early 1950s anglers in the United States wanted to catch more trout. They put presssure on the wildlife agencies throughout the country. The anglers got their extra fish — but, as events have proved, at great cost. The response from the fish and game people was to supplement existing stocks of wild native fish with hatchery-bred trout. The result was that in many cases the hatchery fish took over; gene pools of wild fish were lost. And the consequences overall was a marked loss in the standard of thie fish available. In simple terms, quantity has been substituted for quality. The moral of this chapter of events was brought home to Taupo-based fisheries officer John Gibbs who recently spent several weeks in the United States. Mr Gibbs, of the Wildlife Service, was one of three New Zealand anglers who attended the 25th anniversary convention of Trout Unlimited as official guests. He received assistance from the Central North Island Wildlife Conservancy Council and Air New Zealand. His companions represented the Federation of Freshwater Anglers and the Recreational Fishing Council. As guests of Trout Unlimited, a major conservation group in the US, they fished top-rated rivers and streams; waters American anglers refer to as "blue ribbon." And the message was the same throughout their extensive travels; the quality trout fishing of New Zealand must be preserved at all costs. Trout Unlimited, with 39,500 paid-up members, is a big and powerful organisation. It employs a fulltime executive staff, researchers and political lobbyists. Summing up his coast-to-coast US tour Mr Gibbs said: "I did not see any fisheries which compared

with those in New Zealand. "The reason is that the US fisheries have become so artificial that the trout have lost those qualities — the ability to grow and survive — associated with wild fish and fisheries." Once the programme to stock waters. with hatchery reared fish began it became necessary to breed domesticated fish that would do well in the hatcheries. In many cases wild fish stocks were swamped and, in time, their gene pools eliminated. Ironically, said Mr Gibbs, there was a growing belief now aniong US freshwater fisheries officials that much of the hatchery stocking had been unnecessary. Quality fisheries could have been developed using wild stocks. "The emphasis now is on trying to re-establish wild fisheries, and this is provirig successful in many areas," said Mr Gibbs. "The drawback is finding fish with suitable abilities to reproduce in the wild and adopt to the range of habitats in different localities." According to Mr Gibbs the western state of Montana is leading the way in the revivalof wild fish. The Montana Fish and Game Department does not stock its rivers and streams. It relies solely on natural reporduction by wild fish, although it still puts hatchery reared fish into lakes and reservoirs. While in Montana Mr Gibbs was approached by the fish and game department about the possibility of the New Zealand Wildlife Service supplying ova from our wild migratory fish for use in the Montana lakes. If the ova can be supplied it will mean the US-NZ fishery support Cycle has gone full turn. In 1884 the first rainbow trout stock from California was brought to New Zealand. Mr Gibbs said authorities in Colorado and many other states were also promoting wild fish management.

Throughout the United States the practice of catching and releasing troiit is promoted widely by Trout Unlimited. It is seen as a way of protecting the fishing. Mr Gibbs describes the method a management tool but says the practice is only effective if angling mortality of the trout population is above a certain level. He does not think the trout harvest in New Zealand is high enough for catch and release to be an essential requirement for management of wild stocks, although he says the system could be useful at some future date, particularly for river resident fish. Freshwater angling pressure is highi in the United States. As a comparison Mr Gibbs describes the situation in Colorado, a state in which the population is similar to that in New Zealand. Annually, about 250,000 fishing licences are sold throughout NZ. In Colorado one million licences are sold, many to inter-state visitors. By world standards fishing in New Zealand is cheap. A whole season licence to fish the Taupo district yearround costs $18. A season licence, for six months fishing in the US costs a non-resident angler $US30. Over nine days Mr Gibbs fished in six states. He had to buy a separate licence for each state and the total cost was $NZ99. In New Zealand for $NZ12 an overseas visitor can buy a licence valid for one month which entitles the holder to fish anywhere in the country, including the Lake Taupo district. Generally, the fish Mr Gibbs caught were small, six to 12 inches. His biggest, an inland trout three pounder, was taken on the Big Horn River in Montana. In Washington State he caught true sea-run steelhead in the six to nine pound class. Reprinted from Taupo Times cont'd next week