National News> Media Releases

25 January 2007

The Editor, Rural News, PO Box 3855, Auckland 1

Dear Sir,

David Carter’s “assault” on Fish & Game New Zealand’s finances is puzzling (23 Jan). He passed off his initial claim of an $8 million surplus for 2005 (against total national revenue of less than $8 million!) as a typo, but persists in claiming the need for “urgent financial oversight.”

Had Mr. Carter simply approached Fish & Game with his concerns, he would have been advised that:

· All revenue is generated through the sale of fishing and hunting licences by the 12 independent regional Fish & Game Councils.

· That most councils carry cash reserves representing a modest percent of annual income, a fiscally sensible approach given the potential variability of seasonal income.

· Some councils have further cash assets as a result of land sales and this money is allocated for the purchase and development or land and / or wetlands more appropriately benefiting licence holders.

· Fish & Game also meets the ongoing need for expensive advocacy and Environment Court hearings for water quality and environmental flows in waterways throughout agricultural New Zealand that are absolutely fundamental to the habitat needs of fish and game species. Yet this is more properly the role of other agencies with responsibilities under the Conservation Act 1987 and the Resource Management Act, 1991. In addition to direct benefits to licence holders, this environmental protection benefits indigenous species and all New Zealanders.

· There is no doubt that Canada Geese are becoming more difficult and more expensive to manage than in the past. The development and intensification of land close to water bodies has increased the carrying capacity of the habitat for geese. Fish & Game allocates considerable resources towards this situation, and in recent years has kept goose populations close to the target levels agreed with farmers. Farmers do not have a mortgage over nature.

· On this point, and in relation to the degradation of lowland waterways, Fish & Game continues to advocate that those sectors that cause the problems ought to take greater responsibility and be accountable for their actions.

In the absence of another explanation for Mr. Carter’s unfounded aspersions, perhaps he is simply inclined to the environmentally cavalier fringe element of New Zealand’s primary production sector? Fish & Game would like to believe that all stake holders are part of the solution to the degradation of our lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands, and invite David Carter to achieve some semblance of balance. Supporting an increasingly marginalized and outdated group of “profit and production above sustainability” advocates does Mr. Carter and his colleagues no favours and will alienate a large number of anglers and hunters whose licence fees pay for much of the conservation effort in New Zealand.

Yours sincerely,

Bryce Johnson

Director Fish & Game New Zealand

021 397 897