War of words over fouling of waterways
Fish & Game won’t back down amid a stoush over poo pollution in Southland waterways.
The study, funded by the Institute of Environmental Science and Research and Environment Southland, found that the dominant faecal pollution in 80 per cent of the rivers sampled in the province was from geese, swans, gulls and ducks.
The findings prompted CluthaSouthland MP Hamish Walker to call on Fish & Game to apologise for the offence they have caused farmers in recent years over the source of pollution.
But Southland Fish & Game boss Zane Moss doesn’t believe he had anything to apologise for.
‘‘I would rather be led by the science on these issues, which shows the faecal contamination that is likely to make people sick comes from farm animals.’’
The study found that pollution from cows, sheep, deer and goats [ruminants] was present in about 50 per cent of samples.
Faecal pollution from ruminants typically contains bacteria such as campylobacter, cryptosporidium and salmonella, which are a concern for human health, the report says.
Walker said science had caught up with Fish & Game. It had been irresponsible in blaming farmers for the pollution.
‘‘Farmers are working incredibly hard to do better by the environment and continue to improve waterways – it’s about time Fish and Game did the same.’’
But Moss said faecal pollution of waterways was a complex issue.
‘‘Not all bugs are created equal, and the ones we should be concerned about are the ones that can make us sick.
‘‘There’s no doubt wildfowl, particularly those that live and nest in riverbeds, contribute Ecoli to those rivers and Fish &
Game’s never argued they don’t.’’
Moss said Massey University research on three Canterbury rivers found antibiotic-resistant E. coli and a dangerous strain of bacteria called shiga-toxinproducing E. coli, which was identified as coming exclusively from ruminants.
Environment Southland science manager and report author Dr Elaine Moriarty said the risk of illness after swimming in a river that contains bird pollution was low, but even a small amount of pollution from human or ruminant sources carried a very high risk, as the diseases this pollution carries are more readily transmitted to humans.