Jump to content


Photo

Launch Forfeited for Taking undersize Scallops : Marlborough Sounds, Pelorus Sound.


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#1 Rehabilitated

Rehabilitated

    Rehabilitated

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • Locationon the waters and else where

Posted 02 March 2016 - 03:16 PM

Date:

02 Mar 2016

  MPI media team news release.

 

Colin James McKinney, 69, self-employed, of Blenheim, was convicted of failing to immediately return undersize shellfish back into the waters from which they were taken, after a 2 day defended hearing in December 2015.

 

 

Ministry for Primary Industries District Compliance Manager Nelson/Marlborough Ian Bright

said it is very important to return any scallops to the area where they were taken.

"Scallops can't survive in any old place. They live in defined beds and it is important undersize scallops are returned to the area they were taken to ensure they have the best chance of survival. Returning undersize scallops to where and when it suits the skipper is not good enough.

 

 

"We encourage people to report any suspicious fishing activity to 0800 4 POACHER (0800 476 224). All calls are confidential."

 

 

OC


  • 0

©  2013 2014 2015

ADVANCING MULTIHULL SAILOR ORGANIZER NAVIGATOR.

OCEAN COMBINED CRUISER / RACER ADVANCING MEMBER.


#2 Knot Me... maybe

Knot Me... maybe

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,669 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 04:01 PM

Well done MPI.

 

The dude must have been dodgy for them to push right through to a court so good to see someone getting smacked for being dodgy. Way to many simply don't.


  • 0

#3 Romany

Romany

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 470 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 04:23 PM

Also up north an Aussie yachtie lady fined for not declaring fruit & veg from Fiji - see MPI web site. Good on them.


  • 0

#4 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,534 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 06:50 PM

Arrr yes I know that guy. Once called him a friend. Once. I made the SST rails for his boat. But I got screwed by him.
His Boat had many problems. It's an old "Ship Builders" design and was getting very tired. I feel sorry for the people that bought the boat and are now without it. Surely He must have known something about it going to be seized. Surely the Court wouldn't take a Boat that had already been sold. Normally a Boat is Bonded, so he should not have been able to sell it (without breaking laws) while it was under bond and till after the Court ruling.
Oh yeah, the berth this side of his used to be mine.

 

Attached Files


  • 0

#5 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,534 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 08:29 PM

I've been thinking about this somewhat. There must be more to it surely. Would they really take a $50K boat for 133 undersized scallops? I have heard of far more serious breaches of fishing laws and no where near that level of penalty.


  • 0

#6 ScottiE

ScottiE

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,054 posts
  • LocationAuckland

Posted 02 March 2016 - 08:53 PM

Thought the same thing but we're not gonna find out relying on the herald to get to the bottom of it!

Take it on wheels and get the dirt!
  • 0
After a decade or so of Euphoria . . . it's time to go Ballistic!
Anthony

#7 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,534 posts

Posted 03 March 2016 - 06:48 AM

Herald has just been a Parrot. If you do a search, you will find the exact same story in all of them and i suspect the original story has come from the local Nelson paper reporter.

Will do....as he swaps his hat to a Sherlock Holmes style...or should that be Watson.

 


  • 0

#8 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,534 posts

Posted 03 March 2016 - 06:57 AM

To add, Just had a quick look at the author of the article and it was written by Marlborough Express Senior Reporter Mike Watson. The thing with the news these days is that Fairfax own all the papers and thus the same article is simply copy and pasted to each centre. 


  • 0

#9 Knot Me... maybe

Knot Me... maybe

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,669 posts

Posted 03 March 2016 - 09:46 AM

I've been thinking about this somewhat. There must be more to it surely. Would they really take a $50K boat for 133 undersized scallops? I have heard of far more serious breaches of fishing laws and no where near that level of penalty.

It is very possibly they did. They take boats a fair bit, many of which are given back after the Court and 'arrangements' made usually financially costly ones for the boat owners i.e. they buy the boat back from the courts. But some boats are sold at auction.

 

I'd think this is not the guys 1st offence as they do tend to like a hand smack with education before the start taking stuff.


  • -1

#10 Rehabilitated

Rehabilitated

    Rehabilitated

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • Locationon the waters and else where

Posted 03 March 2016 - 12:30 PM

Arrr yes I know that guy. Once called him a friend. Once. I made the SST rails for his boat. But I got screwed by him.
His Boat had many problems. It's an old "Ship Builders" design and was getting very tired. I feel sorry for the people that bought the boat and are now without it. Surely He must have known something about it going to be seized. Surely the Court wouldn't take a Boat that had already been sold. Normally a Boat is Bonded, so he should not have been able to sell it (without breaking laws) while it was under bond and till after the Court ruling.
Oh yeah, the berth this side of his used to be mine.

 

Wheels do you know what bonded means.

 

Bonded does not mean they have taken procession.

 

Bonded meaning is that you post a amount to a prescribed figure that is decided by the court or similar to cruising vessel like Tahiti.

 

They zap a open signed credit card and that doesn't get process until it needs to be honoured supposedly as collateral. No prosecution and credit card transaction is stamped with a cancelled stamp. Conviction or payment require the open bill of exchange is activated / processed. If ISF then I guess they would go for the boat. Caveat Emptor  Let the buyer beware. 

 

Meaning.

 

let the buyer beware: the principle that the seller of a product cannot be held responsible for its quality unless it is guaranteed in a warranty.

 

The axiom or principle in commerce that the buyer alone is responsible for assessing the quality of a purchase before buying.

 

(Law) the principle that the buyer must bear the risk for the quality of goods purchased unless they are covered by the seller's warranty

 

A Latin phrase meaning let the buyer beware, used to mean the idea that a buyer must not assume that the quality of a purchase is guaranteed .

 

Commercial principle that without a warranty the buyer takes upon himself the risk of quality

 

Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” It means that a customer should be cautious and alert to the possibility of being cheated: “Caveat emptor is the first rule of buying a used car.”

 

Regarding the sentence.

 

Correct sentence and wheels I would have thought you would have been yelling whip pee for this. Not only where they undersize but the boat had over the allowable limit scallops on board. Scallops are fussy where they propagate and are being over fished. Dredging also damage untaken stocks and spreads disease amongst the bed. Commercial vessel trawling / dredging within the Marlborough sounds  boundaries should be banned. 

The sounds, you have been complaining the loudest re visitor numbers drop, decline, since the regulations  restrictions for recreational fishers where altered re Cod only from memory but could be wrong.

 

Scallops and snapper and all the wild fish stocks are very important to all the SOUNDS operators who are trying to survive / make a living during a declining visitors numbers game. Scallops are a treasured commodity for all  the Marlborough sounds and the NZ fisheries are trying their best and obviously listened to your screaming blood murder and unfair criticism of them. Fishing recreation for the recreational fisher is diminishing / being eroded each year as the fish gatherers increase and the fish resource diminishes. No warning should be given. Most know the fishing rules and penalties so why give them a warning. This judgment all NZ's should be congratulating the Judge. People for years have been crying for harsher penalties and when they are given we get some people saying that's a bit harsh.

 

The person that bought the boat and was unaware if your information is correct needs a lawyer to recover with full costs for his loss.

 

Did he the seller if the boat was sold, frauduately sell the boat knowingly that he was going to get a heavy fine or as some are here saying expecting and first time warning small fine that he could afford and bad boy verbalisation from the judge. So did he commit a crime?

 

Fishing regulations breaches should be enforced more rigorously with no warnings and harsher penalties even for the non speak English citizens that fish the Auckland fishing areas from land with casting rods . Plenty mumjo talk when they are catching undersize fish but watch their reactions when a person appears wearing a three piece suit or wearing collar and tie even when they are spotted approaching  from a distance.

 

Perhaps the boat was not bonded. It should have been impounded like Commercial foreign vessels are when they breach our fishing regs. and prosecution / charges are pending. Then people would not get stung. Did he buy the boat through a ship broker or did the buyer cheap skate and by pass local professional selling / buying services with protection for his investment? 

 

OC

 

   


  • -1

©  2013 2014 2015

ADVANCING MULTIHULL SAILOR ORGANIZER NAVIGATOR.

OCEAN COMBINED CRUISER / RACER ADVANCING MEMBER.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users