harrytom 618 Posted March 25 Share Posted March 25 Yes we wre out in the 45/50m mark off colville on Friday,lots of 28/31 snapper around,Would e happy to take first 7 at that size,sweet unlike the bigger fish. Now if we were serious about increasing fish stock. There are a number of things we can do, 1) no fishing within 1 mile of any shoreline or out lying islands(protect fry etc hiding in kelp ,protects breeding /growing fish 2)no size limit,you catch must be kept 3) no taking any shell fish except kina and no limit on kina,reduce kina barrons and re establishs kelp 4)restrict trawlers out to the 100m mark. 5)restrict where longliners can operate,they lay 3000 hooks a time with a 1 in 20 strike rate. 6)introduce $20 pa fishing licence for all. 600k fishers in NZ x $20 =$12 mil. That would be used to increase fishery officers + vessels without officers number 2 wont work. Would keep the current 7 snapper limit but drop combined bag limit from 20 down to 12 . Customary rights stays but limit take and enforce all stock to be legal size,no excemptions 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aardvarkash10 866 Posted March 25 Share Posted March 25 4 hours ago, harrytom said: 6)introduce $20 pa fishing licence for all. 600k fishers in NZ x $20 =$12 mil. That would be used to increase fishery officers + vessels without officers number 2 wont work. The administration alone would cost more than the licence fee. Just pay it out of taxes. Increase fisheries surveillance significantly especially at boat ramps. Strict liability on offences with loss of gear as the only outcome for offending. Change the quota system to reduce the waste of by-catch. Mandate cameras and surveillence technology on commercial boats. No discussion. Again, strict liablity including on skipper and owner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Psyche 534 Posted March 25 Share Posted March 25 The biggest change is cultural, get people to change attitudes that justify greed. How many fish do you need to catch? Ive heard it all from I have family to feed so I need X fish, or I only go out twice a season so I can take more etc. Do we really want fish policeman everywhere legislated to board your vessel and treating everyone like criminals? You also have to overcome an industry that is built on encouraging fishing and the easy availability of high tech gear that means everyone can enjoy fishing any species to collapse. People should be entitled to fish for food, that is a natural birthright and take precedence over commercial in my view. Maybe I am wrong but my impression is that the NZ fishing industry right from the sealing days in the 1800's has not shown itself to be ecologically sensitive. Its rape and pillage until there is a law against it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SloopJohnB 320 Posted March 25 Share Posted March 25 Greed is the downfall of the human race. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 2 hours ago, Psyche said: People should be entitled to fish for food, that is a natural birthright go to 2.59 https://legasea.co.nz/2022/09/22/legasea-response-to-the-fisheries-amendment-bill-2022/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 4 hours ago, aardvarkash10 said: The administration alone would cost more than the licence fee. Just pay it out of taxes. Increase fisheries surveillance significantly especially at boat ramps. Strict liability on offences with loss of gear as the only outcome for offending. Change the quota system to reduce the waste of by-catch. Mandate cameras and surveillence technology on commercial boats. No discussion. Again, strict liablity including on skipper and owner. If we paid a fee then we can say we are STAKE holders.At the moment we are given a cursory amount even though the Minister must allow for recreational catch. We do not have a birth right to catch fish!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aardvarkash10 866 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 5 hours ago, harrytom said: If we paid a fee then we can say we are STAKE holders.At the moment we are given a cursory amount even though the Minister must allow for recreational catch. We do not have a birth right to catch fish!! Part of the attraction of the colonies in the 17- and 1800s was that nobility didn't own the hunting grounds, rivers and seas. So a very real part of our history was the arrival of people who looked forward to a right to hunt and fish for food. Maori had already established that right in their tikanga. So we definitely DO have a birthright in the ability to hunt and fish for food. The question is how to manage that without reverting to the aristocracy of old Some would say that quota holders are the new aristocracy. I couldn't possibly comment. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Frank 111 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 16 hours ago, SloopJohnB said: Greed is the downfall of the human race. Wherever man goes war follows and a 6 metre all aluminium extreme fishing powerboat on a tandem axle trailer with a 250 hp outboard and 24 rocket launchers. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Black Panther 1,497 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 I doubt whether I have caught as many fish in my entire life as one set of a commercial net. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 4 minutes ago, Black Panther said: I doubt whether I have caught as many fish in my entire life as one set of a commercial net. The average set/haul in the gulf is not as high as you may think average is about 150kg of fish lot of effort for little return. I think deep sea like the orange fleet they would be in tonne per trawl. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Black Panther 1,497 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 Similar order of magnitude. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 Once again legasea blaming trawlers https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/03/increasing-number-of-snapper-caught-in-hauraki-gulf-suffering-from-starvation.html?fbclid=IwAR3EBOSDIlAYbFtpQJwRbjsQ2x5RFFaPVBxlrxyegjoMJG7l3ENSmYzjXFU We had the oppurtunity in 2015 to change but NO legasea were against reccs reporting catch https://www.sanford.co.nz/assets/Press_Release_Hauraki_Gulf_-_issued_28_October_2015.pdf Have only ourselves to blame. https://legasea.co.nz/2017/04/05/feasibility-of-reporting-recreational-catch/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 On the weekend ,Greenpeace held their "Ban the Trawler protest for the gulf. Where were "Legasea"?? being their non political selves. Under the umbrella of NZSFC cant be seen at or organise protests. Just read the National party Fishing policy. In the next 10yrs to double output from Aquaculture. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Frank 111 Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 You have a point there harrytom LegaSea presents a spurious argument against the idea of reporting recreational catch, it seems whats good for the Commercial Fisherman should not apply to the recreational one ..... hypocrisy ? Quote" To throw away a tried and true method of estimation in favour of something that may never produce what we are hoping for seems foolish and irresponsible. Millions have been invested in developing our current method and to walk away from that would be a terrible waste of valuable resources." A Tried and True method of estimation" seems like an oxymoron and the defense of the current method based on the "millions spent on it" seems like a Sunk Cost fallacy ie we have spent so much on it now that we must continue so as to justify all that expense. https://legasea.co.nz/2017/04/05/feasibility-of-reporting-recreational-catch/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 On 26/04/2023 at 6:55 AM, Frank said: You have a point there harrytom LegaSea presents a spurious argument against the idea of reporting recreational catch, it seems whats good for the Commercial Fisherman should not apply to the recreational one ..... hypocrisy ? Quote" To throw away a tried and true method of estimation in favour of something that may never produce what we are hoping for seems foolish and irresponsible. Millions have been invested in developing our current method and to walk away from that would be a terrible waste of valuable resources." A Tried and True method of estimation" seems like an oxymoron and the defense of the current method based on the "millions spent on it" seems like a Sunk Cost fallacy ie we have spent so much on it now that we must continue so as to justify all that expense. https://legasea.co.nz/2017/04/05/feasibility-of-reporting-recreational-catch/ Well "Farnk" yesterday I made a comment on the "Legasea" facebook page and now have no access to them,not the first to cop such a ban,dont like peoples view points if it goes against there thinking. They are the ones who want public funds so surely public input is important,right or wrong? There many good ideas around from both commercial and recreational but it seems its all left to few people running "legasea" and its there way or no way. Oh the comment. They were saying how much free fish heads have been given away and I read recently how "sanfords" had donated x amount to the project. No mention by "legasea" of "Sanfords" generosity, and merely pointed it that they should be thanked as well. Never mind each to their own. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 Proposed temporary fisheries closure of Great Barrier Island (Aotea Island) and nearby islands Tēnā koe, The Motairehe Marae Trust, supported by iwi trust board Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea, has requested a temporary closure to the harvest of scallops, pāua, and rock lobster, from the fisheries waters within 3 nautical miles of: Great Barrier Island (Aotea Island) Little Barrier Island (Te Hauturu-o-Toi) the Mokohinau Islands Simpson Rock and Horn Rock. The request is for a 2-year closure. After the request was made, the Northland Scallop Fishery (SCA 1) and Coromandel Scallop Fishery (SCA CS), which include the proposed area, were closed to commercial and recreational scallop fishing under section 11 of the Fisheries Act 1996. The Motairehe Marae Trust Board wish to continue with their request to prohibit the harvest of scallops, pāua, and rock lobster to establish their tino rangatiratanga in the decision-making process. The closure request and map can be found at the links below. The letter from the Motairehe Marae Trust requesting the closure Map of the proposed closure area Related Great Barrier Island Controlled Area Notice The proposed area includes a Controlled Area Notice that Biosecurity New Zealand placed on Great Barrier Island to minimise the spread of exotic Caulerpa species. This includes Blind Bay, Tryphena Harbour, and Whangaparapara Harbour. A temporary closure would have no effect on any Caulerpa Controlled Area Notice. The Controlled Area Notice is in place until 31 October 2023. Controlled Area Notice for Great Barrier Island Your views sought Fisheries New Zealand invites written submissions about the proposed closure from people who have an interest in the species concerned or in the effects of fishing in the area concerned. Making your submission The closing date for submissions is 5pm on 21 August 2023. Email your submission to FMSubmissions@mpi.govt.nz While we prefer email, you can post your submission to: Spatial Allocations Fisheries Management Fisheries New Zealand PO Box 2526 Wellington 6140. Please pass this on to anyone that may be interested. Nāku noa, nā Recreational Fisheries Fisheries Management | Fisheries New Zealand – Tini a Tangaroa Charles Ferguson Tower | PO Box 2526 | Wellington | New Zealand Web: fisheries.govt.nz Contact us about Recreational Fisheries recreationalfisheries@mpi.govt.nz Get the free NZ Fishing Rules app – Apple or Android Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 No mention of stopping Customary rights? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ex Elly 161 Posted August 8 Share Posted August 8 Bottom trawling restrictions in Hauraki Gulf and tripling of marine protection areas Prime Minister Chris Hipkins confirmed this morning the Government will restrict bottom trawling in the Hauraki Gulf and nearly triple the area under protection. Establishing new marine protection areas and a ban on the controversial fishing method are a major step towards protecting the Hauraki Gulf for future generations, Hipkins said in Auckland. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/chris-hipkins-confirms-bottom-trawling-restrictions-in-hauraki-gulf-and-tripling-of-marine-protection-areas/WRTVSE2Q7JCZ5GSZTZOXKMSRTE/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K4309 145 Posted August 8 Share Posted August 8 3 hours ago, ex Elly said: Bottom trawling restrictions in Hauraki Gulf and tripling of marine protection areas Prime Minister Chris Hipkins confirmed this morning the Government will restrict bottom trawling in the Hauraki Gulf and nearly triple the area under protection. Triple of nothing is still nothing. There needs to be a complete ban on bottom trawling across the Gulf. That, and this is just an announcement. Wont be passed into Law before the election. We are commercially catching bait fish, in the order of hundreds thousands of tonnes, and exporting it to the Ivory Coast. At $2.30/kg. But no-one can work out why our snapper are starving (the milky white flesh issue). The only reason they can say dredging and bottom trawling doesn't damage anything, is because they have already destroyed everything. But it ain't going to grow back if they keep on doing it. 1. There has been a 100% reduction in wild mussels. It’s well documented that 500 km2 of mussel beds were destroyed in the 1960s by commercial dredging. The only remaining wild mussels are found in the intertidal zone. 2. The commercial harvest of blue mackerel has increased by 470% since the park was established in 2000. Between 2016-19 the commercial industry extracted a staggering 9,000 tonnes of blue and jack mackerel from the Park. 3. There has been a 57% reduction in the population of jack mackerel and a 32% reduction in other small pelagic species. 4. And, 376 tonnes of pilchards are harvested annually from the park. Individually, each of these statistics is alarming. But the real concern is the fact that these species are the food sources for seabirds, mammals, john dory, kingfish, kahawai and, of course, snapper. Without these keystone species, the ecosystem will be dramatically different, or species will cease to exist altogether. So, what do we do with the vast amount of mackerel that is bulk harvested every year? We export it frozen and unprocessed to Ivory Coast, Philippines and China for an average price of $2.30 per kilo. Is it worth starving our snapper for $2.30? Why are our snapper starving? | The Spinoff 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harrytom 618 Posted August 9 Share Posted August 9 Bottom trawling will not be banned or stopped Sanfords are negotiating with Aotearoa fisheries to take over Sandfords bulk trawling in the gulf. The Government will need to re negotiate the Treaty which was signed off only a few years ago that give Maori around 75% of fishing rights through the sealord deal. There is no bottom trawling in the inner gulf now,the line is Waipu to Cape Colville If this Government or any Government is serious about the gulf.There would be a 5yr moritorium for all,no fishing. It is a National park the Hauraki gulf(marine park) why can you take from a national marine park but cannot extract or remove any fauna etc from a land based national park? 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.