Jump to content

Waiheke Island no take zone


Recommended Posts

We've had three winter trips to Japan.  They eat differently (well,duh!).  We ate like locals, not in tourist restaurants but in small street places.  One memorable meal was in a bar with a dirt floor.  In a ski resort.  Another under a railway line and included pig ears and a range of stuff that was best not to ask.

Portions are smaller.

Protien portions are tiny.

Even cheap food is exquisitely presented.  You eat with your eyes for sure in Japan.

We currently have a 25yo chinese guy living with us.  He is astounded at our waste, the poor quality of the ingredients and the careless way we prepare food here.

Imo, the difference is this.  For those of us with anglo-saxon blood, food is fuel.  For most cultures, food is celebration at every meal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre-Covid I travelled to Japan for business every 6-8 wks. Their culture of personal pride in health & appearance is part of the story.

But just in case Big Mac culture threatens the traditional alleyway food scene, new anti-obesity laws are a further incentive to prevent ‘lazy corporate guy’ growing a waist size of >34 inches (or something like that) and women similar.

Imagine the backlash here in NZ if employers had to monitor their staff’s BMI and pay more tax for having fat workers. True story.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Frank said:

I hear your concerns but frankly sometimes it feels like "If not them then who ?  MPI are hopeless. You want to see the fish life in Deep Water Cove due to the 2 year Rahui.

There has always been good fish life in Deep Water Cove

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem isn’t the recreational take, it’s less than 4% off the top of my head.

The problem is quotas were issued on historical data, so if you caught x tonnes of fish for the last x years then that was your allocation 

Problem being that they brought in the quota system because of over fishing so nothings changed they were and still are taking more that can be sustained. With minor tweaks, 

Personally I believe all commercial fishing should be restricted to small operations fishing with long lines ( one hook one fish ) and enclosed waters like the Hauraki Gulf should be recreational only. Small operators will fish for sustainability, corporations will fish for profit then move to another area once no longer profitable.
 

Plus the recreational take is still too high, no one can eat 9 or 20 fish as it is now, 4 fish of any size makes more sense to me, in other words you can take any size fish but just 4 of them.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Problem is 4/person or boat? Neither addresses the problem. 

/boat and then they will keep fishing and throwing untold juveniles back with associated  casualty rate.

Little sign of responsible animal husbandry amongst fishers.

More interested in the adrenaline/endorphins from chasing down lesser species and/or dollars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lateral said:

 Problem is 4/person or boat? Neither addresses the problem. 

/boat and then they will keep fishing and throwing untold juveniles back with associated  casualty rate.

Little sign of responsible animal husbandry amongst fishers.

More interested in the adrenaline/endorphins from chasing down lesser species and/or dollars.

Thats been my arguement for yrs with advocacy groups,take first 4/7 legal fish,no sorting or high grading like comms do,in fact go one step futher like whats just been introduced in South Australia.

https://afta.net.au/new-snapper-management-plans-in-south-australia

New snapper fishing management arrangements for the South East including recreational bag limits will come into effect 1 February 2021.

Recreational fishers will be allowed to catch two snapper per person per day or six per boat but it will be mandatory to report catches through the Department of Primary Industries and Regions Recreational Fishing App

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently asked Legasea via F/B why they supported this non binding Rahui yet they would not support a court approved reserve at Motiti Island.NO answer.

Asked same question to their bosses and the reply was the Rahui gives hope for recovery of Shellfish/crayfish.Reserves do not have an active roll in producing Biomass of stocks.

Confused I am.

Noted at Parliament today the question was asked .Will this Rahui gain legal standing and be backed by Oceans and Fisheries.NO answer.

I currently have an email in with the Minister over the "Rescuefish" policy as it is not as seems .Under the policy there is more chance of damage being done than is currently happening.If I get a reply you will be enlightened to what the problem maybe.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

no reply at this stage but has ben sent forward for consideration.

Dear Paul Carnahan

 

Thank you for your email which I will pass on for consideration.

 

Kind regards

 

Tracey

 

Office of Hon David Parker

 

Office of Hon David Parker MP | Attorney-General | Minister for the Environment | Minister for Oceans and Fisheries | Minister of Revenue | Associate Minister of Finance

 

Authorised by Hon David Parker MP, Parliament Buildings, Wellington

 

 

 

 

 

From: Paul Carnahan [mailto:d_carnahan@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, 9 February 2021 5:45 PM
To: Hon David Parker <David.Parker@parliament.govt.nz>
Subject: Rahui/Rescue fish

 

Dear Minister

 

Rahui Waiheke Island.

 

I believe “Legasea” and the New Zealand Fishing sports fishing Council both support the non binding Rahui at Waiheke Island .Yet Both do not support the Current non take zone around Motiti Island,Bay of plenty. Have asked both parties what is the difference and one has said non take/reserves do nothing to increase biomass of stock.

 

Rescue fish.

 

After a discussion with a Legasea representative MR Pieter Battaerd. It was revealed how all inshore trawlers would become longliners.

Now this is the problem,we currently have in SNA1 aprox 30 longliners and 100 inshore trawlers,so to convert those trawlers in to longliners would /could put a further 30,000 hooks per day in an area which is already over fished and in particular would affect the average publics fishing ground.At the moment most inshore trawling takes place where recreational do not fish and the Trawlers pretty much trawl the same line so minimum impact being done to seabed.No trawler is operating around reef systems due to torn nets etc.

 

Mr Battaerd stated that the “ rescuefish policy” has been given the nod and will become a reality at what cost to NZ on buy back of Quota etc??The qms just needs a few tweaks after 30yrs.

When one looks at their Petition only 15000 have signed after 6 months and Legasea claim to have 80000 followers.

 

How can Mr Battaerd make such a statement?

 

I have no commercial interest in fishing.

I am an active recreational fisherman in SNA1 and seem to have no problem in getting a few fish for family or elderly nieghbours

 

Look forward to your reply.

Paul Carnahan.

 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bigal.nz said:

He doesnt even reply to LegaSea. 

This is a great read : https://www.emr.org.nz/images/emr/pdf/why-mr/Why-do-we-need-MR-Dr Roger-Grace.pdf

Short version : both commercial and recreational can continue to fish if we make 10% of the gulf a marine reserve, those reserves would act like protected creches.

 

According to legasea and nzsfc reserves serve no purpose as far as increasing biomass.there is the problem.how much coast do you lock off?? Remember if you lock off 20/30 miles if coast you then put more pressure on remains areas  Take goat island most stock has moved why?.poached lack of food area to small to sustain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for a snorkel with the schools of 10lb plus snapper and shoals of trevally at the Poor Knights to see how reserves can work. We swam with a turtle there this Christmas for 15 minutes or so which was a first for me in New Zealand.

30 years ago we caught good crays at Waiheke, scallops in Oneroa and there were schools of kingfish at spray rock. It needs a rest for sure.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Proposed temporary closure around Waiheke Island to the harvest of scallops, mussels, rock lobster, and pāua

Dear Fishers,

Ngāti Pāoa have requested a temporary closure to the harvest of scallops, mussels, rock lobster, and pāua from Waiheke Island.
The request is for a 2-year closure.
Fisheries New Zealand invites written submissions in response to the request from persons who have an interest in the species concerned or in the effects of fishing in the area concerned.
The proposed temporary closure covers all that area of New Zealand fisheries waters within 1 nautical mile offshore from the mean high-water mark of Waiheke Island.
Background to the request
Section 186A of the Fisheries Act 1996 provides that the Minister of Fisheries may temporarily close an area, or temporarily restrict or prohibit the use of any fishing method in respect of an area if satisfied that the closure, restriction, or prohibition will recognise and provide for the use and management practices of tangata whenua in the exercise of non-commercial fishing rights.
Temporary closures apply to recreation, commercial and customary fishing, but have no effect on marine farming.
Ngāti Pāoa consider that a temporary closure will recognise and provide for the customary management practices of tangata whenua in the exercise of their non-commercial fishing rights and allow time for scallop, mussel, rock lobster, and pāua stocks in the area to replenish and increase in number and size.

Further information can be found at the links below.

Find out more about temporary closures

Consultation documents
Waiheke Island application [PDF, 378 KB]
Proposed Waiheke Island temporary closure map [PDF, 4.3 MB]

Making your submission
The closing date for submissions is 5pm on 22 March 2021. 
Email your submission to FMSubmissions@mpi.govt.nz
While we prefer email, you can post your submission to:
Spatial Planning and Allocations
Fisheries Management
Fisheries New Zealand
PO Box 2526

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, darkside said:

Go for a snorkel with the schools of 10lb plus snapper and shoals of trevally at the Poor Knights to see how reserves can work. We swam with a turtle there this Christmas for 15 minutes or so which was a first for me in New Zealand.

30 years ago we caught good crays at Waiheke, scallops in Oneroa and there were schools of kingfish at spray rock. It needs a rest for sure.

Yes but the poor nights covers a large area ,only accessible by vessel which is probably the saving part.

Fishers need to get away from hunting the trophy fish.Our moto is ,if legal its bagged,why risk barotrauma etc a legal snapper can produce a decent feed if your good at filleting in fact bake the whole fish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, harrytom said:

According to legasea and nzsfc reserves serve no purpose as far as increasing biomass.there is the problem.how much coast do you lock off?? Remember if you lock off 20/30 miles if coast you then put more pressure on remains areas  Take goat island most stock has moved why?.poached lack of food area to small to sustain.

The report states you need to lock off 10%. It also details that the reserves must be of a certain size to be effective (Goat Island for example is to small).

If you aren't going to listen to the research and scientists then what do you suggest? At this point anything is better than nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If NZ is serious and I mean serious in saving what we have left.You have to take a very hard stance and it will effect me too,No fishing within 1 or2 miles of the nz coast including offshore islands,no taking anything ,yes it will affect commercial flounders etc but lock it off for for a minimum of 2yrs then stock count/size.I would estimate 3 yrs would be enough. 10% is bugger all if you are talking sna1 .North cape to east cape. 10% of the hauraki gulf will have nil effect.

Stretching from Mangawhai, north of Auckland, to Waihi on the Coromandel Peninsula, the Hauraki Gulf covers 1.2 million hectares of ocean. It is one of New Zealand's most valued and intensively used resources – for food gathering, recreation and conservation.

10% of 1.2 million is stuff all

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/illegal-fishing-net-in-auckland-marine-reserve-caught-pied-shag-sharks-and-eagle-rays-doc-investigating/BDALRZUIGUHFNMYY57HSFTOXBQ/?utm_campaign=nzh_tw&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=nzh_tw#Echobox=1613512117

 

Fishing in a reserve with a long line

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks,Bloody disgusting what people will do.And thats just one case thats made the media how more are there undetected??

Pity they didnt leave it till owners turned up.

On a recent trip on the Manukau e were out around Tipi Tai head(cake island) and there was a net ,reported to Fisheries as set netting banned there due to Hectors frequent the area.Were advised not too remove.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/02/2021 at 6:46 AM, harrytom said:

According to legasea and nzsfc reserves serve no purpose as far as increasing biomass.there is the problem.how much coast do you lock off?? Remember if you lock off 20/30 miles if coast you then put more pressure on remains areas  Take goat island most stock has moved why?.poached lack of food area to small to sustain.

Marine Reserves do little to increase the biomass outside the reserve if the reserve is too small (and not part of a planned larger network of MRs). The MR at Goat Island is a good example - only 5sq km - there are very few snapper just outside the MR because of edge fishing. Even whats in the MR is not as much as it could be. 

Dr.Grace states that the MR's need to be at least 40 sq km each - and carefully selected through out the gulf to catch various types of habitat - again at least 10% of the gulf needs to be MR. 20% would be better. 

No expert here - but that is what the report says and makes sense.

On a happy note I was able to snorkel and see crays in 1.5m of water at Tawharanui the other day - on the little rocky outcrop between Anchor bay and the next one towards the peninsula. Wouldn't it be great to see as much protection of the ocean at Tiri as there is of the land?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...