Local councils have deep pockets due to ratepayers. They welcome court action as as they have a bigger cheque book.
Printable View
Local councils have deep pockets due to ratepayers. They welcome court action as as they have a bigger cheque book.
And to that end, there should be no commercial catch of Kahawai. I believe at the moment it is caught and sent to Aussie to be used in crab pots. How about leaving it alone so at least you could go out with a surfcaster and bring home a feed. It can be bloody hard work to catch a fish off the beach these days dependant on what part of the country you are in.
Firstly I would say be very very careful what you wish for....
Speaking now specifically about snapper 7
Why would you or any other recreational fisher advocate for a lowering of the recreational catch limit of snapper in our finally recovering nicely....getting better year on year snapper fishery?
You do know commercial quota for snapper was increased in our region last year or maybe the one before?
Because they argue snapper are so prolific they cant fish the bay for months (or they run out of quota)
And they are asking for more.....recreational need to grab all the quota they can and hang onto it (legaly not physically ) because once that "share" of the "Total Allowable Catch" is gone we the people will never get it back.
By increasing the snapper quota for commercial and not for recreational (which they of course should have to at least match the comercial ) they have effectively taken the publics fish (yours mine your dads and mine our childrens and neighbors) and given it into OWNERSHIP OF COMERCIAL COMPANYS.
Short of complete societal breakdown civil war type shit we will never get that back.
Gurnard is up for reveiw right now and I suggest you submit and I would politely suggest you submit along the lines that if commercial quota is increased then recreational MUST be raised to match.
Or it is theft from the public by companies/the govt.
While I would like to think it is every kiwis right to catch or gather a feed the sad facts are this.
There are two groups in NZ whos rights to fish are written into law.
COMMERCIAL
And
CUSTOMARY
If you dont belong to one of those two groups you have no right to fish written into law and are at the whim of whoever is in parliament at the time.
NEVER advocate for a reduction in limit for recreational of a recovering abundant species.
YEARS BACK when F&G took size limit off trout in a lot of regions people jumped up n down saying folks would kill all the young trout and none would grow big. not this K1W1 I see it as good thing,small trout that is bleeding CAN be legally kept,instead of chucked back to die...
the whole catch n release thing is a have...if its NOT DONE RIGHT....... there are photos out there of kingfish with hory great hand print sores on them from the catch n release not done right....I would hazard a guess smaller sea fish that are crook dont last long before being eaten....
any fish thats bleeding SHOULD be kept and eaten,its part of your bag limit...
Well as our snapper fishery is doing well getting better year on year and commercial quota has already been increased and most likely will be again I propose that any increase in quota for commercial must be matched for recreational or it is theft of a public resource.
As I said above. All this needs to be area and species specific.
If snapper are in trouble in your area I would propose no fishing for export from that area, must be sold local market.
Prices will come down and pressure will move elsewhere or different species.
Recreational take will then naturally reduce because of the abundant cheap snapper in the markets.
Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk
Yes I do. I submitted against it along with many others as I am sure you did but none of the submissions were listened to and the commercial sector got what it wanted despite the submissions being overwhelmingly against it.
I had no idea, thanks for the heads up, i will definitely submit and head your advice on the angle to take.
To be honest tho it feels a bit like tackling the mafia around here and i doubt any of us will be listened too.
I guess i advocate for an increased minimum size limit and and reduction in daily limit as i am a passionate recreational fisherman who is concerned for our fishery once plundered and now recovering!
In saying that you have a far better understanding of the overall situation than I.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Ten x 10-15 pounders is a lot of fish.
Ten 30cm fish is not a lot of fish.... especially if you are the only one fishing for a large family or only once or twice a year.
For you or I that are able to and do regularly get out for a fish and catch 10 is heaps....I very rarely keep my limit.....
but It pays to remember most people are not in a position to do what we do.
So for those that might get a trip with a friend or on a charter once or twice a year hell yea take Ten I say.
I could support a size increase to 30 tho now that trawlers cannot release small fish alive anymore due to the rule change.
Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk
I never have wanted to catch 25cm fish.
However I agreed with the size in the past because.
It was pretty much all that was possible to be caught from shore here and I think you should be able to catch a feed from shore.
And
Because trawlers had to abide by the size limit too, so I would rather have seen all the 25-30cm snapper they have caught be landed and sold and eaten and most importantly deducted from their quota rather than dumped overboard dead and not counted so they can catch even more.
Nowdays tho with advancements in trawl nets most but not all are using codends that keep the fish alive and swimming mostly untill landed unlike the old days of everything pretty much coming up dead.
So now with the no dumping law that should have been in 30-50-100 years ago the irony is now that for all that time of dead undersized fish being dumped(hence best to have a small limit size) now finally after all that waste the industry over the last few years has finally developed gear that enables most of those undersized fish to actually be released alive and in good condition now they wont be allowed to and they will have to kill them and land them.
Kinda Ironic huh.
So in the past I supported the 25cm for reasons above.
Now locally I would support an increase to 30cm as it is now possible to catch that size from shore reasonabley regularly but mainly because of the law change on "dumping" for commercial
Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk
if 25cm...or 10cm for that matter fish is bleeding when caught,or mishandled...its dead.....just not yet...so it SHOULD BE counted as part of your catch limit....personal integrity and honesty is the only police on the system BUT you keep it and eat it...its used,you chuck it back in and it floats away to be seagull food its wasted resource.
so for me YES if needed to keep it I would like to be able to do it legally.....but bigger is better.....but not if you killing small ones to get them.
oh and you can fill a toast bread sandwich with a 10cm spotty fillet so snapper will do it better.... beer batter is your friend with small fillets.
It is 10 here and has been as long as I can remember.....the fishing gets better every year and commercial take got increased recently and most likely will again soon so why on earth should we cut our own throats to give it to commercial?
The only time I would support a reduction in limit is for a area in trouble and if commercial and customary also take a cut in limit (quota)
Voluntarily reducing rec take for no reason other than to benefit comercial take makes no sense to me at all.
Some fish are pretty hardy....some can survive and heal like 30 percent of there body being bitten out!
Some can be hauled up from over 100m deep and be released fine others are fucked from 10m.
But yes fish handeling education could be better and some species that are a bit fragile and scarce like blue cod here some people probably kill 20 undersized before they get their legal 2 cod.
In our local case the environment courts decision was appealed, and the high Court upheld the decision. It was a benchmark case interpreting the responsibilities of council in managing bethnic biodiversity as written in the RMA. Council doesn't want it. They can't afford it and there is no resource, structure or funding to manage it. The only legal recourse now is to change the RMA. One of my hopes with the hauraki spacial plan is that they will need to change both the qms and the RMA in order to enact the plan. Hopefully that allows for more flexible fishery management and brings it back to mpi to manage and not council.
The scariest part of it all is now any Interest group around the country can take council to court and achieve the same. All they need is for forest and Bird to say the biodiversity of an area is damaged, which by definition every popular reef system around the country is.
I will explain my point, Fur Seals in NZ were reduced in numbers to near extinction. Now there are tens of thousands everywhere along rocky east coast areas. The seal numbers have not been static, they have been increasing exponentially. If the seal numbers were static it would be simple to set fish takes. From 1984 to '92 the rate of increase was 25% per annum. In 2001 the population was estimated at 200,000 so at 25% increase compounding per annum what is the population today ?
If we want a human fish take then all takes have to be balanced with what the stocks can sustain. If we set an allowable fishing take today for a species and next year seals are taking 25% more from that stock compounding, it must put the fish stock under pressure and throw the numbers out. If seals are left unchecked the fishing take will need to be reduced each year to keep the total take sustainable.
I would not be surprised to find that the increase in seal numbers around Banks Pen. has put food resources for Hectors Dolphins under pressure.
Not that I am defending introduced Salmon over indigenous seals, but Salmon numbers here have graphed down in lock step as Seals have increased. This happened in North America leading to the lifting of total protection and seal culls
If seals are problem how is it that many large fish were caught in the ‘early days’ when seals were apparently still prolific?
Maybe because back then humans were less prolific…
Remember seals were hunted from around year 1800 here and very quickly the seals in the areas later populated by settlers were gone, the seal hunters having to concentrate on areas like Fiordland and islands south of NZ. Settler likely hardly saw a seal. Maori populations dropped too, from 200,000 to 20,000 due to disease thus reducing the fish take. Maori culled seals from their fishing grounds historically.
What also needs considered is that there was not the vast quota takes we have now. I just see seals as one part of the puzzle that has been ignored
Locking off those reefs in tga isn't going to do anything for fish stocks, it will look pretty to all the bottle diver tourists, they need to be looking at the harbours where the juvenile fish are.
The hauraki is the most depressing dive I have ever done, the bottom that was scallops and sand is now silt/mud and fan worms, there is so many issues with our fisheries and alot of it is out of sight out of mind for fishos too, people bringing up kingy heads until the sharks get full and they can bring one up is another one that people don't seem to care about.
A positive that I have seen is the crayfish in the bop, we never really looked for crays a few years ago as it was like hunting for the last ones, but the rec quota got cut by half and the comms cut by 80percent, the bounce back has been great to see, there is more numbers and now they are getting bigger, bit of a rant but there is problems on both sides(rec and comm) and also run off etc things like these where all parties are around the same table can only be good for the fisheries
How about just shopping all inshore fishing for 20 years?
I bet that 20 years down the track everyone is pleased they did it.
Times change,just like the ban on native logging in the 90s. Could you imagine people's outrage if some logging gang started a clear fell in Westland and exported the logs ?
They seem to like variety. I have watched them at the Waiau river mouth in Nth canty catching flounders. They swam all the way from the sea into lake Mckerrow and cleaned out the sea run trout - a food source that is not natural to them, so they obviously can learn and adapt.
In four years time there will be twice as many as now, what will we do then ?
No anchoring is a good point. Just imagine the carnage the 10-15 ships are causing out from Tauranga that wait there for days on end! They will be flattening everything! Some are anchoring out by mayor island
NO the major part of their diet is squid off the continental shelf.. variety has nothing to do with anything. Like Berg said they will eat hoki at the back of a trawler, that is opportunism just as is catching a flounder, my guess they would also eat a trout and a herring and a salmon but the major part of the fur seals diet is caught off the continental shelf and it is squid.
I have no idea what we will do in 4yrs time, lets face that IF your guess is correct ... but to go out and slaughter a heap of seals because a seal is seen eating a flounder or a salmon or supposedly cleaned out the entire sea run trout population of lake Mckerrow...nah.
the other week at 11 sitting at road works along the coast...next truck driver in que says "come look at this" walks over to road barrier and shines torch...there are seals right up next to the road...lots of them..... the barriers are there to stop them going onto road and under trucks.....bumpity bumpity bump....big meaty mess.
was awesome to see so many of them there...the changed coastline has given them MORE rocks n beach to bask on....
So lets both accept that squid is the major part of their diet. Is squid always available or do they move around ? Is the squid under quota management, if it is wont the exponential growth in the seal population combined with the commercial take put the squid resource under pressure potentially collapsing it, or will seals exploit other fish as a food resource ?
Wot you said :thumbsup:
50 years ago, I used to take my girls friends du jour, to Takapuna beach at night, to gaze at the sea and well, shag them.
90% of the time we could watch the trawlers working up and down the Rangitoto channel. This trawling was illegal. They would do one direction, with their nav lights on, then switch off the nav lights and do 3, 4, 5 or more passes with no lights and then turn lights on and go home.
The reason I could see them, when the lights were off, is that they had lights in the cabin and cigarettes in their mouths, easy for a young man with good eyesight.
I coincidentally, had a girlfriend, whose brothers were all trawler fishermen and whose father was a, wait for it, fisheries inspector. The Dad would take all the confiscated seafood home. The Brothers would bring by-catch home. Mind you in those days, the snapper by-catch were all the size of goats. I've seen snapper that needed two guys to lift.
As a kid I could go out, on Saturday morning with Dad, off Northcote point and after an hour, bring back enough fish for us, for a couple of days and for several of our neighbours also.
Unfortunately the the commercial fishing industry is predicated on rape and pillage, maximum profit for shareholders, is the only rule they take heed of.
My opinion, because the fish can't see the line on the map. There's a good argument to expand the reserve at Goat Island, Leigh, because the catch rate just outside the reserve, is depleting the populations inside the reserve. Triple or quadruple it in my view.
Used to be on Pakatoa Island, the cooks would dump the kitchen scraps from the hotel, off the wharf. Some very very big Trevally were caught there...
Page 12 summary
https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rc...rVz-Q4zBvFEWCu
I know the Jelly fish are out of control, I didn't know that was also the case with squid.
All I am suggesting is a pragmatic approach setting emotion aside to achieve a sustainable balance. Do seals or any other non endangered creature have any more or any less right to life ?