National’ regional recreational fisheries forum meeting Paul noted that MFish may hold a national recreational forum meeting at the end of this year, potentially in October or November. The idea to hold a national meeting had been around since regional recreational forums were developed, and it is intended that representatives from each regional forum would attend the national meeting. Paul would provide more details at the next meeting, at which time the forum could talk about who they want to send as representatives.
Potential fishing issues within Wellington shellfish beds Paul stated that he had spoken to a councilor with the Hutt City Council who had received concerns about overfishing of some local shellfish beds, particularly in the Eastbourne area. He asked whether MFish was aware of any similar concerns. Paul said he had agreed to raise this matter with the forum. Jim O’Brien reported there were no cockles or pipi found along the beach in that area, but there are large mussels and lots of small paua. He noted he sees a lot of people collecting shellfish at this beach and suggested that a compliance officer visit the area (on a Sunday) to check that people were abiding with the amateur fishing rules and to provide more education. Marine reserves Kevin raised an issue about the Minister’s concurrence role when considering marine reserve applications. He noted that the Minister when deciding whether to grant concurrence was required to consider whether a proposed marine reserve would have an ‘undue adverse effect’ on recreational fishing. However, he believed the Minister failed to consider this test for the Tapuae marine reserve application as there was no robust research available in which to consider the effects on recreational fishers. Kevin informed the forum that he intended to write a letter to the Minister outlining his concerns.
Bluefin tuna Kevin raised concerns about the Minister’s decision to set a recreational allowance (within the TAC) for bluefin tuna. He believed the allowance was set too low to reflect actual recreational catches and was based on insufficient information. He stated the allowance equated to about five individual tuna. He asked for a copy of MFish’s final advice paper sent to the Minister. Bob said was concerned about sustainability of the fishery, as there was little research on the size of the stock. Action: 7) Paul will send Kevin a copy of the final advice paper.
Mataitai reserves Kevin voiced his concern about inadequate consultation on mätaitai reserve applications. He believes the consultation process was flawed as it was only available to those that lived nearby. Kevin believed MFish should consult with the wider public, especially as people travel large distances to fish in specific areas. Kevin was also concerned that past MFish presentations on mätaitai reserves failed to explain the full implications of mätaitai reserves on fishers. He provided an example where MFish had said that a mätaitai could not exclude recreational fishers from fishing within a mätaitai reserve, but failed to explain that kaitiaki could exclude recreational fishers by asking the Minister to regulate. Paul noted that a mätaitai reserve could not exclude people based on race. Action: 8) Paul agreed to pass on Kevin’s concerns to the Spatial Allocations Manager.
Recreational crayfish research Kevin advised members that he had submitted a research proposal to MFish last year to estimate recreational crayfish catches in Taranaki. This proposal was unsuccessful. Kevin noted this research would be easy to carry out, and would provide good information recreational crayfish catches. Paul agreed to resubmit the proposal on the forum’s behalf into the upcoming research planning round for 2007-08. Action: 9) Paul to resubmit the recreational crayfish research proposal into research planning round for 2007-08. Mahanga Bay research proposal Bob wanted to know the status of the Mahanga Bay research proposal. Jim Mikoz asked that MFish provide waypoints using WGS84 for the proposal as the grid points displayed on the MFish supplied chart could not be converted into WGS84 by him or by using the formula supplied by MFish. He had contacted Land Information NZ and they also could also not convert them. Action: 10) Paul will provide members with a response on the Mahanga Bay research proposal. Pukerua Bay closure Jim Mikoz expressed concern whether the reinstatement of the closed area for another two to four years would improve local fish and shellfish stocks given the Minister had reported the closure would improve fishstocks. He requested a copy of MFish’s final advice paper on the Pukerua Bay temporary closure. Action: 11) Paul will send Jim Mikoz a copy of the final advice paper. |