Hauraki Gulf/Bay of Plenty Regional Recreational Forum –

Date: 14 August 2007

Venue: MFish Auckland

Time: 3.00pm to 8.30pm

Present:

George Johnston, Peter Stevenson, Peter Hempleman, Rick Pollock, Anthony Olsen, John Taunton-Clark (MFish), Alan Moore (MFish), Graeme McGregor (MFish), Ian Bright (MFish)

Apologies:

Draft Summary of Discussion

1. Matters Arising From Previous Minutes

Fisheries Plan Update

The 2007/08 financial year will see the Northland Scallops Fisheries Plan, and on the west coast, the Northwest Finfish Fisheries Plan being progressed.

MFish is proposing to create an advisory group comprised of tangata whenua and stakeholders to assist MFish in the development of each draft plan.

A discussion followed that raised three issues

• similarities between the role of the recreation forum and the fisheries plan advisory group.
• that MFish had many initiatives on the go, fisheries plans, standards etc and that from a stakeholders perspective it was difficult to keep pace with these changes and ensuring that the various processes were appropriately linked
• local area management tools, their, use, hierarchy and operation.

Kahawai Appeal

It was noted that the kahawai case had been appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Ministry was successful in getting a stay on the requirement set by the High Court to review the TAC for KAH 1, and to review the setting of allowances and TACC for all kahawai stocks until the Court of Appeal process is complete.

Sustainability Round and Reviews

The submission period has closed for the sustainability round. MFish is preparing the final advice papers for the Minister. Decisions are due for implementation on 1 October.

Action

Members will be advised of the Minister’s decision on the sustainability matters.

2. Compliance Matters

Mr Bright gave a general update on compliance matters in the region.

Mr Bright noted that the Ministry stands by the stick-on fish ruler. If people are stopped by compliance and fish found to be undersized, inform the officer of the use of the stick-on ruler and enable the officer to measure the fish against the stick-on ruler.

Some members consider that the mixed bag limit of 20 fish could be confusing in situations where there was an abundance of species.

Some members raised a concern that whilst the Coast Watch series was an excellent vehicle for MFish, some recent programmes did not display MFish staff in good light. The Ministry does have a vetting process for the programme.

Action

The comments regarding the Coast Watch programme will be passed to the relevant person.

3. Broadbill Sword Fish (SWO)

Mr McGregor gave a very detailed account of the history behind the broadbill swordfish fishery.

• Japanese targeted SWO in the 1980s.
• In the late 1980’s New Zealand established the EEZ and banned Japanese fishing.
• Recreational fishers were worried about the development of the swordfish fishery and in the 1990s recreational anglers and MFish agreed that marlin would be a non-commercial species. A trade off was that SWO could be taken commercially but only as bycatch.
• The tuna fishery started developing in the 1990s and reached a peak of 150 vessels in 2000. This fishery was outside the quota management system (QMS). Fishers used long lines. They caught tuna, marlin and SWO. They were prohibited from landing marlin but could land SWO.
• In 2001 in recognition of the effects of high seas fishing on highly migratory species a regional management commission was established (Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC).
• In recognition of the effects of fishing on these species, the WCPFC requested countries to fish with “restraint”.
• Whilst SWO was a bycatch species only, it was noted that some fishers used light sticks to enhance catch. It was argued that the light sticks were being used to enhance their target fishery, tuna. Light sticks improve tuna catch by 30%, but increase the SWO bycatch by 70%.
• In 2004 SWO was brought into the QMS. When fish are brought into the QMS, quota is allocated to fishers on the basis of their reported catch during the 1990-92 period. However, there was little fishing for SWO at that time and hence little catch history entitlement. The SWO TACC was set at 885 tonnes (which was below the peak harvest) and unallocated quota sold by public tender.
• The majority of the quota was purchased by a New Zealand company with an overseas address, however it met the criteria of a New Zealand company.
• In order to get the best return from their quota, the company has targeted SWO. This has aggrieved those tuna fishers without SWO quota that require SWO quota to cover their bycatch.
• This company used Australian vessels. As overseas vessels, they were required to have observers on board. A high level of seabird (albatross) catch was observed. The Minister enacted regulations to minimise the seabird catch; long lines to be set at night and mandatory use of tori lines. These measures were successful.
• The Australian vessels have currently been withdrawn from the fishery and some of the quota sold to Talley’s.

Mr McGregor also spoke on the marlin fishery.

• New Zealand recognises the importance and value of marlin as a non-commercial fishery. Many overseas countries do not share the same philosophy, for example, in Australia, striped marlin is a commercial species, blue and black marlin are non-commercial only. There is also a high sea fishery for marlins.
• New Zealand is trying to influence the WCPFC to encourage other countries to follow our lead, however progress to date has been slower than hoped.
• The WCFPC has placed limits on the number of vessels that can fish south of latitude 15^o South however this is an effort control and does not address catch. New Zealand would prefer to establish catch limits.

Action

None required

4. Snapper 1 and Snapper 8

Mr Taunton-Clark provided an overview of the Snapper 1 fishery.

• Stock status

· Most recent stock assessment in 2000:

· Informed by commercial catch histories, estimates of non-commercial catches, longline CPUE indices, biomass estimates from tagging surveys in 1984 and 1995, biological parameters, recruitment indices (SST and trawl survey of 1+ age fish in Hauraki Gulf), and other inputs

· Scenario for 1999 (base case assumptions) was:

• East Northland recruited biomass approximately at B_MSY and expected to exceed that level by 2020 with 67% probability
• Hauraki Gulf/Bay of Plenty recruited biomass less than B_MSY but expected to exceed that level by 2020 with 100% probability

· Scenario for 2007 (base case projections):

• East Northland and H Gulf/Bay of Plenty both above B_MSY

· Uncertainties

• No absolute abundance estimate since 1995, hence programmed tagging survey for 2008-2009 (release phase)
• Fish movements between sub-stocks (design work being done to better incorporate this in the model)
• Non-commercial catch levels (over-flight and boat ramp surveys to obtain improved estimates)
• Recruitment and growth variability (environmental conditions – cold seasons, late seasons)
• Catch trends

· Commercial

• Catches at or near TACC for past 9 years (between 97% and 100.5%, except 3% over-catch in 2004-05 (largely by one fisher))

· Recreational

• Previous estimates considered to be uncertain and potentially unreliable
• Recent aerial over-flight and boat ramp surveys provide improved estimates –
• Total for SNA 1 in 2004-05 was 2210.8 tonnes
• 2003-04 estimate of 1334.2 tonnes for Hauraki Gulf
• 2004-05 estimate of 1276.0 tonnes for Hauraki Gulf, 503.3 tonnes for east Northland, and 431.5 tonnes for Bay of Plenty
• In the Hauraki Gulf very similar for the full year in 2003-04 and 2004-05, but markedly different seasonal patterns

Discussion on Snapper 8 was deferred until the next meeting.

Action

SNA 8 be placed on the agenda for the next meeting.

5. Update - Proposed Aotea Marine Reserve

The Minister of Conservation has asked the Minister of Fisheries for concurrence. MFish is anticipating providing the Minister with a final advice paper some time between the end of September and the end of December 2007. For further information contact Randall Bess at MFish, Head Office

Action

None required.

6. Marine Protected Areas – draft classification and protection standard

The draft classification and protection standard was discussed. Some members stated that they found the document difficult to read and understand. Another member wished better explanation of the relationship of the paper with other local area management initiatives under the Act.

Action

It was suggested that members consider making submissions to raise these matters.

7. Telson Clipping of Crayfish

As the member wishing to discuss this issue was absent, this issue has been carried over to the next meeting.

8. Coromandel Scallop - bag limit, size, in-season review

Concern was raised about three matters relating to the management of Coromandel scallops:

1. The non synchronisation of the commercial and recreational scallop season, and concern raised by recreational fishers about commercial fishers harvesting the recreational areas.
2. The reason for the difference in the commercial (90mm) and non-commercial (100mm) minimum size limit.
3. It was also questioned why the in-season review was based on surveys of the commercial beds only.

Mr McGregor gave an account of the fishery and the reasons for the regulations and the in-season review survey. The main points were as follows:

• The commercial and recreational areas in the Coromandel scallop fishery are spatially separated. There are 15 areas where commercial fishers cannot fish. Many of these areas were originally established as voluntary measures but have since been regulated. In effect, the recreational fishery is at lest 15% of the fishery (by area). These areas tend to be the shallower more accessible areas. No similar restriction applied to recreational fishers and they can fish within the commercial areas. Regardless of the commencement date for the season, commercial fishers are prohibited from fishing the recreational beds.

• The differential size limit is primarily as a result of two issues. Firstly the commercial beds are located in deeper water than the recreational beds. Scallops in these areas tend to grow slower and mature at a smaller size (90mm) than those in shallower water (100mm). Secondly, commercial fishers use a Victorian box dredge for scalloping. It has a high catch rate but also results in a high damage rate. Accordingly, the “other fisheries-related mortality” allocation for scallops is about 1/3 of the TACC. Scallops “hit” by the dredge also get a check in their growth rate. The 90mm size limit enables commercial fishers to reduce the amount of dredging necessary to harvest their ACE and accordingly reduces wastage.

• The surveys to inform the in-season review are cost recovered from the commercial fishers. An in-season review is only initiated if requested by the commercial fishers. Usually only commercial beds are surveyed, however, this year the survey included some recreational beds. This is to get some baseline information on the beds and to assess whether surveys of commercial beds can be used as an indicator of the quality of the recreational beds.

9. Deemed Value

MFish has recently released a new standard for deemed values. This outlines how MFish will manage deemed values. This standard was reported at the previous meeting. In accordance with the standard, MFish is reviewing deemed values to make them more effective as stopping commercial fishers fishing above the level of the TACC, whilst retaining the incentive to land fish.

MFish has, through the October 2007 sustainability round, proposed a series of changes to deemed value. A number of submissions from recreational interests were received that raised the issue of subtracting fish caught above the TACC from the following year.

Action.

Members will be advised of the Minister’s decision on this matter.

10. Hokianga Accord – recognition by MFish

As the member wishing to discuss this issue was absent, this issue has been carried over to the next meeting.

11. National Recreational Forum Hui

MFish is proposing holding a national hui for members of recreational forums. The purpose:

• To bring together representatives from each forum to discuss:
• How forums are performing
• What members individual experiences have been so far, and
• Workshop ideas for improving things
• To discuss national recreational issues of interest to all forums

It is proposed that two members of each forum to attend

The proposed timing is between 17 and 30 November.

Location: Napier or Wellington.

Costs: MFish will cover costs.

Due to a number of members being absent, the meeting decided to address nomination after the meeting. I suggest the following process:

1. People wishing to attend to forward their names to Alan, including preferred dates.

2. If more than two nominations are received, I will forward these to each member for a vote. All members (not MFish staff attendees) including those nominated may vote.

3. The two people with the two highest vote counts will be put forward for attendance. In the case of a tie, the two people will be left to discuss who should attend.

Action

Members consider the above process email Alan as to their agreement of otherwise to the process. Alan will call for names after I have received comments from all persons.

12. Recreational Forum Management

• The meeting spoke of the need to know what other forums are discussing.
• For MFish to get a level of consistency in the agendas for each forum.
• For MFish to have better process to act upon the outcomes from the forums.
• The forum also felt that MFish needed to develop a more active promotion/ education processes.

These are the sorts of matters that could be discussed at the national recreational forum hui.

Agendas and meeting summaries all recreational forums are available of the MFish website. Members should take the opportunity to view these.

Action

These matters to be put forward for the agenda of the national recreational forum hui.

Alan to give effect to the bullet points 2 and 3.

13. Consideration of Endorsement of “The People Submission”

The members considered that the Forum was set up as an apolitical body and that it was not appropriate for the Forum to endorse the submission.

Date for next meeting

If the meetings are held quarterly on the second Tuesday of the month, the next meeting of the forum is Tuesday 13 November 2007. This date is immediately before the national hui. We could change the meeting date to after the national hui so the attending members can report back to the forum, if its members so wish.

Action

Members to confirm meeting or comment as per above.