Northland non-commercial fishing Forum – fifth Meeting
Date: Tuesday 14th November 2006
Venue: A’Fare function and reception lounge, 197 Lower Dent Street, Whangarei
Time: 4:00 – 9:00pm
Present:
- Paul Batten, Des Subritzky, Geoff Stone, Doug McColl, John Torr, John Holdsworth, John Chibnall, Simon Howard, Graeme Heapy, Stephanie Hill, Kim Drummond
Apologies:
Shared fisheries policy
Kim Drummond presented the shared fisheries policy package that is currently out for consultation. Submissions close 28 February 2007.
Main discussion points:
Some concern the timeframe was too short, particularly since consultation was occurring over summer and the Christmas period. KD indicated that there would still be opportunities for informal discussions and input, but that formal submissions that would be incorporated into the summary of submissions had to be received by the end of February. After that, the next formal chance to make comments would be when government consults on any proposed legislative changes. A public meeting was to take place in Whangarei on Wednesday 22nd of November.
-
Information on catch and value
Discussion about the difficulties of defining value, in particular the intrinsic values of non-commercial fishing. KD agreed that this is one of the challenges the policy is attempting to address. Some recreational fishers felt existing information on recreational catches is not as poor as the policy document suggests. There was also debate about the proposal to gain further information on recreational catches through charter boat reporting. GS noted it would be a small sample size, and that the administration costs would be high relative to the information received. Although KD noted MSA records indicate an increasing number of boats registered as charter boats, there was some doubt as to the portion of those boats actively engaged in the industry. A risk of pushing people into blackmarket activities if reporting requirements were too arduous was raised. Some others saw more benefits than disadvantages, in terms of increased information about who is operating and where (which could be useful for smaller area management). However, it was acknowledged that obtaining such information was not the stated purpose of the policy (which aimed to gain more information on recreational catches and value). The risk of non-reporting or mis-reporting was also seen as a potential problem.
Discussion about the proposal to manage key recreational species at higher biomass levels and to set faster rebuild timeframes for depleted fisheries. It was noted that we lack good information on the biomass level that can support maximum sustainable yield (BMSY) for most inshore stocks. GS noted that even without information on BMSY, policies could be put in place that favoured the recreational sector. For example, there could be more focus on the size frequency of fish populations (recognising that availability of fish of a certain size was of most importance to recreational fishers).
KD noted that if forum members agreed that a different management target (i.e. managing above BMSY) was needed to achieve recreational values, then they should indicate this support as part of their submissions.
There was a question about whether a law change was actually required to achieve this outcome, because the existing legislation allows for management at or above BMSY. Managing above BMSY was also seen as an option that was increasingly being pursued internationally. KD agreed there is less biological risk in managing at higher stock levels but it impacted on utilisation. The proposed changes would be to make it explicit that the intention was to manage above BMSY for utilisation/value purposes.
For stocks currently below BMSY, it was signaled that sacrifices might need to be made across all sectors to achieve rebuilds.
In relation to rebuild times, it was noted the Fisheries Act does not currently give specific guidance. For example, the rebuild chosen for the west coast snapper fishery might not meet the goals of recreational fishers, although the Minister is meeting his obligations to rebuild the fishery (by setting a TAC that will move the stock towards or above BMSY). It was also felt that there are currently over fishing practices that can act to cancel out any TAC/C cuts, in particular through the deeming of commercial catches above the TACC and by dumping. KD agreed enforcement would be important and noted that a review of the deemed value framework was underway.
Although they noted the proposed priority for recreational catch was not absolute (proposal is 20% of recreational allowance), forum members were pleased to have some discussion on the table about a priority for recreational fishers. However, they observed it was only relevant at very low biomass levels or when rapid rebuild rates were set. In the case of the former, forum members considered by the time biomass was that low, people would probably have stopped fishing recreationally anyway. There is also a difficulty in comparing values of commercial and recreational sectors (for reductions in catch required up until the final 20% of the recreational allowance kicks in). KD noted there are international advances in valuation techniques that try and calculate the marginal value of a fish to a particular sector.
In relation to baseline allocations, it was noted that many important stocks don’t yet have non-commercial allowances set. Such allowances could be set through fish plans. Different ways of adjusting allowances were also discussed. It was noted that if the biomass level in a fishery is more favourable, that a proportional adjustment to commercial and non-commercial allowances may not be so bad, and would have the advantage of simplicity as well as certainty.
The proposed increase in focus on area/stock specific management was seen as very attractive. Some concern that restrictions on trailer boat movement was on the cards, but this was not the case. However, the policy proposed that rules might need to be different in different areas (e.g. differential bag limits or other controls). The basis for such management would be value (rather than existing processes e.g. dispute resolution that are based on conflict).
Discussion about timeframes for implementation, given a concern that fisheries are still declining. KD noted that the Ministry’s general operational programme still continues. Other fishers felt key northern fisheries such as snapper had been fishing fairly well recently.
MFish update
The MFish bulletin update was presented. Key topics were:
- Shared fisheries
- Bay of Plenty iwi forum signs MOU with Ministry of Fisheries
- Snapper tagging in Hauraki Gulf
- Draft fisheries standards released. Of particular interest are the consultation standard and the harvest strategy standard.
- Sustainability and regulatory measures review
- Recreational regulation review
- Northland scallop catch limit
- Maui’s dolphins
- Inter-tidal shellfish monitoring. Des felt that toheroa and tuatua stocks also needed to be monitored, particularly at Ripiro Beach.
- Te Roopu Awatea national hui
Actions:
- Distribute more information on fisheries standards to forum members. The draft standards are now available on the web at http://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/Consultations/Fisheries+Standards/ Printed copies are available from Steph.
- Advise group when Minister has made his decisions on the recreational regulations for review.
- Discuss monitoring of toheroa and tuatua stocks with Des.
Members’ updates
- PB: crayfish poor at Mangawhai. Scallops in southern Bream Bay in poor condition. Northland Regional Council has released use and value maps to help in planning for aquaculture management areas.
- DS: mullet is fishing well; flounder is patchy. Overall, fisheries have been fairly patchy. Des is keen on discussing management of Kaipara fisheries with the Ministry.
- GS: Bay fishing has been patchy, because of cold water depressing fishing. Snapper are there but not biting. Conditions not yet right for spawning.
- DMcC: similar. Locals along Tokerau Beach had been complaining about trawlers at night, but the vessels in question were small longliners.
- JT: huge sunfish seen on the pontoons at Paraua Bay. Harbour has been contaminated three times in a 3 month period with sewerage overflow. A large marina development is going ahead by the new marine reserve.
- GH: large crays are common in Bay of Islands, all shedding their shells. Lots of large snapper are also present, feeding on the crays. Not much kingfish around. Canterbury wreck has gotten the go ahead, and is seen as a very positive development for the Bay. Agrees that scallops are in poor condition, possibly linked to water temperatures.
- JH: High Court kahawai legal challenge has been held up because the judge was sick. Request for information on kahawai catch by purse seine by target species.
- JC: snapper fishing OK for Bay of Islands. High speed boat traffic a problem in the Bay of Islands, because it scares school fish.
Actions:
- There is still interest in having NRC attend a future meeting – MFish to bear in mind for agenda of future forum meeting.
- Kahawai/purse seine information for JH.
- Information on specific fisheries closures/management measures for Bay of Islands for GS (pamphlet or similar to give to public, including both commercial and non-commercial fishing restrictions).
- Link to DOC resource ‘area-based restrictions in the NZ marine environment’ is http://www.doc.govt.nz/Conservation/Marine-and-Coastal/Fishing/Area-based-restrictions/index.asp
- Northern amateur regulation pamphlets for GS.
Other agenda items
Northland scallop catch limit
DMcC was interested in the decision making process for Northland scallops. He had discussed this with Todd Sylvester before the meeting, and outlined briefly his understanding of the situation. For non-commercial fishers, it was hard to understand why the commercial catch limit would increase in a good season, but with no change to the recreational bag limit. This is partly because the commercial fishery is managed at a low baseline catch limit, with an opportunity for it to increase when surveys indicate it will be a good season. In contrast, the recreational bag limit does not tend to change from year to year (and has not been decreased in poor years, although the commercial catch limit is lower in such years). There was also interest in the survey results that indicated it would be a good season, because various members felt scallops were in poor condition.
Harvest of mussels
DS has concerns about over-harvest of mussels in the Kaipara, which he has noticed particularly since change of regulations last year to now allow use of SCUBA to harvest them. Other forum members are not aware of problems in their areas, and mussels are plentiful on the east coast.
Action:
- SH to discuss with inshore team.
Information on customary tools
JT queried about information on customary tools referred to in a recent article of customary management.
Action:
- Referred to information distributed at a previous meeting. JT to respond if any remaining questions.
Next meeting:
End of January or start of February (in order to have time to discuss consultation and stock harvest standards before end of February).
Location: Bay of Islands.