Hot off the press - here's the Stuart Nash, the Minister’s decision letter re catch limits for 32 fish stocks:
Links:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dear Fishers,
The Minister of Fisheries announced new catch limits for 32 fish stocks on Wednesday. Following on from his announcement, he has released his decision letter today.
To read his full decision letter, including the rationale for changes to specific fish stocks, such as tarakihi, Southern bluefin tuna and Kaipara scallops,
click here.
The first section of the Minister’s decision letter is provided below:
2018 October Sustainability Round
General issues
A number of submitters raised a range of generic issues which apply to the legislative framework, fisheries management system and/or processes. The Fisheries New Zealand decision document contains a detailed analysis and response to these points. However, I will outline my views on some of some of the matters raised to provide some understanding of my view as the Minister of Fisheries.
I continue to be impressed and heartened by the number of submissions I receive on fisheries issues, and the passion and capability of the people and representative organisations that submit them. I have taken the time to go through the advice presented to me by Fisheries New Zealand, which contains a summary of all of the submissions, in detail, from cover to cover. I have also specifically looked at a range of submissions in full so that I can be clear on the position of the submitters, and also because I was particularly interested in the detailed analysis and interpretation of my obligations that they contained.
Timeframes for consultation
A number of submitters expressed concern about the timeframe for consultation on options for changes to sustainability measures. I am advised by Fisheries New Zealand that the consultation timeframe is limited by a range of processes that provide input to the management process and the requirement to have measures in place before the start of the fishing year. In particular, the important role of the science working groups in reviewing the new scientific information that forms the evidence base for options on management changes.
I understand these limitations. However, I am looking to trial a longer consultation phase for the next round in order to see if this meets the needs of key submitting stakeholders. I expect to see Fisheries New Zealand engaging meaningfully with stakeholders and iwi in order to ensure that information is made available and opportunity provided to work through problems and find solutions. Getting buy-in, or at least understanding, of management approaches is important for them to have the best chance of success.
I am keen to make sure that we operate processes that ensure sufficient opportunity to have a say. I also support the idea of taking different engagement approaches to key shared fisheries, so that we can allow longer for discussion on changes and approaches. I have asked Fisheries New Zealand to review the sustainability measures process, to ensure that consultation approaches and timeframes are fit for purpose.
Allowance for all other sources of mortality caused by fishing
While reviewing the options presented to me by Fisheries New Zealand in final advice, it became clear that a consistent approach to calculating the allowance for all other sources of mortality caused by fishing was lacking. While I appreciate that the information to inform this allowance is, by its nature, uncertain, I believe it is reasonable to consider some basic criteria. To this end, I have made the decision to set an allowance for all other sources of mortality caused by fishing at a minimum of 10% of the TACC for inshore stocks that are taken predominantly by trawl.
I consider this allowance is likely to be highest in fisheries where trawl is the predominant method, based on the best available scientific, anecdotal and compliance information. I am aware that this information varies in quantity and reliability between species and areas. I also note that, in some cases, this information suggests that the allowance could be considerably larger than 10%, but I consider a generic 10% best reflects the overall level of uncertainty in this information across all of the stocks taken predominantly by the trawl method. Where there is particular information to suggest the allowance should be either higher or lower than 10%, then I will reflect that in my decision.
I am keen that information to support the setting of this allowance is improved. I consider that the requirement to report all catch of stocks below minimum legal size as part of the introduction of digital monitoring is long overdue. I intend to create strong incentives to ensure mortality of fish below the minimum legal size is minimised so that these fish can recruit into our fisheries, and more importantly, have an opportunity to breed.
Customary Allowance
In setting a TACC I must set an allowance for customary non-commercial fishing, acting consistently with the provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992. That Act provides that the extent of Māori rights and interests in fishing are to be provided through regulations made under the Fisheries Act 1996.
I have considered the extent of customary non-commercial fishing conducted under the relevant customary fishing regulations, noting that some regulations do not require catches to be reported to Fisheries New Zealand. While acknowledging the uncertainty around the final figures in relation to current or actual fishing effort, I have made very few changes to the status quo. I would like future decisions to be based on better information on current or actual harvest and officials will consult on a way forward over the coming months. When better information on harvest becomes available, I will reconsider these allowances.
Allocation
In relation to allocation of fishing allowances between sectors, the Fisheries Act outlines, and the courts have confirmed, the considerable discretion that I have. There is no priority accorded any sector by the Act. I am also not obliged to meet any sector’s needs in full, and I can consider a variety of information in reaching a decision on how to allocate. I can give weight to the proportions of existing allocations or decide to alter those proportions based on a range of factors, including what might deliver best value from utilisation of the fishery.
Having said that, I recognise that providing a level of certainty around the basis for allocation decisions is of benefit. Where stakeholders are able, I am open to giving weight to collective agreement around allocation through fisheries plans or other mechanisms. I urge stakeholders to consider the discretion afforded by the Act as an opportunity to work together to achieve their desired outcomes in relation to allocation.
Shelving
The use of shelving as a tool to achieve a reduction in commercial catch has been raised by both Te Ohu Kaimoana and industry in submissions and discussions since I became Minister. I understand the benefits associated with shelving from an industry perspective: it promotes collective action; it allows faster response to changes in abundance; it provides certainty around allocation decisions and it prevents possible issues associated with 28N rights.
I am also advised by Fisheries New Zealand that, although there is ambiguity in the use of voluntary tools such as shelving and they are not directly referred to in the Act, they consider there is discretion for me to take planned shelving arrangements into account when making my decisions on a case by case basis. However, shelving cannot be used as a substitute for an appropriately set TAC as required under section 13. I take this to mean that shelving is available as an interim tool to reduce catch over a defined time period where, for example, there may be considerable uncertainty over the need for a change to the TAC and more information is being gathered. Obviously, if that situation arose then I would also need to be satisfied as to the risk of the TAC and TACC being fully fished, i.e. the certainty that a shelving arrangement would operate successfully, and the impact on the stock if it did not.
I consider there is more policy work to be done in defining the circumstances in which shelving might be considered. I also note that wider consideration may want to be given to whether the Act currently reflects the value of shelving as a management tool adequately.
Shelving has been proposed in relation to one stock under review as part of this sustainability round (east coast tarakihi). A proposal to shelve Annual Catch Entitlement was received from the fishing industry in relation to the four quota management stocks that include east coast tarakihi. I have considered the specific circumstances of that proposal and outlined my views on it, in the appropriate section below.
28N rights
These rights were generated at the time of implementation of the Quota Management System in 1986. I am sympathetic to the frustrations of 28N rights holders who were allocated these rights in return for a reduction to their Individual Transferable Quota, and the concerns of existing rights holders who may not receive full return from their effort in ensuring sustainable utilisation of fisheries resources as a result of preferential allocation. I understand that industry and Te Ohu Kaimoana are working with Fisheries New Zealand on options for resolution. Once I receive a report from this process, I will then consider how best to address this longstanding problem, but I am serious in developing a methodology for resolving this contentious issue.
Innovation
I am determined to promote innovation in the way we manage and use our fisheries and the way we market products domestically and internationally. The way that the majority of inshore finfish are caught is largely unchanged since the 1950s. The way we operated then is much less acceptable now. Without change Government will be forced to intervene and also, as of recently, local authorities have acted to address local community concerns.
I intend to create stronger incentives for innovation via strengthening of the legislative framework. Landing and discards will be a key focus. I am keen to work with all sectors and iwi on how this change might best occur.
I understand Fisheries New Zealand is working with industry on how best to support gear innovation at the fisher, rather than company, level. I strongly support this work. I am personally aware of fishers driving to innovate, and I am sure there are large numbers of others that have innovative ideas, but need some help putting them into place.
I have asked Fisheries New Zealand to advise me on how we might best encourage innovation. This is not just a job for Government, Fisheries New Zealand will need to talk to a wide range of people in preparing that advice. I look forward to receiving it in early 2019.
To read the Minister’s full decision letter, including his rationale for changes to specific fish stocks, such as tarakihi and Southern bluefin tuna, and Kaipara scallops click here.
View the full consultation page here.
Please pass this information on to anyone who may be interested.
Kind regards,
Recreational Fisheries - Inshore Fisheries Management
Fisheries New Zealand – Tini a Tangaroa
Pastoral House | PO Box 2526 | Wellington | New Zealand
Web: fisheries.govt.nz
Contact us about Recreational Fisheries
[email protected]