| herby wrote:|
What would you prefer - no management, or poor management?
It would be nice to have a government with the balls to just reduce various TACCs and be done with it.
| cirrus wrote:|
Quote." Rec fishing licences being a key part way fishing should be managed."
Since when has our inshore fishery been managed. Exploited would be more to the point. So why would a licence bring about good management.
When the quoted 1 million undersize fish crushed in trawl nets in Sn1 ,or fisheries such as sounds and Tasman bay scollops closed due to neglect and overfishing are actually addressed properly,then maybe people can talk management.
To date management includes us having cuts in increased size and in limit numbers and we want to thank them by paying for it.
So what would a licence achieve. Cant see anything on the table yet.
Like it or not our fisheries are a political issue.When a fishery is run by the government for economic benefit of fishing companies.then it cant be anything but .
For me it is a decided NO. I expect value for money,and not illusion or maybes.
" Geeks like to think they can ignore politics,you can leave politics alone,but politics wont leave you alone."
Richard Stallman. quote.
| Capt Asparagus wrote:|
I think we definitely need a licensing system. A thirty dollar a year licence with funds going to an independent rec fishing body, NOT govt coffers.
Licence to apply to all fishers including Maori , who however have a free licence if at point of sale can produce evidence they are on the Maori electoral role... Maybe even so, if free, there will be a proviso on the licence to allow them to donate their $30 to the cause anyhow. (Although that would be seriously difficult to administer.) Applying online would make donating the equivalent to the fee easy, and by ticking that box would include them in the draw for prizes. Basically, make it easier for them just to buy the licence really.
Kids under 13 free, kids under 18 half price. Full adults, say $30-$40, or roughly the price of a day's bait and berley.
Funds collected to be used for enforcement and education, , and a contribution to the HFO system, coastguard, but mainly to fund rec fishing research and POLITICAL CLOUT.
Include in the licence a chance to go in the draw for a new boat and trailer packag or something, as per the annual coastguard fundraiser, only paid licences are eligible...ie, not free kids or any Maori who claimed free licences.
Licences could easily be sold online, easy to do, as trout licences and hunting licences are done now. Once you buy your licence you have an electronic receipt on your phone or whatever, print out if you want, and in due course, a proper plastic licence will be mailed out to you for your wallet.
The benefits.... MONEY, and therefore lobbying clout, for rec fishing interests.
A database of nz rec fishers, to get some decent information on the numbers of rec fishers out there and contact details for them, to help in rallying support for rec fishing interests.
It would hugely help research into rec fishing itself. Simply ticking a few boxes in the licence form, ie, how many times you fish a year, where mainly, main target species, usual catch (ie, how many you normally expect to get), it'd be a massive help.
If half a mill fishers got paid for licences , that is 15mill to fund rec fishing causes....if admin etc ate up 90% of that money, and left only a tithe of the licence money (10%) to actually go to rec fishing organisations, that'd still be the biggest support to rec fishing bodies by orders of magnitude than is currently funded.
Should it be even more efficient and return say a third of the fees to rec fishing, then those funds could be used for enforcement, coastguard, maybe even some ramp building/fish handling facilities a is done in W.A.
What it could not do is buy back or retire quota, sorry guys, that is not how the system works, as I am sure you are aware. Quota works on tacc, total allowable commercial catch. If recs were to buy and nit take say half the quota, the tacc would be reallocated to those holding the remaining quota, so they would get to simply catch MORE. However, if rec fishing actually had the funding, and therefore the political clout (yes, in politics, as everywhere, money talks, bull-spit walks), then perhaps changes could be effected in the halls of power to change things.
The main point of the licence is not to control fishermen, it is to fund fishing interests, to give us the political clout. The other stuff, like Maori licensing, kids, family tickets, prizes etc etc, are all secondary.
I buy my trout licence every year for $130 or whatever it is, I buy a W.A. Fishing licence for I think $30 every year, it is not big deal. I surely would be happy to fork out $30-$40 for a saltwater licence, to give nz rec fishing interests the teeth to fight for us properly.
Edit, just read the above....re $5 day licences. Nope, none, for exactly the reason Tagit gave, it dilutes the income stream too much. Keep the licence fee small enough, $35 say, make it payable online, so it is in your smartphone or whatever, that'd be easy as.
Kids licensing, although technically kids would need a licence to fish, it is free, so no one is gunna bother about checking kids fishing off wharves etc for their licences, it just ain't worth the bother.
So what's one more?
| Men In Black wrote:|
Licensing may happen but not for all. Too many gray areas that will never be black or white in our lifetime. The Treaty comes to mind, just how do you think you are going to inforce a licence to go fishing for Maori and ignore that signed agreement of freedom to gather and harvest.
Licensing would be a waste of money , it will never be properly inforced as it will be under resourced, it will never be fair for all, it's just another encroachment of our freedom to go fishing and hopefully it will never happen.
Commercial fishing operations are licensed are you all happy and tickity boo with how that's all panning out, and that's supposed to be closely monitored and controlled.
| pjc wrote:|
People who think they fish to feed the family are dreaming
| Men In Black wrote:|
A licensing fee unless outrageously high and out of reach of most will never fund, police, and administer what you are hoping for. If you think it will you are seriuosly out of touch with just where any licensing money will actually be gobbled up in reality.
And I would be very cautious on the racial comments about Maori as you are broad brushing them as all being free loaders when majority are not... Maori under the Treaty have the right to gather and harvest and you don't have the power to change that no matter what your views are.
| mowerman wrote:|
Its the Iwi Maori ( self appointed mouth pieces with Honneck ) whom you have to watch out for as they are in for their pockets and Commerical fishing... Legasea are sitting down at the same table with them and Scott Macindoe thinks Honneck is a great Guy ..." quote "
Poor Mr everyday Maori are being ripped off by them ..
| Muppet wrote:|
If that is the case MIB how does anyone get caught out now poaching and taking undersized fish without any of us funding a system? Its not just 0800 Poacher but there are already checkpoints in place its just that we will go a few steps further.
$150 million a year is a lot of money. My old company only turned over 2.2 million and employed 18 people. You could employ a heap of people with $150 million I would not expect it raise that amount anyway half that would be unreal and lets say we did get 75 million that is worth nearly four times the amount of snapper export value!