On a couple of points are consultation and under size.

Consultationbeing proposed to 20 days for submissions? Seem short but do we need to carry on with the situation we have now. Example the cry to close Crayfish in Northland. Being talking for what 2,3,4 yrs?? So if action can happen in matter of months whats the issue.

Undersize commercial fish. Snapper/terakihi/Trevally

The call to land all catch regardless of size. The factories dont want undersize. Could change net size or use the plastic nets where fish arrive alive. or dump undersize and it comes of ace?  Dont for longliners have same issues,too long a soak,barotraumra from depths.

I would suggest reccreational would kill more undersize through bad handling, not a trophy fish so basically high grading. .We would kill more fish on a weekend than any commercial operation

Easier to turn a blind eye to our actions!

Okay... something tells me I should catch and keep as many as I like to eat(for scientific purposes)...

I've seen people fishing near Harvey Norman for these fish, and not anyone hooked a single koi except for me; I'm all about finesse when it comes to fishing... 

Can I keep the catch at such places and bring it home to eat? It sounds illegal despite being classified as pest control, not to mention eels get my bait at nightfall...

10.1 TAC - Total Allowable CatchOption 197. Option 1 is an increase to the TAC of 1,280 tonnes, a 72% increase from the current setting.This option is a cautious approach and gives weight to uncertainty of how the fishery and thehabitat that supports it may respond to increases in catch. This option provides for a low level ofutilisation despite information indicating greater increases would be sustainable. It responds toconcerns raised by tangata whenua and recreational fishers that the alternative proposedchanges to the TAC are too large and could lead to another decline in the fishery. Under thisoption, a further review would be scheduled, likely in three years when the stock assessmentcould be updated with new information and further discussions on levels of utilisation couldoccur.98. Under Option 1, projections using long term average recruitment indicate that the SNA 8biomass is likely to increase from 54% B0 to above 60% B0 over the next five years. Option 1was not projected using the stock assessment model, the catch settings in Option 1 areanticipated to result in a biomass between Projections 1 and 2.Option 299. Option 2 is an increase to the TAC of 1,652 tonnes, a 93% increase from the current setting.This option provides a greater opportunity for utilisation and places weight on the status of thestock while acknowledging uncertainty in how the fishery will respond to a significant increase inTAC.100. Under Option 2, projections using long term average recruitment indicate that the SNA 8biomass is likely to increase from 54% B0 to above 60% B0 (95% CI:0.44 to 0.73) over the nextfive years. There is a 92% probability that under a TAC of 3,437 tonnes the 2026 biomass willbe above 50% B0.Option 3101. Option 3 is an increase to the TAC of 2,009 tonnes, a 113% increase from the current setting.This option provides a greater opportunity for utilisation and places weight on the status of thestock, acknowledging that the biomass is likely to remain high over the next five years.102. Under Option 3, projections using long term average recruitment indicate that the SNA 8biomass is likely to increase from 54% B0 to 58% B0 (95% CI:0.43 to 0.71) over the next fiveyears. There is an 89% probability that under a TAC of 3,794 tonnes the 2026 biomass will beabove 50% B0.Option 4103. Option 4 is an increase to the TAC of 2,367 tonnes, a 133% increase from the current setting.Option 4 recognises the strong recovery of the stock and represents the least cautious option.This option provides a greater opportunity for stakeholders to utilise the fishery and placesweight on the status of the stock, acknowledging that the biomass is likely to remain high overthe next five years.104. Under Option 4, projections using long term average recruitment indicate that the SNA 8biomass is likely to increase from 54% B0 to 57% (95% CI:0.41 to 0.71) over the next fiveyears. There is an 84% probability that under a TAC of 4,152 tonnes the 2026 biomass will beabove 50% B0.

15.2 Recreational Controls156. The options outlined in this paper do not propose any new controls on recreational fishing thatwould constrain current catch. The current status of the stock is above the default targetbiomass and the current estimated recreational catch is considered by Fisheries New Zealandto be sustainable.157. Some stakeholders have suggested that the daily bag limit and MLS should be aligned with theSNA 1 fishery, by increasing the MLS to 30cm and decreasing the daily bag limit to seven.Fisheries New Zealand commissioned an evaluation of alternative recreational snapper MLSand bag limits for SNA 8. The findings of this report indicated that the alignment of MLS and baglimits for SNA 1 and SNA 8 would have a negligible effect on constraining the level of currentrecreational catch. 

Here we fisheries wanting to increase TACC or remain the same.But who is the Stakeholder/s wanting to reduce recreational to sna1 limits??

Those that fish the Manukau or across the bar it maybe in your interest to attend rather than go "why have we had a cut"