 pjc wrote:Alan L that is what I thinking,fund FnB Tongue n check I know but is legasea going to save the tuatara? One is land based issues and I guess covers marine birds while the is about protecting/saving fish stock hence the name. |
| pjc wrote: Here is the answer to NIWA selling surveyed fish areas Hi Paul Thanks for your e mail and apologies for the delayed reply. It arrived the day we were mobilising to leave for the survey, and we have been at sea with limited cell phone coverage since then. In answer to your question, yes, commercial species of legal size are iced onboard and sold wherever practical, with the net revenue from the sale paid to the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). Kind regards Emma Sent from my iPhone > On 8/10/2020, at 23:20, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello joneseg, > > paul carnahan ([email protected]) has sent you a message via your contact > form (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fniwa.co.nz%2Fuser%2F912%2Fcontact&data=02%7C01%7CEmma.Jones%40niwa.co.nz%7Cdf3cbebaea27466b4f1c08d86b73b538%7C41caed736a0c468aba499ff6aafd1c77%7C0%7C1%7C637377492048022912&sdata=4mijZl68gvh68dJZiRnN%2F155fOXkoYStzc%2BXwUtVaFs%3D&reserved=0) at NIWA. > > this is a message forwarded from contact form on the NIWA website > > Message: > > Hi > Can you confirm that fish caught being of legal in the trawl net will iced > and sold. A claim that Legasea is making via Facebook while making people > aware of the survey. > Thank You > Paul Carnahan > |
| pjc wrote: The Croc. Had a scan through and yes ,lots of survey work being undertaken on majority of inshore species. Be interesting to see when all surveys completed .Which species increase or decrease. Most work to be completed by December 2021. Certainly more survey work being undertaken than I thought. Do you know where or how can survey results be accessed. |
| Alan L wrote: That all looks encouraging Croc. Lots going on. But do you have any idea why Puka/Bass/Bluenose are still and have been studiously ignored for decades? It must be deliberate over that time period. My only sneaking suspicion is that they are of low commercial viability?? In which case, who is calling the shots? Regards Alan |
| marlinmarty wrote: PJ Sadly you too often come across as simply negative nellie without a credible alternate point. The scallop argument is about bulk removal depleting breeding stocks across all of coro. Comms actially have less rights then Recs by law it only now being enforced. Runoff is a weak debate unless you table a relative study. If you feel ostracized by a perceived old boys network ( your words) suggest you hook up with the Tindall Foundation you will be right at home. It took 35 years to reconstruct the QMS to suit big business it might take that long to fix it on a shoestring budget. Lighten up. |
Marlinmarty, sadly I have to somewhat agree with Paul. Advocacy groups such as Legasea, Ban Commercial Inshore Fishing (which I know your vocal on), and Greenpeace etc. do ban individuals whose comments don’t align with their own beliefs. In regard to posts/comment made on Legaseas page, those administering the page have deleted comments (it might be their prerogative) that they don’t want made, whether there genuine or not.
Case in mind was when Legasea put up a post about Sanford’s trawler supposedly trawling inside Bream Heads without any factual evidence, certain comments made by both commercial & recreational were deleted, including one I made. Legasea is quite happy to leave comments up from commercial why? because it’s easy to have supporters look to discredit anything they say all the while hiding in the background but when recreational question Legasea their quick to remove those comments as it would appear to let’s say Government agencies monitoring comments that there is disunity within the recreational sector.
If any of what Paul says is only partly true what has the likes of Legasea got to hide by banning or deleting individuals comments, sure anything that is derogatory or threatening by all means but it seem then this organisation is being caught up in this PC world of censuring free speech. I do find it interesting that Legasea seem to be riding the success on the court case taken by Forrest & Bird judging by some of the comments that they played a part. If NZSFC/Legasea is so concerned with the state of our fisheries when then don’t they look to take the same course of action F & B has done with fish stocks that great affect recreational, while their plan is to be a public outreach organisation, do you really think the ordinary person on the street really cares how their fish is caught for their Friday night fish & chips, hell some think their meat comes from the butcher and not the farm.
Whether you like it or not there is a perceived mind-set by some that the NZSFC/Legasea is run by the old boy’s network and yes I am one of them, my perception is not from what I read but I have seen it first-hand. No doubt you will find cause to chastise my comments but I don’t really care, I have been quite open with any of my previous comments that I don’t support them. While I think recreational need such an organisation like Legasea and there are some creditable people within it but I won’t support them while those heading the organisation push their own ideals/beliefs on the recreational sector in a manner that can be misleading at times.
Legasea is no different to any other advocacy group, while they all say they aren’t anti commercial much of how they post topics only looks to incite followers which then portrays an Us versus Them situation, if they’re going to post something up try engaging with those commenting by answering some of the posts and not sit back and let what could be good debateable topics turn sour. New Zealand fishery is a share one and we are all part of the problem and solution. Perhaps Legasea’s main body should take a leaf out of Legasea Hawkes Bay book, while there are still genuine concerns in the bay at least they are having meaningful dialogue with their local commercial fisherman.
The government recent stance towards commercial will have ramifications for all and if recreational think that this government is going to stop with just the commercial sector I think recreational are just deluding themselves.
Yes it is a wet and miserable day down here and I have nothing better to do.
| marlinmarty wrote: PJ Sadly you too often come across as simply negative nellie without a credible alternate point. The scallop argument is about bulk removal depleting breeding stocks across all of coro. Comms actially have less rights then Recs by law it only now being enforced. Runoff is a weak debate unless you table a relative study. If you feel ostracized by a perceived old boys network ( your words) suggest you hook up with the Tindall Foundation you will be right at home. It took 35 years to reconstruct the QMS to suit big business it might take that long to fix it on a shoestring budget. Lighten up. |
Williams said the three main potentially interacting stressors for the scallop’s habitat were likely sedimentation, disturbance to the sea bed, and over-enrichment of nutrients.
He said resuspended sediments in the water column could be a major problem for scallops and other shellfish which filter feed, sucking in water to acquire plankton.
“If they’re sucking in muddy water it's more difficult to breathe and filter the available food, and the deposition of suspended sediments can bury them and alter their habitat.”
“In some places it’s like a cloud out there, if you dive near the bottom it all becomes resuspended really easily ... It’s really a combination of things happening where those shellfish are struggling to get hold and grow.”
Marty I have posted before on this but here we go again.Before Pine harbour went in ,you could get pipis/cockles at Tepuna bay below beachlands .Now its black sticky mud with dead shells underneath.The rock just from the entrance supported healthy mussels but now ,still there but taste of deisel/antifoul etc. So if we contnue poisoning the waterways the future is not bright.So the campains on the seas needs to take place on the lanmd.So why jion forces with Grenpeace/FnB and have a real voice rather than making submissions upon submission to Fisheries that seem to go.Oh another email,file it.
Negative it may seem but thats reallity the way I see it.
| marlinmarty wrote: PJ Sadly you too often come across as simply negative nellie without a credible alternate point. The scallop argument is about bulk removal depleting breeding stocks across all of coro. Comms actially have less rights then Recs by law it only now being enforced. Runoff is a weak debate unless you table a relative study. If you feel ostracized by a perceived old boys network ( your words) suggest you hook up with the Tindall Foundation you will be right at home. It took 35 years to reconstruct the QMS to suit big business it might take that long to fix it on a shoestring budget. Lighten up. |
Nearly half the shellfish at a monitoring site in one of Auckland's treasured estuaries died over a three-year period, according to a report that has found sediment increasingly choking the marine environment.
If uncontrolled, sediment - including mud and silt - can be washed into the city's waterways and surrounding harbours, devastating marine ecosystems.
The State of the Gulf 2020 report highlighted sediment as one of the Hauraki Gulf's biggest issues, impacting everything from snapper stocks to shellfish beds, and increasing mud at inner-city beaches.
| Pcj wrote: Latest Media release"seafoodnz" Hauraki Gulf changes raise challenges and opportunities
On Tuesday, when the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries, David Parker announced the longflagged revitalisation of the Hauraki Gulf, it was in response to the “Sea Change” plan prepared
four years earlier.
As with any such initiative, not all parties were happy.
Trawling will be restricted to ‘corridors’ in the Gulf, there will be a bespoke fisheries plan, and 18
new marine protected areas (MPAs) will increase coverage threefold to 17.6 percent.
Whilst saying it is a great first step, members of the Hauraki Gulf Forum are still hoping that 30
percent of the Gulf will be protected in the future and all trawling and dredging banned completely.
Commercial scallop operations may continue but they will be restricted to areas already dredged,
while recreational scallop dredging will be banned.
A thriving marine environment is of paramount importance to the commercial seafood industry
and we look forward to working with government on how to implement the changes. In doing so,
the true costs and benefits of what’s proposed must be assessed rationally and an evidencebased approach adopted.
The announcement does, however, raise some questions, including around the new proposals for
different categories of marine protection, including a new “Special Management Area”, which will
allow “carefully managed and targeted” recreational fishing. The announcement did not identify
these areas, or how they will be managed and monitored.
In National Panel Surveys conducted by NIWA, it is revealed that recreational fishers haul nearly
twice as many snapper out of the inner Gulf than commercial fishers (2,068 tonnes to 1,096
tonnes).
Given the importance of the area for recreational fishing, there are many welcome changes
mooted for the recreational fishing sector, which places a huge pressure on the Gulf. But if the
Gulf really is a jewel in our maritime crown, and an area so important to recreational fishing, why
is there such reluctance for relatively simple but important measures like recreational catch
reporting?
Industry is relieved that its consistent calls for a quicker reaction to reducing bag limits is being
considered, by changing the decision making from a Cabinet sign off to a Gazette notice. We
welcome more controls on charter vessel reporting, presumably from a paper-based system to an
electronic reporting system, and we welcome the proposal, although have little faith in its eventual
implementation, of a registry of recreational vessels.
This is not a ‘us versus them’ dig at reccies. It is a genuine desire to see some control on the
thousands of vessels that use the Gulf as their playground. As most of the catch in the inner Gulf
is recreational, the government’s will to address this and get a more accurate picture of the catch
is to be applauded.
It comes as some surprise to the general public and recreational fishers, that the restrictions
already placed on commercial fishing in the Gulf are extensive. There are already trawl
prohibitions, Danish seine prohibitions, net prohibitions and seasonal prohibitions.
The maps below show current restrictions (left) and proposed additional restrictions (right),
although Special Management Areas are still to be identified. |
Harbour the option for the long weekend It looks like we should all be doing... Read More >
Go shallow! Go shallow! Locals, Smithy and ‘The ‘Hammer’, continue to catch some lovely pannies... Read More >
Hungry snapper and big striped marlin The water’s starting to cool down, but don’t start... Read More >
Freshwater firing The Easter break is upon us, and what a great time to be... Read More >
Major Bites
Minor Bites
Major Bites
Minor Bites
Forum Topics
New Posts
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Topic Options
Post Options
Likes(1)
