Nationals proposed fishing reserves
Printed From: The Fishing Website
Category: General Forums
Forum Name: Fisheries Management
Forum Description: Anything to do with fisheries management here please
URL: https://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=104324
Printed Date: 27 Jan 2026 at 3:25pm
Topic: Nationals proposed fishing reserves
Posted By: gunangler
Subject: Nationals proposed fishing reserves
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 1:58pm
Well the idea was United Futures policy but anyway doesn't matter who but it does matter that we get them right. In our supply agreement with National we are to make submissions and comment on the proposed reserves. I am writing a briefing paper now for the minister and hope to have it done by end of week. I think I understand all the issues but if anyone wants to add thier pennies worth here please do as I want to make sure I appraise the Minister with what is wrong with thier suggestion and what is needed. With regards to the Hauraki Gulf my main concern was to extend the reserve boundaries out towards Barrier... wondering if little barrier to Cape Colville would be a good boundary.... What about Northwards ???? Any other things that need addressing? With regards to the Marlborough Sounds I see extending that out to include western Durville Is and to ban commercial scallop dredging as well. I see this as the most destructive of all the activities in the Sounds... What about port Underwood..???? Your thoughts would be most appreciated. Alan ------------- Smith and Wesson beats four aces and never leap frog a unicorn. It takes more than deer sign to make a stew! Co Leader. www.outdoorsparty.co.nz Making Our Outdoors The Heart Of NZ |
Replies:
Posted By: SaltyC
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 3:20pm
|
Moonbeams would be Bream Head to the Moks to the Needles but more realistically I would like to see a line from Cape Rodney North of Little Barrier to the Needles. Perhaps start at the first and negotiate to the second
 |
Posted By: corosanta
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 3:42pm
|
Off to the political section I say, or at least 'Fish management'. Shame really. ------------- Sitndrinkntalknbullman |
Posted By: SaltyC
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 3:57pm
| And perhaps bottom line, Takatu to Little barrier to cape Colville |
Posted By: smudge
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 4:14pm
------------- Best gurnard fisherman in my street |
corosanta wrote:Posted By: Lethal
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 5:04pm
|
personal i think the further out you go the least likely it is to happen, yes i would love it to be outside of Gt Barrier Moke's Hen & Chickens Mercury Is Aldermans Mayor White Island, considering we are really talking peanuts for the amount of dollars they collect "32million" best if it was left for Tourism to exploit which would possible produce double that 32 million and we would end up with a fantastic fishery plus nature would revert back to where it should be... you can only dream... ------------- Thanks for everything you did for us Eric. may you rest in peace, You were one of the real legends of NZ recreational fishing |
Posted By: dirtyharry
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 5:25pm
|
I agree with ya Lethal. Hauraki Gulf recreational reserve should be Cape Rodney to Cape Colville. Doubtless Bay should also be a Recreational Reserve also. ------------- I waste most of my money on fishing tackle. The rest I invest in women and booze. |
Posted By: TOSF
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 5:41pm
|
Bream bay gets absolutely raped by commercial trawlers, this area also needs looking after. Pilchard schools and snapper spawning in this area is a reason enough to look after it, it's sheltered safe area for small boats fishing for their families. If any political folks need proof or to see what the recreational and fishing tourism dollar is in this area I would love to take them out for a days fishing and show them the true potential and future tourism fishing can do for NZ. ------------- http://www.facebook.com/TonyOrtonSportFishingOffshoreAdventures www.offshoreadventures.net http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: letsgetem
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 6:03pm
|
Snapper stocks are even worse in the Bay of Plenty. I understand MPI estimated only 6% snapper stock (of original stock), compared to about 24% Hauraki Gulf. Basically it is hard to catch any snapper in BOP. So, a recreational-only area is needed more in BOP. I think an area out to the 12nm limit would be the minimum for a worthwhile recreational-only area. National must accept that other areas are just as (or more) deserving - so I hope this is negotiated. |
Posted By: dalgo
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 7:15pm
|
Just moving the commercial catch to other areas won't relieve the stress on the fishery. The original policy announcement mentioned 'compensating quota holders'. Does this mean buying back some of their quota? That might be beneficial, providing it wasn't reallocated. |
Posted By: Olfart
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 7:20pm
|
Why would you compensate quota holders for losing something they essentially got for free in the first place and now consider to be their "right"??? Makes no sense at all to me and will only alienate rec and customary fishers further.... ------------- Semper in excreta sumus, solum profundum variat.... |
Posted By: widerange
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 7:29pm
| but rec and customary fishers will apparently will still vote for national anyway so wtf |
Posted By: U357
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 7:44pm
------------- 404. That’s an error. That’s all we know. |
Posted By: Jiggy Jig
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 8:46pm
------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: pommy dave
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 9:27pm
|
I don't think a Rec only marine park is the answer to the issues and would much prefer the government invest the $ 20 million of potential compensation into funding the change to more sustainable fishing methods. By creating a rec only marine park of any size would just further divide recs and comms, when in fact we all need to work to the same goal. I would much prefer to see UF put its energy into changing the laws under which the comms work. For example no trawling in the 3 main channels ( Colville, Craddock and Jellicoe ) into the HG from Sep to Nov. It doesn't make sense to catch snapper in huge numbers when they are coming in to breed, at least if you allow the channels to be trawled in the autumn when the snapper are leaving the fish have had a chance to breed. In short i think the whole industry needs overhauling, to be made sustainable long term and there would be no need for marine parks and segregation as there would be more fish in the sea for all.
|
Posted By: wanabe
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 9:39pm
|
How about not just point to point or island to island and just put it to a distance(say 5 Miles from all points and any island), and include the larger bodies off water where that distance does not cover the entire area With a mandatory gps tracking on all commercial boats to show where they have been. |
Posted By: mowerman
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 11:45pm
|
Port Jackson to ( Cape Rodney to Beam Head 5 klm from land ) this could well extended north and South to have fairness to other areas..or just exculsion zone of 100 mtres coastal NZ with limited coms fishing within but only to those with "approved nets " ( square mesh with escape panels ) ------------- The People Protest Actions Speak Louder Than Words |
Posted By: mowerman
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 11:53pm
If we had of all voted greens and labour you would be buying your fishing licence this week by next week Greens would of shut it all up in reserves .. What we need is united people power on pavement's ... >>> this will happen in the end ..Have to wait until it gets down to 3 fish then everyone will wake up to that idea ------------- The People Protest Actions Speak Louder Than Words |
Posted By: widerange
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2014 at 11:59pm
|
Was that really the greens policy for the fishery MM? I didn't see that bit in legasea's ratings of party's fishery policy
|
Posted By: mowerman
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 12:47am
|
•Pass Marine Reserves Bill and create a network of protection areas.expand marine reserves >>> Greens Policy •Those using the sea commercially should not degrade it, and should pay to use it ( that could be made to include recs ) Fishing Licence >>> Labours Rather than read what Legasea wrote and / or interpreted from it ,read their policys..that looks black and white to me what is meant . Nothing against reserve's but Greens like to shut everything up ..Their policy on all the windblown timber was to leave it to rot where it fell , least they saved a few snails ------------- The People Protest Actions Speak Louder Than Words |
Posted By: worksux
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 7:24am
Hundred % letsgetem . Lets not forget that people who fish in the HG only give a rats about the HG. With the Eastern Coro/ BOP at 6%, shouldn't that be the priority.
------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Clifftastic
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 9:59am
|
Not true worksux, when I read the first post all I wanted to say was dont worry about the HG, go sort out the BoP/Hawkes Bay. ------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: SaltyC
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 10:14am
|
Guys this is not a HG vs BoP argument. We should be arguing for both, but the policy announcement was for the Gulf and Sounds, are you really arguing that we shouldn't pursue these as National has already committed to them? We should pursue these and push the boundaries as widely as we can as well as arguing that other areas are also in need of drastic action. Stop making this a fight within our own ranks and build on what has been offered to make sure we get rec only reserves in more areas of the coast while we also pursue more accountability and better fishing practices for the comm sector. and as for the " Lets not forget that people who fish in the HG only give a rats about the HG" comment ... well really ... Fish have fins and swim, we are concerned about the whole fishery, not just the HG and not just SNA1.
|
Posted By: Clifftastic
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 10:34am
|
I agree. BoP out of scope of the discussion. ------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: letsgetem
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 3:18pm
| I agree that the need for rec only areas in BOP and no doubt other parts, should not dictate any reduction in the already proposed areas (HG and Marlborough). I certainly don't want an argument over where to do it - but expect the United Furure negotiation to include ongoing effect in other areas. |
Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 3:22pm
|
Forget about recreational reserves,the answer is what legasea and others want no comms within the 100m deep/contour line of any coast around new zealand,thats one to be pushing for. ------------- Sex at 58.Lucky I live at 56 |
Posted By: gunangler
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 3:53pm
|
Forget anything else. The time for you to have a say politically has gone and anglers at large did not support us. If it is green policy or NZ First policy then let them negotiate their own agreement with National. As was made well clear on this forum and others before the election NZ First would not go into government and therefore be powerless and so it is but I know plenty of anglers who voted for them! The Policy we, United Future went to the electorate with was for recreational Fishing reserves specifically for the hauraki Gulf and Marlborough sounds and other areas such as BOP and Akaroa... but National usurped us and announced what they have. They were voted in and we got 4000 votes.... so we are not in any position to demand anything... but because of our coatlition with National we can have some say in the proposed Nats policy... hence my involvement. We don't have any other influence. I want to know where the boundaries should be and any other issues that should be taken into account such as mullet fishing etc.... I'm not interested in ex NZ First policy of 12 mile limits etc. that's all been left behind with the election. If you are still wanting that idea then talk to Richard Prosser or Winston Peters...  I want to make sure I have taken into account all the issues around the proposed National Party Recreational fishing reserves for the Hauraki Gulf and Marlborough Sounds. I'm afraid Net sizes and all the things bad with com fishing don't come into it. |
Posted By: letsgetem
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 4:13pm
| Gunangler - as well as your effort towards getting recreational only areas in HG and Marlborough (for which I applaud you); could you also go into bat for the obvious concerns of recreational fishers for the parlous state of snapper stocks in other areas. I would be surprised if MPI and National government was expecting to do it just in HG and Marlborough, as they know the state of fisheries in other areas. |
Posted By: gunangler
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 4:18pm
|
Dont worry I will be trying to open other doors..Im just as concerned at BOP and netting and wastage... and so on... We have been given a partially open door.. lets get the wedge in firmly and then start giving it a bash or two! The test will be how well they listen to us on this issue..... |
Posted By: Brad76
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2014 at 4:37pm
| Am glad my party vote helped crack open the door a bit. If you can show some results with such a small amount of say this time round, more anglers may re-think their party vote next time you ask for support. |