nz fishing compensation
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=118628
Printed Date: 28 Jan 2026 at 2:33pm
Topic: nz fishing compensation
Posted By: pjc
Subject: nz fishing compensation
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2016 at 2:54pm
|
After pm a few sight members and now I have a respone I wll go forward with this. http://fishingoutdoors.org/082016/FLASH/index.html The article refers to compensation to get trawlers out of the inshore Had a verbal call with one member from Legasea who says it refers to new proposed sanctuary at the Kermadec Islands Just received this from nz first Hi
Paul
The
meeting in question was prior to the 2014 election, so it was long before the
Kermadec sanctuary had been proposed.
I
don’t recall compensation being discussed specifically at that meeting, but if
it was there were certainly no objections raised at the time. Our policy
regarding the inshore fishery was still in formulation stage at that time;
currently it is to exclude bulk harvest commercial fishing from a defined
inshore zone, out to the 12-mile limit as a default, but determined regionally
through consultation with all stakeholders. In some places a 3-mile limit might
be more appropriate, or a depth line as is favoured by
LegaSea.
As
I understand it, LegaSea’s current position on compensation is a recent
decision, but I have not discussed it with them directly.
Since
that time our policy has been refined to take account of the realities of paua,
crayfish, and scallops, and to allow for some non-bulk method, non-export
commercial harvest from the inshore, for the purposes of supplying the local
trade only.
The
growth of aquaculture will require further refinement of our recreational-only
inshore policy and we are currently working on that
matter.
Compensation
is a non-negotiable position for New Zealand First. We have created commercial
quota access to the fishery as a tradeable property right, and that has value
whether it is being utilised or not. New Zealand First will never countenance
the confiscation of property without compensation.
Whether
the tradeable property right should have been created or not, is another matter
entirely.
I
believe LegaSea supports the current Government’s marine parks and reserves
approach, while the Fishing & Outdoors Newspaper prefers New Zealand First’s
12-mile policy. We agree with you that this is the better way to build abundance
for all fishers.
I
hope and trust this clarifies our position for you. If I may be of further
assistance, or if you have information or suggestions that you feel may be of
value, please do feel free to contact me directly. Numerous stakeholders do
continue to bring new ideas and perspectives to our
attention.
Best
regards
Richard
Richard Prosser
MP New
Zealand First List Bowen
House, Parliament Buildings Private
Bag 18 888 Wellington 6011 P +64
4 817 8363 : M +64 21 243 1199 Spokesperson
for Primary Industries : Biosecurity : Outdoor Recreation : Serious Fraud
Office Spokesperson
for State Owned Enterprises http://www.nzfirst.org.nz/" rel="nofollow - www.nzfirst.org.nz
SO the question now is who do I believe?? |
Replies:
Posted By: hookerpuka
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2016 at 3:00pm
| It seems there are fires burning under the couldren after all eh? |
Posted By: Catchelot
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2016 at 3:18pm
Good to see NZ First fronting up
|
Posted By: Steps
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2016 at 5:18pm
|
A company gets mining rights..sort of a quota by another term (???) work the mines and the resource runs out Do they get compensation? No.... good business practice has the directors seeing the writing on the wall and move investments into new areas... Even commercial stats have indicated many resources have been propped up by small size limits, catches etc. And many other indicators for a very long time. This principle goes across all areas of business.., the dieing shopping center and shops where a mine' is farming, native forestry, to washing boards being obsoleted by a washing machine. In saying that, it is still the duty of directors to pull as much money in as possible from where ever and pushing for compensation is fine...its just if it is granted or not and if at the expense of who?... tax payers? |
Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2016 at 5:59pm
|
They I read it is,pay out say $100 mil to the inshore fleet they move out to the 12 mile/100m zone out of sight of mind?the compensation pays for extra fuel etc or there could be another option sell there trawler quota and become longliners and need to buy longline quota? If they were to move out then we should be able to manage basically our fishing zone. short term fix to build abundance,plaster when amputation is required.
|