Aotea Marine Reserve.
Printed From: The Fishing Website
Category: Saltwater Fishing
Forum Name: The Briny Bar
Forum Description: The place for general chat on saltwater fishing!
URL: https://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22340
Printed Date: 11 Jun 2026 at 2:00am
Topic: Aotea Marine Reserve.
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Subject: Aotea Marine Reserve.
Date Posted: 08 Aug 2007 at 9:53pm
|
Here is a letter I was sent tonight, and asked to circulate as widely as I could... so I shall post it up here for you all to consider,
Cheers, Stu.
Subject:: Great Barrier Marine Reserve
The Ministry of Fisheries is just finalising its advice paper to the Minister in regards to giving his concurrence to the Aotea, Gt Barrier Island marine reserve. MFish are offering a final opportunity to provide any new information before they complete their advice for the Minister of Fisheries to make his decision. If you do have any additional information from that which you have provided in 2004 - such as changes in fishing practices in the area, economic value of the area, costs to your business etc, then I advise that you contact MFish directly. They are intending to send a final recommendation report to the Minister in the next 2 weeks. MFish Contact is: Jo Anderson, (04) 819-4772 ([email protected]) Unfortunately I am no longer comfortable what has transpired behind closed doors and with the potential outcomes from this process. I have a reservation that MFish might be selective with their advise as they are apt to do at times. If the advise follows their past track record they will give the Minister a number of options with a weighting of what they believe the Government will want to hear. Which will once again be counter productive to what we the extractive users wish. We all know that DOC ran a consultative process that was quite deceitful. We equally know that the Minister of Conservation was less that generous with the truth. And we know that the eco-ites are very selective with the truth. We also know the Ministry has spoken with Maori. What we don�t know is if any deals have been offered or accepted. This means we now have to make urgent last submissions adding only new information, which is hard in its self as we all have made substantial submissions. But if any one has any new information available please let me know ASAP. While I am the eternal optimist and have a lot of respect for this Minister, Jim Anderton, I would be the last to try and second guess him in the hope that commonsense will prevail. Having been caught before with the way these decisions are released and if we have not learnt anything else we should know that the current processes for creating marine reserves ignores the truth and any undue or adverse effect it might have on fishing. It ignores the cumulative effect. It ignores displacement effects and we only have to look at CRA3 to see those results. It fails to recognise other forms of marine protected areas or tools. It fails to acknowledge the wider public good. It fails to acknowledge the undue and adverse effects on fishing. And finally it fails to acknowledge the principles and requirements of the Hauraki Gulf Maritime parks Act and the recent KLC decision. But then Minister Carter is noted for his failings in these areas. But lets not be quick to tar Minister Jim with the same brush. DoC have consistently fails to consult and talk with us because we want to talk on subjects they don�t want to hear. No we are not against marine reserves for the sake of it and for the record I repeat, the NZRFC was an applicant for one and supported twelve MR proposals. We objected to five. We lost several of those objections, notably Parininihi, Wellington South Coast and Tapuae but some objections are still very much alive including Aotea (Great Barrier Island). Aotea is a destination not a way point on your way to somewhere else, unless you are heading to the Kermadec�s. The area proposed for 47,000ha or 47 square kilometres for a marine reserve is on the north east coast of the Barrier. The only protected sport fishing waters in our prevailing sou westers. It removes 70% of the rocky foreshore from the back of the Barrier. It erodes our access rights when the area is not at risk. DoC have failed to acknowledge the large Navy no fishing, no anchoring sound range just adjacent on its sou-eastern boundary and they have failed to acknowledge the 100s of square kilometres of no fishing no anchoring cable protection area a bit further north passing the Mokes. The Department says that these areas do not count as the Minister has them as MPAs by default thankyou. He fails to acknowledge that the Barrier is protected by its isolation and therefore is not at risk. He fails to recognise other management tools available and that DoC cannot effect compliance and in his greed he only wants to lockup another 47,000 ha.. of public water space thus eroding the rights of the wider boating community. I will reserve any further comments. This being the case we now need to prepare for the worse and that is the Minister of Fisheries under political pressure will give his concurrence because that is Government policy. A tough call for Jim and I do not envy him in his decision making process one bit. Because if he agrees there is no amount of political spin doctoring that will convince us he has made an impartial decision based on the best information before him. Which will only leave one option open to us and that is to test this decision and the advice of both MFish and DoC in the Courts. The one consolation here is that I am confident that we will gain the commercial industry support. Therefore I have opened up discussions with our respected lawyers who have a professional expertise in these matters with a view to reviewing our case and recommending a way forward. If the Minister was to make an adverse decision and we are to take the Minister to court and I hope we don�t, we will need to raise some serious money within a very short time frame and as such I am giving you all a heads up say to all fishers and boaties who value the back of the Barrier for what it is, think about it. As I may have to be asking you all to support the value you place on this part of the Barrier and front up. To this end I would ask for your comments and support by registering your interest with the NZRFC either by return email or our secretary Sheryl Hart email: [email protected]. Please put Aotea Gt Barrier in the subject box. Just what we needed on top of shared fisheries, the marine protected areas classification and standards, Maui dolphins/set nets and Fisheries standards, IPPs, the KLC defence and a raft of other issues all of which have the potential to erode our access rights to a reasonable share. Do you see a pattern developing? Yes it could be all part of a cunning bureaucratic ploy of striking while we are distracted elsewhere. Am I being unkind? Maybe! I will let you decide. Now don�t be bashful, please circulate this widely, be they green or otherwise, our intentions are honourable and clear. And yes the Minister will know our intent sooner than later. Not as a threat! But, because I am not the type to work behind peoples backs in a deceitful manner. |
Replies:
Posted By: Lethal
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 12:17am
|
here we go again.... why on earth is it us the recreational fisher person that has to keep on given given given our right to fish away all the dam time..... why dont the powers to be slow the dam Commercial fleet down so we dont have to give give give all the time....... we would not need a reserve if they knocked there Quota back to save our fish..... im sick to death of it.... Tobes had a great idea.... lets pick a weekend a Saturday or Sunday and take our boats on a slow drive along the motorway if we could get fifty rigs all moving along at once we would im sure attract some attention..... anyone want to do this????????????????? |
Posted By: Plow
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 2:25am
The only reason I can think of Lethal is that us recs haven't made enough noise as a united front. Option 4 are trying their best but really we need a lot more boats on board to make a big push. The convoy is a good idea, get on and start organising it!
This is supposed to be a democratic country afterall so its time the people made a big noise and put real pressure on the govt to give the public resource back to the public. Not just a few lawmakers lawbreakers and accountants.
I too lose heart when I see the very thing I love being wrecked by the people that govern the waters. As the worlds waters are quickly being emptied of fish surely �t is in everyones interests (including the comms) to ensure more fish in the water for future years. And surely that means knocking back the quotas..
There must be quite a few tourist dollars that come into NZ for its recreational fishing, in the future it could be a lot more than what it is today, as long as there is fish a plenty in the sea and easy access to them that is..
Reserves can be a good idea but the pattern is so obvious now, lock out areas to everyone and the comms can clean out the rest.
Im amazed more boating companies aren't making more of a noise. They have an interest also that we recs are out there reguarly catching fish.
------------- Legasea Legend, the rest of you should be too, $10 a month.  |
Lethal wrote:Posted By: Donald Duck
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 5:38am
|
Yeah well, good luck in stopping the DoC Nazis making a Marine Reserve. But I hold very little hope for you.
I protested, submitted, yada yada yada against the Reserve off White Cliffs in Northern Taranaki. 900-odd public submissions against, 20 for.
In the end, DoC said that the main reason that the marine was needed was so that they could do a scientific study on some sponge that nobody had ever heard of, ever disturbed, ever even knew was there.
Boys, this was for a large reef area that's about 15nm from any boat ramp, was hardly ever fished and in no need of any protection.
Of course, while this was happening (about two years ago), recreational fishers of the area drew little or no support from other areas - even though we said that this same issue will visit your doorstep soon. Well, now it is and good luck to you.
But protest all you like - I went to a public meeting and I saw DoC's attitude. They'll stand up expert after expert who will talk so much goobly-gook that nobody really understands; then DoC will stand up and say, "See." Then you'll go on about the public's right to their Coastline, they'll say, "Irrelevant and the Minister is about to sign, so why don't you all just pi55 off. Green is the colour brother and we have the power."
Commiserations, you're about to be screwed.
|
Posted By: Naki
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 7:24am
|
Beagles right in the way DoC function and I know the same will happen at Gt Barrier. (Remember the Volkners)
We have had 2 reserves go in on our doorstep down here with overwhelming submissions against them. I feel the only way is through the courts, cause DoC (Department of Confiscation) will ignore the people and do what Uncle Helen wants.
Not sure if pi$$ing of the general public by further congesting the AKL roads is a good idea either. The general unwashed don't give a sh#t and if they do they have been brain washed by DoC propaganda.
But you have my support. ------------- President of the "Pontoon Owners Club". I started off with nothing and now I still have most of it left!!! |
Posted By: kens
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 9:03am
Thats exactly the sort of thing we should be doing, us Kiwis sit back and whinge and generally do fark all, look at the french (****ers) the farmers drive the tractors and shut down motorways, truckies do the same.
Lethal, Im in (when i finally get my boat) and I will tell all my mates who have boats as well, forget fifty I rekon we could get 200
Its about time we made the ******* notice
 |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 9:54am
|
You really want to start having an impact on governmental decision making? Then I suggest you all support the introduction of a Recreational salt water fishing licence.
WHAT!!!!
Have it as a rec fishing council licence, all funds to that council. $25 a year for every angler, that will give millions a year in funding to the recfishing council,- who at the moment get the pathetic sum of around $50-60 grand from the govt- and this would quickly give US as anglers the funding to carry out media work, fund studies, and generally carry the fight to the government for our rights to fish.
Without this funding however, then you can be absolutely certain that no politician or high level bureaucrat will ever give a stuff about our opinions.
Oh, and I think the issue of Maori not needing licences coz of the waitangi thing is just a blind... it doesn't matter if they do not want to contribute, make buying the tickets a lottery for a new boat or two, and non-licence holders can go to pot.
The point is, even if only half of our fishermen buy a licence, then at long last there will be funding available for our rec fishing representatives to actually take on such issues, legally, politically and in the media to counter the very well funded and organised green movement.
Just my thoughts anyhow.
Cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: Boz19
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 10:07am
|
This country is a joke.
The government is supposed to be there to do the wishes of the voters who elected them. Instead we are told what to do and the government do what they ****ing like.
Out of the general public, who actually supports these stupid proposals? I'd hazard a guess that 95% of the people who go to the back of the barrier go there to fish and dive, so why the **** would DoC make it a reserve? Maybe 5% benefit and 95% lose out. It makes no sense... ------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Finatic
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 10:35am
Nail on the head right there Boz! ------------- What's the cheapest type of meat? Dear balls. They're under a buck. |
Posted By: Wizard
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 10:39am
| I'd pay $25 for a membership along with the donations I already make to option4. Dan |
Posted By: wild turkey
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 5:07pm
|
cpt asparagus is right, we need a fund for fighting for our right to fish $25 for a yearly licence is less than the price for bait for one days fishing. yet it would give us a powerful voice. people need to think about their fishing future. |
Posted By: Plow
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 6:07pm
Very good point Stu....
I'd never thought of it that way before, it would mean a much bigger (and funded) voice...
I have thought about this extensively over the last 30 seconds and I nominate you to lead the process and get the ball rolling...
Does option 4 have an opinion on this?
------------- Legasea Legend, the rest of you should be too, $10 a month. |
Posted By: whiti-fisho
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 6:45pm
|
I agree with Stu on this not much to pay per year for a greater say with more muscle Just like i dont mind paying for the use of a boat ramp so long as that money is spent on that ramps upkeep Not much to pay to enshure my daughters kids and i can still fish in the future Make it one fee Coastguard ,ramps and fishing license ------------- I step out my door to paradise on earth |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 6:58pm
|
I certainly think including a coastguard proportion in the licence would be good, funding for the coastguard/monitoring recreational epirbs etc was one reason I also endorsed the idea of a national boat registration. However, I hasten to add, a register of boats only, NOT a warrant of fitness or boat-users licence.
:-) This whole thing could get very political quickly, couldn't it? :-)
cheers all,
Stu.
|
Posted By: whiti-fisho
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 7:24pm
|
No i agree Stu no warrant of fitnessetc just aregister would be good ,all iwould want was transparency as to where the money was being used and it would have to be administered by boaties for boaties not by pollies or thier appointed flunkies/mates Maybe a small commitee representative of boatbuilders ,retailers ,fishermen,,probably left someone out but thinking as i type
------------- I step out my door to paradise on earth |
Posted By: feeder
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 7:58pm
 Fishing licence. Those people who can't see the wood for the trees will scream, never never will I pay for a licence to fish in the sea. As I see it , it is the only way to get substantial funds to fight for our existing rights. Most thinking fishers have already supported option 4 and the kahawai struggle so you can say we are already paying a fee. Having a licence would get those who couldn't care less about what happens in someone else's patch, but scream like stuck pigs when their area is subject to controls to contribute to the general cause. Even a modest $10.00 would be a huge help, think about it fishers, it is our future. Cheers ------------- The only bar to frequent is the Kawhia Bar |
Posted By: kens
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 8:18pm
|
I have no problem with a licence, just keep those goverment ****ing maggots away from it. I am sick of various forms of funding being diverted into the great slush fund. If I'm going to pay a licence fee it should go directly to fisheries interests not ANYTHING else. I am struglling to avoid a rant here but too many times we have seen forms of fund raising turn into a new tax.
|
Posted By: rocko
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 8:22pm
|
Bull****... bull**** politics no ****in we should have to pay for our own natural resource. Unlike the fresh water system which is stocks are largely commercially bred... sorry but i dont agree with any of it. our sea is our natural resource and we as public should be able to enjoy it and be responsible about it with out some pencil pushing yes man/woman saying we cant.. some may not like what ive said quite frankly i dont give **** ------------- ......... |
Posted By: one leg
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 9:41pm
|
some of me says listen to Rocko some says don''t i wonder how long before it costs to go to the bch ------------- woman who say they are equal to men ,show lack of Ambition . |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2007 at 9:50pm
|
You are welcome to your opinion Rocko, but really mate, how else are you going to try to fund a recreational defence of our right to fish?
The government? Do not tell me you seriously expect any government to fund any organisation that will be at loggerheads with government departments. No way Jose!
No, we have to fund ourselves to fight for our rights. You are absolutely right when you say "our sea is our natural resource and we as public should be able to enjoy it and be responsible about it" . It should be that way in an ideal world, but you cannot think it really is a perfect world do you?
I would love to think that a benevolent government would adequately fund recreational fishing bodies to look after our interests for us... but mate, it is not happening now, and will not happen in the future. In the real world, Money talks, as they say, and without substantial funding, I am afraid our voice is on a permanent Mute setting.
To just say "This is wrong, someone should help us!" will get us.... well, precisely where we are today, frankly, on the losing side of every fisheries related argument.
You need to get away from the idea that you are paying for a natural resource..., rather, a licence is simply the simplest, fairest and most efficient way of funding people to represent YOUR interests in keeping that resource in place. Relying on occasional supporters to create enough funding, such as those of us who contribute to the various rec fishing funds will never get the level of funding this problem requires. We need to get in MILLIONS worth of funding, not thousands.
So Rocko, how would YOU suggest we deal with this issue?
Cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: rocko
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 6:54am
|
Capt A.. I know what you saying mate.. dont get me wrong thats just my personal feelings towards such a subject.. You could be right in what you saying that a licence or such could be the way to fund such a cause.....Expect the goverment to play ball? * YEH RIGHT* no i dont expect it mate..How do we deal with it? Mate ive got no bloody idea, but just because it may be the a anwser towards the problem doesnt mean to say i have to like it....... Enough said..  ------------- ......... |
Posted By: Donald Duck
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 7:06am
|
I have to say rocko, you're probably right. The Licence is a great idea. $25? Yeah, right. It'll be $50, run by the government and if the Recreational Council saw as much as $3 of it I'd be very surprised.
How much do the equivalent hunting organisations see out of Firearms Licences? Zip.
How much does the AA see out of Driver Licence Fees? Zip.
|
Posted By: Naki
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 7:52am
|
Whats wrong with paying the fee directly to the NZRFC or similar organization.
I know it has been said before, or even putting a small levy on fishing tackle/bait and sending that to the NZRFC ------------- President of the "Pontoon Owners Club". I started off with nothing and now I still have most of it left!!! |
Posted By: kens
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 8:45am
|
When the Goverment set up the new practicing licence system for sparkies they set the cost at around $90 per year. This was explained that there was a significant cost involved in setting up the system etc. A few years later the licencing board said we want to drop the price as we dont need all this money any more. Thank you very much said the goverment we will keep it the same and take the excess. This is what must be avoided. Keep away from the bottomless pit of goverment money grabbing. Perhaps the best way would be to set up a volentary licencing system that is controlled by fishos
|
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 8:55am
|
The acclimatisation societies get the proceeds of freshwater licence sales, so what would be needed would be to have a formal, non-governmental organisation set up... and I say here the NZ Rec Fishing Council as that is a pretty good umbrella group for NZ Marine fishing, that gets the responsibility of setting up the licencing system. I do not know the ins and outs of how the Acclimatisation Socys have done this, I think the govt needs to pass laws to allow this I suppose, but then the funds do indeed go to Rec fishing interests, definitely NOT to the govts Slush fund.... as beagle very correctly says, if it were to go there, then we (being rec fishers) would get nothing back I am sure, it would all be "administered" into oblivion.
Hiya Naki... how's the jigging going? :-)
A small levy on tackle sales etc would not likely work... shop keepers and tackle wholesalers etc would resist this I am sure, it is bad enough having to do the bloody GST, let alone working out the levy on fishing tackles, sending in the returns etc etc etc.
By far the easiest idea is the licence, in my opinion anyhow. Need it be more than $25 ea ? Well, I do not know. In Aussie they have introduced such licences, they are only around this amount, and by doing so, the rec fishing people have been able to use these funds to organise themselves, buy out commercial fishermen in most estuaries etc, to get rid of the inshore/estuary netting etc, so that now these fisheries are rebounding hugely... I hate to say it, but the aussies have got it together on their side of the ditch in that respect at least. We could do the same here I am sure.
As i said before the biggest hurdle is that everyone knows that "the maori" will not agree under general principles, and claim exemption due to waitangi and all that crap... and if they do not need a licence, then why the hell should non-maori??!! It is a fair point, and I agree with that totally as well, BUT I also think the time for getting sniffy about such matters is passing quickly, and that the need for funding is such that Maori can be let off from having a licence just to get the licencing system in place for a start. Then if they want to free-load, stuff them, they can, but if they wish to contribute to the general cause, well good on them, the can still buy a licence just like the rest of us. I bet a lot of them would anyhow, only the pikers and activists would continue to refuse. It is here that the addition bonus of making every licence a ticket in a decent lottery would be a big draw.
Well anyhow, thems is my thoughts.
Cheers all,
Stu.
|
Posted By: Naki
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 9:26am
|
Hiya Capt.
Are there any council members of the NZRFC on this forum? Perhaps it could be raised with them? ------------- President of the "Pontoon Owners Club". I started off with nothing and now I still have most of it left!!! |
Posted By: Wizard
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 9:52am
|
I stilll think this is a good idea having a license, but it will only work for the honest people like you and I. Its the ones that alreadly rape and pilage our seas that we need to keep an eye on, and then there is the policing issues. And I'm not sure about the boat regestration thing as there are many boaties enjoying the water and dear I say it that use their boat not to catch fish.
Having said that, I do believe there should be some type of compulsory boating education cause there are a hell of a lot of idiots on the water, and its not a place that gives too many second chances. Just my two cents. Very good topic this. Dan
|
Posted By: JW
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 11:41am
|
Yes, have voluntary licensing and motivate people to buy them by going in the draw to win something decent like a boat. I think the coastguard have similar thing. If it can be kept simple and made easy for people to buy it then it should work. Should be non-governmental. The main thing that would make me resent buying one is not knowing where the money is going - it would need to be very transparent with clear objectives and ran by one body representing all of us (which is where it gets tricky). License holders could be further motivated by discounts on certain products, bait etc. Leave it up to the retailer or manufacturer to decide (black magic gave 10% back I think?) but everyone benefits in the long run. You have to feel as though you are buying into something and getting something for it, rather than it feeling like it just another way of donating money. My thoughts anyway. |
Posted By: Boz19
Date Posted: 10 Aug 2007 at 11:47am
Both Maori and Non-Maori are catching the same fish... Maori will suffer along with everyone else if the fish stocks continue to diminish... Why would Maori not want to support an idea that will ensure fish for them to catch in the future?
We're 1 Nation ffs ------------- http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 7:05pm
|
Extract from the Aotea (Great Barrier) Marine Reserve Application. 6.3 page 30 Consultation
The pre-notification consultation process is distinct from the statutory notification process that is required under section 5 of the Marine Reserves Act and which calls for objections. If any person who has already made known his or her views and wishes that those views be taken into account by the Minister he or she must make a further formal objection within the time provided under section 5 of the Act (two months).
Anybody wants a copy of the application, email me on mailto:[email protected] - [email protected]
Or better still email me (I'll make sure you get it) AND MFish Contact: Jo Anderson, (04) 819-4772 ( mailto:joanna.anderso[email protected] - [email protected] )
We probably only have a week to contact Mfish, I have no idea when the two months statutory notification period started or ends. Anybody know? Capt A? ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 7:30pm
|
I think what we have to do, is email the Rec Fish and/or MFish person, with our objections. Seems like the first time we went to all the effort was not a statutory requirement and as such, is not taken into account from a legal perspective. We are only really counted if we do it at the statutory stage....now. Seems like a whole heap of legal/political BS to me to confuse the people. The Rec Fishing Council is asking us to contact them so they can forward our views on collectively.
Hence the request from Rec Fish....
[To this end I would ask for your comments and support by registering your interest with the NZRFC secretary Sheryl Hart email: [email protected]. Please put Aotea Gt Barrier in the subject box.
MFish Contact is: Jo Anderson, (04) 819-4772 ( mailto:joanna.anderso[email protected] - [email protected] ) ]
------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: cpt pugwash
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 7:52pm
|
Perhaps the funds could be paid as a "membership/saltwater fishing" licence/fee to the local fishing club, which could then elect national representatives to speak on behalf of all fisho's. This way every region would be represented and ensure that any fees payable are used where they should be used. Of course all clubs would need to belong a national body with ethical codes etc. ------------- Remember, not all crazy folks are locked up! Some own boats! |
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 9:00pm
|
Good idea Capt Pugwash.
What about form an incorporated society which accepts membership from individuals, businesses or through fishing/boating clubs. Funds to be used for fighting for our rights on issues which would be stipulated, such as fishing rights and sustainability while incorporating a vessel registration service and providing a subsidised Recreational safe boating program for members. I'm sure Govt agencies and businesses would contribute to that portion of the service.
Are there 15 people out there who would be interested in getting together to discuss ideas to get it going? If so, get back to me. ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: part-timer
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 9:29pm
|
doesnt the fisheries act state that there is a TAC for each species? (for those under control) and each group be given a proportion of that catch??
Is that correct??
Jim
|
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2007 at 10:47pm
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 30 Aug 2007 at 8:27am
|
Re Aotea Gt Barrier Marine Reserve Proposal and Objections.
This is an open letter and emails have been sent to
MP, Peter Dunne mailto:[email protected] - [email protected]
and Joanna Anderson (MFish) mailto:joanna.anderso[email protected] - [email protected] who I understand is liasing with Jim Anderton.
A question.
Why did DoC not see fit to notify all the submitters (that they had names and addresses for,) of the deadline for the statutory stage of the application for the Marine Reserve proposal at Aotea, Great Barrier?
I was one of those people and represented a large number of objectors of this proposal as the Gt Barrier Marine Action Group who all put in submissions objecting to this proposed marine reserve at Aotea.
I was not notified by the department, yet they have my details.
The people deserve a reply please and I would ask the Hon Peter Dunne to follow up on this with the minister the Hon Jim Anderton and DoC Representatives.
Why is the system set up so we put all our effort in at the earlier stage, when really it seems to have no legal bearing on the result and yet when the statutory stage comes around, Doc does not want to hear from the interested parties (objectors)?
Seems to me to be a set-up, for DoC to sus out what the people are thinking and con us into believing DoC has have done their bit and allowed us our say. When in reality, what we think at the earlier stage has no bearing on how they conduct themselves at the statutory stage and very likely, at this statutory stage, our earlier submissions are not worth the paper they are written on, as they are disregarded !?
I would like to see the statutory deadline extended and all objectors notified, with at least a months grace to deal with it.
So last day of October 2007 is the date I request as the new deadline, as long as the submitters are all notified by end of September 2007.
 Here is a link to the submissions sent in as recorded by DoC
http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/conservation/marine-and-coastal/marine-protected-areas/great%20barrier%20island%20marine%20reserve%20proposal%20-%20summary%20of%20submissions%20to%20proposal.pdf - http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/conservation/marine-and-coastal/marine-protected-areas/great%20barrier%20island%20marine%20reserve%20proposal%20-%20summary%20of%20submissions%20to%20proposal.pdf
Thanks
Stephanie Railey
09 423 7642 ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: Phecda
Date Posted: 30 Aug 2007 at 11:50am
Is this scary geeky or WHAT? 
I've just added up by hand the Yes and No column in the DoC document "Aotea Gt Barrier-summary of submissions" (summary-HA), yes all 101 pages of the 202 page document with that info.
My results are 454 Yes, 1380 No, 48 Unsure. This comes to a Total of 1882 vs the document count of 1863, well I did do it by hand!! What further useful comment could I possibly make?
It's scandal-Gate!
(and I'm a poet I just dont know it))
|
Posted By: Yammieski
Date Posted: 30 Aug 2007 at 12:03pm
| What happens to the portion of our petrol tax that goes into boats. Last I heard it was dam hard driving a 16 ft with a Yammie on the back down the motor way. These funds are just being laped up by the A holes in Parliment. Wouldnt that be easier than trying to register boats and the likes cause where would it go from there. As some say Licenceing, WOF these guys just dont give a **** about our hard earned $$$$$ Any way just a thought rather than bleed Option 4 |
Posted By: Phecda
Date Posted: 30 Aug 2007 at 12:29pm
|
Yet DoC gives the figures, via the mouth of Chris Carter, that 2200 of 3513 submissions were "supportive".
http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/page.aspx?id=33769 - http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/page.aspx?id=33769
What gives. What does it TAKE to expose an outright lie in this country?
|
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 31 Aug 2007 at 7:05am
|
Write to the papers, write to Jim Anderton, even say your piece on here.
The whole process is a farce and they know it!
Can anyone tell me, if the original proposal for a marine reserve is changed, does'nt that mean the whole process has to be done again?
Well, Peter Dunne is against any more reserves being announced until the process is sorted and the people are happy with it. National I believe are cool on the idea of reserves, not altogether sure what their stance is.
Just remember, election year coming up. So have your say. The politicians have already started the battle and Labour is well and truely on the slippery slope and they know it!
 Marine Reserves are an economic treasure for Governments, revenue gatherers. They present these reserves as an opportuniy they are presenting us. I see it as opportunity lost. Sure the ocean environment needs managing, but reserves ain't the way.
Go here for a wee look. http://www.seafriends.co.nz/index.htm - http://www.seafriends.co.nz/index.htm
This guy is not paid by the government to say what they want, he does the hard yards out in his little ali boat in a wetsuit for days, photographing, doing the research, INDEPENDANTLY and as a private person. Naturally, the government agencies don't want to accept hs findings. Makeup your own mind who is on the right track. ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 31 Aug 2007 at 8:43am
|
Reply received today from Joanna Anderson (Jim Andertons Office, as Minister of Fisheries) Dear Stephanie,
Thank you for your email regarding the Great Barrier marine reserve application. This application is currently being assessed by the Ministry of Fisheries. Please note that there is no consultation process, statutory or otherwise, underway at this time; however the Ministry of Fisheries has advised some stakeholders and stakeholder groups, including tangata whenua, that the Ministry is open to receipt of any new information beyond that contained in submissions received by the Department of Conservation during the statutory consultation process in late 2004. The Great Barrier Community Board was advised of this on 1 May 2007 (see attached update), in response to their enquiry about the status of the marine reserve application. To clarify the status of this application, on 14 June 2005 the Minister of Conservation requested that the Minister of Fisheries agree with the Minister of Conservation�s decision to establish the marine reserve. If the Minister of Fisheries does not agree, i.e. does not concur, with the Minister of Conservation�s decision, the application cannot proceed as it stands. The Ministry of Fisheries is currently assessing the application and is preparing advice for the Minister of Fisheries. The Marine Reserves Act 1971 does not require the Ministry�s assessment of the application to include further consultation beyond that undertaken earlier by the Department of Conservation. It is up to the Ministry to decide whether or not further consultation is needed on a case-by-case basis. The Ministry�s assessment of the application will examine and consider all submissions the Department of Conservation received during consultation in late 2004. Please be assured that the Ministry of Fisheries is considering all information provided in submissions received in 2004, along with any new information received since that time, including your submission on behalf of the Great Barrier Island Marine Action Group, dated 19 August 2007. Attached is the May 2007 update to the GBI Community Board advising the community about the status of the marine reserve application. Please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions. Kind regards
Joanna Anderson
Joanna Anderson Ministry of Fisheries - Te Tautiaki i nga tini a Tangaroa P O Box 1020 Wellington New Zealand
Tel 04 819 4772 Fax 04 819 4208 ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 31 Aug 2007 at 8:45am
|
Reply From Peter Dunne
Dear Stephanie, Thank you for your message. I will follow up with Jim Anderton as you request, and let you know the outcome in due course. Regards, Hon Peter Dunne MP for Ohariu Belmont Leader of United Future Minister of Revenue Associate Minister of Health http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/ - www.unitedfuture.org.nz ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |
Posted By: Chips
Date Posted: 31 Aug 2007 at 10:36am
|
I have sent this e-mail to Peter Dunne and the Minister just now.
Thankyou to Peter Dunne for your reply offering to follow up on this for us.
Thankyou Joanne for your reply also.
I understood that our submissions were sent in at the A4 to A5 stage of proceedings as we were always told by DoC that this was the non-statutory phase of the MR protocol. I understand that Part B, the statutory stage, which I referred to in my earlier email, allows for the applicant (DoC) to Notify, Consult, Answer Objections etc, when was any one of the interested parties involved in this process of Part B? I for one was not and I know of many others who were not.
The protocol, does not allow for a time frame to be able to work to, which makes the whole process very difficult to keep up with.
I request that the Honorable Jim Anderton not make recommendation for creation of this marine reserve by Order in Council. The process has been fatally flawed by more than one issue and these need resolving before another MR is established. I also ask to be given the opportunity to represent my group and their concerns.
Yours sincerely
Stephanie Railey
Gt Barrier Marine Action Group
09 423 7642
Outline of Steps The process outlined below is applicable to a situation where the Department of Conservation is the applicant mid://00000058/#_ftn1 - - * . It will be made specific to individual proposals in the project plan. Part A: Developing a proposal (non-statutory) Step A1: Identify potential sites and gather information. Step A2: Discussions held with tangata whenua and other interested parties; preliminary assessment of site suitability. Step A3: Commission site survey and investigation, and review of site information. Step A4: Draft proposal released for public comment. Step A5: Prepare a formal application. Part B: Making a formal application (statutory) Step B1: Notification of application. Step B2: Consultation with interested parties. Step B3: Answer to objections. Step B4: Consideration of application and objections by Department. Step B5: Minister of Conservation considers objections (s 5(6)), then substantive case (s 5(9)). Step B6: Concurrence sought from Ministers of Transport and Fisheries. Step B7: Recommendation made for creation of marine reserve by Order in Council. mid://00000058/#_ftnref1 - - * Where external bodies qualify as applicants, and pursue proposals to develop formal applications, both Agencies should encourage such applicants to follow the standards and process as set out in this protocol. ------------- http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz - http://www.rnrcharters.co.nz |