Abundance is the key. More fish in the water as required to ensure meaningful fishing experiences for future generations

5 Key Policy Recommendations

1. Public OwnershipThe public are the sole owners of the fish stocks and minerals in the New Zealand Exclusive Economic Zone and therefore our fisheries should be managed in ways that deliver public benefits from the fishery, this includes social and cultural benefits. The economic exploitation of fish and minerals in the NZ EEZ must deliver economic returns to us, the owners. The oil and gas, mining, any commercial industry that exploits public resources always pay a resource rental; it recognises that the public are the owners and are deserving of a return.

Recommendations:1. Recognise fish stocks as public resources and consider applying a Resource Rental

regime   to captures the extra competitive profit that arise from commercial fishing in the EEZ.

Fishing is no digfferent to the same situation we have with freshwater. It belongs to the public as do the fish and commercial interests fish it at a cost to the public in access themselves to quality fish. There should be a return to the people of NZ in both monetry and recreational terms. The way it is now we pay world export prices for our fish and are denied the opportunity to catch them by over fishing.It is UF policy that all fish belong to the people of NZ and that commercial interests only have the ability to commercially fish surpluses and that those benefits should be returned to the people of NZ by way of resource rentals or other means. Commercial interest

2. That your party unequivocally states the intention to keep managing recreational fishing outside the Quota Management System (QMS). We intend to remove the quota system from any species that is included in the recreational only species category. Kahawaim snapper, kingfish and blue cod. We intend to introduce legislation to this effect and effectively MPI would license commercial interests to harvest any deemed surplus after good science has established the actual size and health of the fishery.We believe there is no place for the word 'quota' when managing recreational fishing. Under our recreation only policy the commercial allocation can only take place of any surplus after all recreational and customary needs have been filled. We will also Introduce a type of new marine reserve named recreational reserves. These reserves will be for recreational fishers and Iwi to fish in; commercial fishing in these reserves will be banned.

3.

Encourage the public to conserve fish by resourcing public led research and consultation aimed at developing a raft of measures to accelerate rebuilds without fear of those fish being later allocated to export driven commercial fishing.

The cost of resourcing this must be met by levying the commercial fishing industry. It is very wrong that voluntary recreational organizations have to front the costs of consultation and that research is often carried out in the interest of the commercial sector. It is the old story … the science and results follow the money. We would look to redistribute that.and to ensure gains made by recreational sacrifice are not stolen by the commercial companies. UF will work with the recreational fishing sector to establish a public consultation process regarding the future of inshore fisheries management. Our intention is to preserve the ability for future generations of New Zealanders to have access to the recreational fishing opportunities that we and previous generations have enjoyed

Notes: Government needs certainty and safety when regulating public fishing interests. Both Government and the public are tired of being ‘gamed’ by Ministry led regulatory measures designed to increase commercial access at the expense of public utility and wellbeing.

2. Manage for abundanceInternational best practice in setting management targets for fish stocks at a minimum biomass of 40% of the original unfished stock size. To achieve this the exploitation rate on the snapper stock should not exceed 8%. The 40% stock target may not apply to fast growing stocks, but remains the default starting point. Didnt realise a comment was needed for this...We see the biomass being revisited and subject to better science. Firstly a healthy self sustaining population should be the base line and then add to that the recreational catch and that should be the minimum biomass. An arbitrary 40% of the original stock is not sustainable in my opinion. Who knows what that unfished figure was before human settlement.Recommendations:1. Adopt the default target of 40% or better of the unfished biomass and set Total Allowable Catches (TACs) accordingly. See my comment above. If we were to just answer this then manage at a greater that 40% and any reduction in catch would come from commercial quota.UF will make snapper one of the recreational species that can only be commercially fished when surpluses exceed a healthy biomass that includes all recreational, customary catch and the long term sustainability of the species.

2. When the target biomass is reached allocation decisions can be made after fully considering the obligations to future generations, and after the full intentions of Part 3 of the Fisheries Act are adopted. Misses the point (although we could do better in explaining) I miss understood this. Under our policy we would allow commercial fishing of the recreational only species to catch that surplus. For species not under our recreational only category we would want to see robust science that makes sure that speciaes is not fished down below that target biomass. If the commercial operators over fish and cause the biomass to fall below the minimum permanent tonnage they will be required to cease fishing that species until the fish returns above the minimum tonnage. Our policy is based on fish for future generations

3. Adopt an ecosystem approach to stock management which better accounts for interdependent and associated species. Hence our distaste and public condemnation for the

scallop harvest in the Marlborough Sounds having seen first hand how that destroyed the whole eco system. How many species that coexisted with the scallops disappeared from those areas as a result and how long it has taken to recover. We believe fishery management should be based on the ecosystem rather than on numbers.UF will Substantially increase the level of funding made available for robust scientific monitoring over the impact that specific catch limits and fishing methods are having on fish populations and the marine environment, in order to ensure sustainability of the resource. This funding will be made available to universities, Crown Research Institutes, and other relevant institutions

4. Adopt a cautious approach to management when stock assessments do not match up with the reality of what is actually happening in the waterUF totally agrees. Science is often lagging behind reality and UF as part of its recreational species policy will only allow commercial fishing when sustainability is assured

3. Reduce wastageEveryone loses when fish are discarded or wasted due to perverse incentives within the QMS, poor selectivity, poor release practices, and inappropriate fishing methods. Rebuilding toward the 40% target is much easier if wastage be reduced or eliminated. Responsible utilisation will achieve far better yield per recruit, reduced juvenile mortality, and will require adopting environmentally benign fishing techniques.   I don’t follow, We find dumping abhorrent and would do everything we could to put an end to it. We require better methods used, better management systems concerning by catch and seasonal restrictions on areas if by-catch is present in numbers.

UF are totally opposed to dumping or any waste of fish and would require methods be implemented that reduce or eliminate such. Better nets or catch methods and anything within the act that allows dumping, highgrading or waste..

Recommendations:

1. Information. All fisheries information is in the public interest, and all records that identify catch mix, species, methods, and areas of commercial catch needs to be immediately released into the public domain. In particular all data that has been collected on catch composition of inshore trawlers that has been gathered since 1990 must be immediately available for public scrutiny. We totally agree and would seek as part of our radical overhaul of the fisheries.

2. Remove trawling that cannot demonstrate compliance with reasonable selectivity standards and minimised benthic contact from within the 100m contour.  Again we agree. And as above would seek to make it a part of a review

Notes: The recent Snapper1 Commercial agreement sets a selectivity standard of juvenile catch at 15% of the total snapper catch by weight, which will typically run to 30% by number of total fish  killed. Clearly, this is a standard that accepts poor selectivity and is not reasonable. Again this is related to fishing methods and areas fished. Size limits and the quota / by-catch system. We would require better science on this issue as per our demand for more

robust science in our policy. While the system we have porevails juviniles will be caught in greater numbers than desired. Under our recreational only fish policy snapper would only be allowed to be fished commercially for the surplus. We therefor think different rules will apply to commercial catch of recreational only species.

3. Resource the public conversation designed to develop ways to reduce waste in the recreational sector. Invest in education to provide the public with the tools and understanding required to better conserve fish. Miss. This is about resourceing NO we state we would resource this from the commercial sector. By making them pay more to fish the public’s fish. We also state above that we will resource universities and research institutes to investigate better fishery management which would include methods, waste and so on.... Our policy also states … Ensure that the Government recognizes that education is essential for the future survival of the ocean’s resources and to recognize that importance by making appropriate changes and additions to the school curriculum. The details of this will form part of UNITED’s Education policy.Work with the recreational fishing sector to establish a public consultation process regarding the future of inshore fisheries management. This would be resourced from consenting commercial fishing of the public resource.

Notes - The public are more than ready to further conserve precious resources, but only in the context of rebuilding abundance, not to subsidise export driven commercial fishing.

4. Equal size limitsIt is no longer tolerable for the differential size limits to prevail in fisheries such as snapper, scallops, crayfish and kingfish. These so called ‘concessions’ are spurious; they are nothing more than MPI sanctioned mechanisms to protect commercial interests from competition in the form of recreational fishing. The Fisheries Act contains a large number of management tools for managing fishing effort. Using minimum legal size (MLS) to offer advantage to private, commercial interests at public cost is becoming more widely understood and recognised for what it is, and therefore more repugnant.

Recommendation:

1. Standardise, across all sectors, the MLS for all fish stocks and set them for biological and stock management outcomes rather than using it as an allocation tool. The default policy is to increase MLS to the highest current size.UF believe that differing size limits are ridiculous and allow the commercial sector to over fish the publicly owned fish. It is totally wrong that an angler has to let a fish go for the health of the fishery because it is under size and a trawler can then swoop that same fish up legally. there has to be a better way to manage commercially fished species and MLS is only part of the mix.

5. Economic ValuationIn several overseas jurisdictions economic studies have been commissioned that compare the size of the economies of commercial and recreational fishing. These studies are recognising the huge advantage national economies receive from public fishing in inshore

stocks. This methodology needs to be applied to NZ before any more attempts are made to exclude or reduce public fishing.

Recommendation:

1. Commit to resourcing full and proper research in order to establish an economic value of recreational fishing. We believe that any economic evaluation would overwhelmingly show that recreational fishing generates far more economic benefits and many of the fish caught are also returned for others to catch increasing the economic returns immensely. Ie a kingfish caught off White Island by a charter boat often is caught several times costing several hundred dollars per fish each time. Without factoring in the social and health benefits. UF believe that while an economic evaluation would be useful our belief is that the fish already belong to the people of NZ and there should be no need for the NZ public to justify its right to fish, Hence our recreational only species in our policy. We would certainly support an economic evaluation.

Note: This is work that needs to be undertaken independent of MPI. The NZSFC and Marine Research Foundation stand by to coordinate and supervise this work and deliver both outstanding value and definitive results.