That is the central thrust of the industry’s response to the current review of the Fisheries Act.
Submissions were sought in 2015, the Ministry for Primary Industries took a year to digest those and sought further responses to a discussion document, the Future Of Our Fisheries (FOOF).
However, while the industry is approaching the review in a positive light, there is one area of major concern that is at the nub of fisheries management.
When the review was announced, the rights associated with quota ownership that underpin the QMS and Treaty rights enshrined in the 1992 Maori Fisheries Settlement were ruled out of scope.
It is disappointing, if not alarming, to see aspects of the review clearly breach this intent.
That is embodied in a proposal to forcibly re-set management targets and reallocate catch shares.
Value is eroded where rights are insecure.
The motive for the proposed arbitrary catch reallocations in shared fisheries was presumably to provide for the increasing demands of the recreational sector centred on Auckland.
But anything that undermines hard fought rights enshrined in law, and indeed in the country’s fabric, are simply not tenable and will be resisted.
This distraction needs to be removed so that we can make progress on a number of issues, ideally to the benefit all parties in a shared fishery.
There is no dispute from the fishing industry that operational issues such as discarding need to be addressed. In this regard it is heartening that MPI has agreed to review policies and settings and incentives.
The solutions should include development of inshore fisheries management plans. There is inadequate Crown funding of research to assess the status of these stocks; most have not been scientifically reviewed for a decade or more.
Is it any wonder that the system struggles when fish stocks increase and catch limits are not adjusted accordingly? The situation is exacerbated when deemed values, the sum paid to the Crown where excess fish are landed, are so out of kilter in some cases, it is uneconomic for such fish to be landed.
There is also a clear need to improve measurement and management of recreational fishing. The system is currently lopsided, with commercial and customary catch reported comprehensively, while surveying of recreational catch is infrequent and inadequate.
Allocations for the recreational sector should be confirmed based on current catch and those limits should be actively managed in the same manner as the Total Allowable Commercial Catches. Any increases or decreases due to sustainability considerations should be proportional across the recreational and commercial sectors so that there is shared gain and shared restraint where necessary.
Restraint based on science is well established in the commercial sector and was evidenced again this week when Gisborne rock lobster fishers supported a 23-tonne reduction in the catch, equivalent to 9 percent of the quota, to maintain stocks.
“The aim is to maintain a high abundance level, so when the procedure signals a cut, we are fine with that,” Tairawhiti Rock Lobster Industry Association chair Gordon Halley said.
If there is to be any adjustment of allocations between the commercial and recreational sectors, a framework should be in place for this to occur through market mechanisms.
The Fisheries Act has not undergone major review since 1996, a generation ago. That said, it is not broken and it remains world-leading. What is needed is policy to ensure the QMS operates more effectively, and enhancements that build upon, not erode, the core elements that have been the cornerstone of our success to date.
The seafood sector wants to make the most of the review opportunity and is fully supportive of some aspects of FOOF, such as enabling innovative harvest technologies.
There is considerable potential to deliver on the Business Growth Agenda by delivering more value through industry management, reducing excessive regulation and enhancing regional economic growth, whilst securing long-term, sustainable fisheries.