rights to harvest fish for food within the limits of sustainability
are no less important than the fishing industries rights
granted under the QMS to harvest fish to sell. Therefore
I ask for the same decision making standards as demanded
by and granted to the fishing industry before any changes
to TAC’s or TACC’s are contemplated.
1. Robust scientific evidence of all factors pertaining
to the proposal
2. Full consultation with all affected users
3. Involvement in the decision making process
All of the documents thus far have failed to deliver the
necessary quality of information, consultation and involvement
necessary for me to agree with the proposals made.
I need robust
scientific projections that support the claims made in the
documents produced to date that current or future levels
of public fishing will affect sustainability.
I am particularly
concerned that proposed regulation changes that are so detrimental
to the public’s rights to harvest fish for food are
based on anecdotal reports from a few individuals. The proposed
changes appear to be trying to predict and manage future
fishing scenarios that may not even occur and in doing so
are eroding our rights to harvest fish for food now, possibly
I have read the
summary of concerns produced by option4. I agree that much
more consultation is required before fisheries management
measures such as those proposed may be contemplated. It
is critical, in my opinion, that the public’s rights
to fish are more clearly defined before any regulation changes
are put in place that affect my rights to fish.
I wish that NZRFC,
NZBGFC and option4 be kept fully informed and are consulted
with as the Integrated Management Strategy is further developed.
I wish to be
sent a summary of this consultation process outcome and
any recommendations arising there from.