Crayfish - Rock Lobster

Crayfish - Rock Lobster Management

by option4 and NZSFC

2010 - 2011

Crayfish Management

Since 1992 the New Zealand the rock lobster fisheries have been managed by a national-level, multi-stakeholder group called the National Rock Lobster Management Group (NRLMG). A variety of interests are involved in this forum including commercial quota owners, commercial fishers, customary fishers, the New Zealand Recreational Fishing Council, and representatives from environmental and conservation groups.

The National Rock Lobster Management Group provides an Annual Report to the Minister of Fisheries. In December each year the NRLMG also provide the Minister with an Initial Advice Paper (IPP). The IPP includes management proposals for specific crayfish stocks that, if approved, would apply from April 1st the following year.

Sustainability measures 2010

In December 2009 the National Rock Lobster Management Group submitted two Initial Advice Papers to the Minister. The Minister, Phil Heatley, asked the Ministry to consult the public on the following proposals:

• Consultation 1 – Proposal to adopt a management procedure for Crayfish 3 (CRA 3)
• Consultation 2 – Catch limit reviews for CRA 3, CRA 4, and CRA 7 as a result of operation of Management Procedures.

TOP

Preliminary comments

Points of interest

• Proposals documents issued mid-December, just prior to the holiday period.
• Seven week consultation period, minus four-week holiday term, leaves three working weeks for consultation.
• Limited consultation period as signalled in Fisheries 2030
• No reference to Fisheries Act section 12 obligations, to consult with sector representatives or provide for the input and participation of tangata whenua in these processes. Other Fisheries Act sections covered in statutory obligations sections of papers. It is almost as if s12 no longer exists and MFish are following the Fisheries 2030 process with no intention of acknowledging or fulfilling s12 obligations.
• New section 13(2)(A) of the Fisheries Act 1996 is being used in the absence of any reliable estimates of current biomass or BMSY. The CRA3 plan proposes to use s13(2)(A) in the absence of BMSY for that crayfish stock.

Crayfish 3 (CRA 3) Gisborne

• Historic, ongoing issues about commercial access to concession (smaller than legal) sized fish, customary harvesting ‘spider’ sized fish, recreational fishers inability to access numbers and legal sized fish
• The Minister reduced the TAC and TACC in 2009 and wants a management procedure to guide TAC setting from April 2010.
• The Working Group could not agree on one management option, so two options have been proposed and consulted on. Both involve no change to allowances for non-commercial and other mortality.
• The NRLMG, industry and one customary representative prefer option 1 (Rule 2a)– fix current TAC and TACC for three years within minimum and maximum CPUE limits, monitor CPUE, variations to TAC if stock size changes (up or down). Rebuild expected by 2016.
• Recreational and one customary representative prefer option 2 (Rule 5) - reduce TAC and TACC by 20 tonne, fix at that level for two years irrespective of abundance. Rebuild expected by 2015.

Crayfish 4 (CRA 4) Hawke Bay/Wellington

• Historic, ongoing issues about sustainability.
• The Minister reduced the TAC and TACC in 2009 and enabled management rules to be applied in this fishery. Industry had ‘shelved’ ACE for two years prior to this reduction.
• NZ Sport Fishing Council (formerly NZBGFC) Zone 5 members imposed a voluntary daily bag limit cut from six to four crayfish to assist the rebuild.
• MFish propose two management options. Option 1 - Maintain current catch limits for all sectors.
• The NRLMG and industry favour option 2 – increasing the TAC and TACC by 199.5 tonne and maintaining current allowances for non-commercial and other mortality.

Issues to consider

• Industry concerned that increased abundance will be taken by non-commercial fishers
• MFish term from Harvest Strategy Standards document – ‘conceptual BMSY’ – used in the absence of BMSY, Fmsy and MSY, “embraces the spirit and intent of section 13 of the Act”.
• The KLC outcome reinforced the importance of the total allowable catch (TAC) and s13 of the Fisheries Act as providing for the social, economic and cultural well-being of New Zealanders, through providing abundance. The Court went onto suggest that all of the TAC needs to be allocated to users, to be caught. Allowances in s21 are being interpreted as catch, not interests. So where are people's conservation interests provided for?
• If the TAC is increased and all that increase is given to commercials as higher TACC this assumes non-commercial interests have no further interest in that proportion. That’s a nonsense, as non-commercial fishers want more fish in the water.
• This proposal falsely perpetuates the notion that the total allowable commercial catch (TACC) is an automatic proportion of TAC.
• No recognition of the recreational sector’s contribution to rebuilding the crayfish stocks. All increases proposed to the TACC only.
• s13(2)(A) of the Fisheries Act is being used to justify setting maximum TAC and TACCs.
• Maximum TACCs are being used to suppress non-commercial catch.
• Non-commercial interests are far greater than current catch in these rock lobster fisheries.
• The Minister is legally obliged to provide for non-commercial environmental and fishing interests.

TOP

Submission deadline

The deadline for submissions closed on 5 February 2010.

Your Input

Please register here if you are not on our email list and want to receive our Updates and Alerts so you can stay informed and have your input into the process.

Documents

To achieve a good level of understanding of complex fisheries management scenarios we believe it is important to read the information in chronological order so you can follow the process.

Please provide your feedback to the option4 team.

Thank you for taking the time to participate.

TOP