My individual 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 unnecessarily.

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.