Mr Ellery is
obviously a consummate political animal. He articulates his points
well and goes into considerable detail but fails to answer the fundamental
question; as do most politicians.
"What is
the legislative right of recreational anglers in New Zealand?" Answer:
"They haven't got any clearly defined rights of access to the fishery".
Until this is
gained Mr Ellery's rhetoric will disappear into the ether. When
he's unable to freely access the inshore fishery to catch a snapper
or whatever because there aren't any left then I wonder if he'll
be quite as vocal about the Option4 group then, I think not.
I guess the
beauty of a democracy is that everyone is entitled to their opinion
but isn't it great that we can also suggest they take their particular
opinion elsewhere? If you're not for the Option4 Group mr Ellery
might I suggest you go elsewhere for an argument because "Pap" such
as yours is what has caused the present problem. Don't even begin
to tell me what the RFC or NZBGFC has done for the recreational
angler. My catch limit has been reduced substantially since 1989
and it will be further eroded if govt and Ministry had their way.
if you can't see that then you definitely are a politician and no
fisherman in my eyes.
To say that
orange roughy isn't an issue for us because we don't catch them
is pathetic. The problem in that fishery is the same problem in
the snapper fishery Mr Ellery. It's been raped and pillaged and
plundered for profit. Industry have demonstrated no ability to manage
this fishery. Ministry have similarly contributed to its demise.
Your attitude smacks of "if it doesn't harm me directly then I'm
all right mate!" hardly a considered or even intelligent perspective
methinks. If you are remotely concerned about the future of recreational
fishing see Soundings for what it really is; Political propaganda
which doesn't even begin to come close to addressing the primary
issue. Refer to the "answer" above.
If soundings
was meant to be a balanced discussion document then perhaps Mr Ellery
could explain why it's so one eyed in the propositions it makes?
Notice that every Option avoids any question of Government or Ministry
having to compensate industry etc. Is that a coincidence or intended.
You don't have to have to be a genius to work it out do you? Notice
how most of the emphasis is on everything other than giving recreational
anglers statutory rights of access etc.
Recreational
fishers can't even begin to get involved with TACC and TAC etc.
We don't have the money to finance independent research to challenge
industry or Ministry's statistics. Why the hell should we fund $4,000,000
or for that matter $1 when we pay taxes to government already to
look after our rights. I didn't vote in a government to screw me
Mr Ellery. Regardless of whether it is National or labour. You obviously
have access to a considerable amount of information Mr Ellery and
you are well versed in the issue but I don't know who's side you
are on.
Perhaps a bit
of disclosure would be appropriate in order that we can make a balanced
decision on what your agenda really is.
I look forward
to your considered reply.
Bill Ross,
Recreational Angler.
|