Fish, service and spies
Relevant offers
Letters to the editor
OPINION: Cod catch
The interesting article by Mr Shields about the blue cod is actually a red herring. It is beyond dispute that a skilled fisher, with the right hook, can land, handle and release a fish, usually without harm. It is not, however, given to most of us to be able to do that.
Our data, available on the Marlborough Recreational Fishers website, indicates that a very significant number of oversize fish (perhaps as much as 30 per cent) die after capture, either by damage or predation.
The justification for release of the larger fish, mainly males, is that their continued presence inhibits the sex change of the biggest females, and hence will lead to greater productivity of fertilised eggs. There are flaws in this argument.
First, dead males have no influence on the behaviour of the females, and second, there is no good evidence that the population of blue cod in the sounds is limited by egg production. In fact, there are a number of imponderables which need investigation, and the MRFA is trying to make a small contribution to this.
My thanks to all those who have supplied the MRFA with details of their cod catch. It is only with such data, imperfect as it is, that we can hope to persuade the authorities to change their views about the slot rule. I urge all cod fishers to return details of their catch to myself or Des Mitchell.
JOHN LEADER, Picton
Stop bad service
There has been a lot of talk lately about the poor quality of customer service in Blenheim shops and restaurants.
It is time Blenheim residents learned to complain about bad service and supported those businesses who pride themselves on quality service.
It is the old name and shame idea. When dining out, a customer expects good food, good surroundings and friendly service. It's a pity there are restaurants out there that serve sub-standard food at inflated prices. And the service is sometimes mere lip service. I have experienced moody waiters, rude waiters and waiters who think they know everything, but in reality have limited knowledge of their roles, along with people passing themselves off as chefs who have had limited training and serve up poor-quality food.
People don't accept this.
Come on Blenheim – start demanding a better deal. Good service may be hard to find, but look around. Support these businesses and show others that they need to improve their standards or suffer the consequences.
PAULINE JACKSON, Blenheim
Spy base cost
Talking to Blenheim people about the Waihopai spy base last weekend, it was clear that the costs of this base and its operative, the GCSB (Government Communications Security Bureau), are not well known. Several people were unhappy about $1 million claimed to be the cost of damage to the base by protesters, but this is pocket money to the GCSB.
Their 2012 budget is $56m; last year they spent $35m on new headquarters and total (public) budget was $73m.
The organisation has cost taxpayers more than $600m in the past two decades, possibly much more in hidden costs. And who can cite any direct benefits to our country from the insidious and undemocratic operations of the base? Would you like many more doctors or teachers or police in Blenheim? Then close the base!
WARREN THOMSON, Christchurch
Fish farms
In reply to New Zealand King Salmon chief executive Grant Rosewarne, who claims the Marlborough Sounds will not be inundated with fish farms, I say again: the "message" seems to have been lost in translation.
I stand by my concerns, and so should every one who has a heart for the Sounds.
Mr Rosewarne, you state enough is known about the Sounds' ecosystems. Council acknowledge in their latest publication, Ecologically significant marine sites in Marlborough, that little is known and most of what is known has been compromised. This is not good enough. Things are steadily getting worse, not better as per the promise to enhance our marine environment via the 2015 Tourism Strategy.
You claim you have always been aware of the environment. Why then are you flushing your waste (nutrients) into the Sounds as dairy have flushed their waste (nutrients) into our rivers?
Algae are connected to nutrient levels and there is a real danger of toxic algae blooms. It is similar to our waterway crises. Fifty per cent of our lakes are now polluted and most lowland rivers don't meet bathing standards. Little has been achieved in the time we have all been aware of these problems. Take a look at latimes.com/oceans to see where this leads. Is this what we want for the Sounds? (Auckland's toxic blooms 2011, Marlborough Sounds 2010/11).
Again I urge the public to become aware of these applications and make submissions.
Sorry Mr Rosewarne, you have done well with your spin but I don't buy it.
DANNY BOULTON, Marlborough Sounds Tourism Operator
- The Marlborough Express
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Hugh you are getting me flustered sentence should have read. I have been fishing when all fish caught were over the slot and bringing them up 2 at a time as soon as you hit the bottom you hooked up, it was it was in Tory Channel about 10 minutes from the Queen Charlotte end. So I don’t have a problem with the 75% figure Des Mitchell
Hugh me thinks you were standing on your head (inverted) when you wrote the last letter. The statistics are Caught 1572, Under Slot 558 35.5%, Over Slot 615 39.1%, Slot 399 25.4%, Reported Dead 211 Shags 105 Barracuda 43 Total Dead 356 30.3% I believe Maff claim 41% in the slot and that is what the rule was based on. People who caught their boat limit 51% people who didn’t catch their boat limit 44.7% people who caught over the limit 4.3%. One doesn’t need to be a scientist to figure out if there was no slot, people would easily get there limit and stop fishing and the smaller fish mortality would be much reduced. They would then grow up to be mummies and daddies and make lots of babies. Sure you would approve of that. “You are actually claiming an area, outside of the inner Sounds” Your words. Where did I specify the area? I have been fishing when all fish caught were over the slot and bringing them up 2 at a time as soon as you hit the bottom you hooked up it was about 10 minutes from the Queen Charlotte end. So I don’t have a problem with the 75% figure I queried the fact that we were catching more big fish than were being caught at Long Island at the time the Davidson report was released. There is no doubt that the slot kills fish and the sooner it’s gone the better. Des Mitchell
Re: COD CATCH 24/1. PART TWO. On the Charter trip you refer to, you claim: 320 total fish caught: 60 under the slot, 20 in the slot and 240 above the slot. Or in percentages: 18.8% under the slot, 6.3% in the slot and 75% above the slot.
75% over the slot is a staggering figure and is so out of synch with the MRFA website, Davidson Environmental or any survey data from the past 30 years as to be unbelievable.
What your figures actually do is invert the pyramid with the widest part at the top, balancing on the pointy bit at the bottom. That is not how Egyptians built their pyramids and it is not typical of blue cod population structure. For there to be large numbers of big sized cod there needs to be a even larger number of small cod to support the base of the pyramid.
You are actually claiming an area, outside of the inner Sounds, which has been open to recreational, commercial and customary fishing for the whole time i.e. an area not subject to the closure, has a higher percentage of large fish than a Marine Reserve in which fishing has been banned for 18 years.
Me thinks’ you are tricking us more than you are letting on. Only a few months ago members of MRFA members wrote claiming the, “Displacement of fishing effort, due to the closure, was causing serial depletion in the open areas beyond the Sounds.” Now you are claiming 75% of the blue cod in the same area are over the slot size, where only a few months ago, “Recreational fishers are struggling to catch a legal cod.” Since these two statements contradict each other, only one can be the truth, which is it?
Re: COD CATCH 24/1. PART ONE. Des, on the subject of data being “flawed,” your data simply does not stack-up compared to your own MRFA website figures, Dr John Leader’s up-dated catch figures, the Long Island Marine Reserve Survey for the past 18 years or any NIWA data for the past 30 years. MRFA website (27 Jan 2012) recorded 899 total fish caught: 34% under the slot, 26% in the slot and 40% above the slot. On 29 January Dr John Leader emailed me up-dated figures (yet to be posted on MRFA website): 1562 total fish caught: 35.4% under the slot, 25.3% in the slot and 39.4% above the slot. These two sets of figures are remarkably similar and are typical of the Sounds blue cod population: 60% below 35cm, 40% above 35cm. Blue cod population graphs usually represent a pyramid shaped structure with a wide base containing the largest proportion of small sized fish support a small number of large fish at the top of the pyramid. Davidson Environmental Limited, Long Island Marine Reserve Survey figures April 2011 show: 74.9% under 30cm, 13.50% in the 30 – 33cm size and 11.60% above 33cm in the recreationally fished areas. Inside the Reserve, Davidson Environmental recorded: 57.35% under 30cm, 14.10% in the 30 – 33cm size and 28.50% above 33cm. NOTE: Davidson Environmental commenced surveys of Long Island in September 1993, long before the Slot Fishery was introduced in the Sounds, and therefore the measurement sizes do not line-up with the slot size, nor are the surveys, which are done for DOC, not MFISH, intended to support or discredit the slot fishery.
Des, To preserve the Blue Cod there needs to be a ban. In the past reduction in limits has been tried but has not worked as the cod population before the ban proved as it was almost impossible to catch a legal Cod in the inner Sounds. There has been some people speculating that it was the mussel farms, seals, shags, barracouta etc etc. The real reason the cod have been depleted is due to recreational over fishing thus the ban was imposed. The old whingers and moaners complained when the ban was enforced so MAF opened the slot rule so some cod could be taken to keep the whingers and moaners happy. Now it appears that the winger and moaners aren't happy yet again. What is the easiest way to protect the Cod? Would it be to ban Cod fishing and have no slot rule at all. Will you be happy then???
Interesting to note the slot rule is in place throughout Australia and works over there without any problem. You will find alot of fisherman now return large fish, especially snapper, out of respect for the fishery. I guess it is just a matter of changing peoples attitudes.
Brendon the issue is not charter boats it is just another red herring. Over the holiday period the average boat held 3.5 fishers so 3 rec boats = 1 charter boat with 10 on board how many charter boats do the rec fishers represent, there were hundreds out. Charter boats are not causing the problem. The slot rule is! It is indisputable with no slot rule they would have taken at most 30 fish. You could probably use your fingers to do the calculation if you don’t have a calculator. I am personally quite happy with 2 fish each. Where you get the idea they are not enough beats me. Yes ministry have said that they will look at it late this year but nothing will happen till 2014. By then the abundance will have been severely depleted and it will used as an excuse to close the sounds again. The cost and time to change it is small change to preserve “the iconic Blue Cod fishery” but first there has to be the will. And Maff and the previous minister have shown no inclination to do so. Indeed they are remaining deathly silent. Anderton made the decision over night Maff could just as easily change the rule. If they wanted to. Des Mitchell
Des, The charter boat only moved three times. This means they were catching a hundred cod before they moved each time. As I said before the charter obviously has no respect for the fish stocks in the Sounds. For a charter boat to move only after catching a hundred Cod is pathetic. You must remember that the charter fisherman are making a commmercial living from the recreational fishing stocks.
Are two cod per person not enough for you. Been an experienced angler I'm sure you catch lots of other species when you go fishing.
The Ministry has already stated they will look at the slopt rule in the future but to change the rules at the present will not happen due to costs and time so why not accept the slot rule for the time been and work with it rather than fight it. While the Cod ban is on it might be a good opportunity to educate others about all the other easily caught edible species in the Sounds such as Tarakihi, Gurnard, Snappper, Kingfish, Monkfish, Sea Perch.
Brendon I think you are losing sight of the problem. The slot rule cannot be justified using the data which was used as an excuse to close it. If you look at the data you will see that the claim is the largest number of fish were between 30-35cm unfortunately this is far from the actuality. If you care to look the histogram up you will also see that in all sizes from 25-40cm the most dominant fish are large males there is no shortage of them. So no need to traumatize them with catch and release they can safely be kept with out fear of females rushing to change sex. More importantly by allowing them to be kept this would reduce the time spent fishing to get the limit. In turn this will dramatically reduce the number of undersize fish having to be returned. Talk till the cows come home catching and releasing Blue Cod carries a high mortality. The charter boat moved 3 times but to no avail. Even you would have to agree catching and keeping 20-30 fish instead of 300 is much more sensible. As I have said the charter boys didn’t make the rules. The slot rule is an experiment by one person and it has gone terribly wrong. Time to bin it. And no I don’t want to go out and catch unlimited fish just enjoy the sounds and get a feed.
Des, You think if a charter fisherman had to catch that many fish to get them with in the slot they would move to a spot where fish were they could catch them with in the sizes allowed.
Obviously this charter fisherman has no respect for the fishery.
I totally agree with your statement that there is none so blind as they who don’t want to see. Take a look at yourself as you seem to laugh at the prospect of waving a gaff at the shags. I know of plenty of people that use this technique and it works.
Vital thrilling seconds make his day
Leona and dog Chase smell a rat
Rider pushes the safety message
Minister shares community dream
Kiwis 'best at marketing own wine'
Safety strategy to get people on bikes
The art of style on show at Barn
Hold on tight, the rodeo's coming
Des, The latest article in the paper went down like a lead balloon with teh public. Do you feel that you are fighting a losing battle especially when the statistics that were quoted are so flawed