President’s Report September 2009

The honeymoon, if there was one, is now well over and the past year has seen me grapple with the increasing workload that the role with the Council now demands. Your Management Committee is certainly struggling to provide increasingly professional representation in a volunteer capacity.

The year has been both rewarding and frustrating although the events have combined to focus my thoughts on what the future direction of the NZBGFC could be.

This years report is obscenely long. I would like to have had it out earlier for greater discussion. It incorporates more of a review of where I see the NZBGFC is at and where it could go into the future should the member clubs choose.

 Hiwi the Kiwi Goes Fishing

Everybody acknowledged last year that the Hiwi the Kiwi Goes Fishing was an excellent concept. While it was initially slow to get off the ground, the $50K underwrite by Dennis Davey was a huge commitment, especially as the economy fell deeply into recession.

Never the less, Dennis’s commitment was the catalyst for others to get on board and thanks to the NZ Marine Research Foundation, Water Safety NZ, and Black Magic Fishing Tackle via their option4 game fishing lures and The Guardians of the Sea Charitable Trust, the project was brought to fruition.

The rationale for the Hiwi the Kiwi Goes Fishing project is plain. We want to see more kids / the grass-roots being introduced and getting into fishing. These kids are the future of the clubs of this Council. They need to be encouraged. We need to support the NZ culture of “going fishing to catch a feed of fish”.

For many years we entertained a stand at the Auckland Boat Show, but it would come at a cost and was too hard. With Hiwi the Kiwi, meetings have already been held with the Show’s organisers and they are keen to provide us with a stand (free of charge) and to promote the Hiwi the Kiwi program as an incentive to get kids to drag their parents along to the Show….How the world can change…we do need to take advantage of the opportunity that lies before us.

As I mentioned last year, beyond the Hiwi the Kiwi program, I believe that the Council needs to look to the development of a youth fishing and boating program.

Sport & Recreation New Zealand (SPARC)

This year the NZBGFC achieved recognition by SPARC as the national body representing fishing. What does this mean?? Each year Sparc invests $70M into achieving their mission of “Everyone. Every day. Enjoying and excelling through sport and recreation.” They have identified 5 priority areas…
1. Young New Zealanders (0-18 years)
2. Grassroots Sport
3. Recreation
4. Partner Capability
5. High Performance
From SPARC’s own research, 633,749 New Zealanders go fishing each year. Fishing is the 4th most popular activity for males, with 29.8% participating. Those ahead of fishing are walking, gardening and swimming. Including females, fishing still ranks 6th most popular with overall 19.3% participating, with equipment based exercise and cycling then ranking above.
Given the popularity of fishing, and SPARC’s stated desire to achieve increased participation, into the future, I anticipate gaining their support for projects such as Hiwi the Kiwi, a youth fishing and boating program and also assistance with improving our capability as a national representative body.
In this regard, I have made contact with the Sir Edmund Hillary Outdoor Recreation Trust, which has been established as the principal advisory body to SPARC on “investment”, and we are to have an initial meeting with a view to arranging a presentation to the trustees on how they / SPARC may be able to be of assistance.
I understand that SPARC invested $600,000 in surfing last year, and I recently saw their support at a curling competition. Given that neither of these sports rank in the top 20, I am optimistic, that given a professional approach, then we should also be able to secure investment from them.
It has been suggested that mixing our fisheries management representation activities while belonging to SPARC is untenable. To the contrary, there is a difference between participating in fisheries management and political lobbying. This issue was covered in our discussions with SPARC and accepted prior to recognition being granted. Unlike any other sport, with fishing, access to the resource is shared between both commercial and non commercial interests.

The Fisheries Act requires the Government to consult with non commercial fishers. Fishers or any organisation do not have a choice…The politicians now come to us and are obliged to consult with us.

Fisheries Management – Future Strategy

How do we achieve “More Fish in the Water?”

Unquestionably, as demonstrated with the 2030 Vision process, when we give ourselves the time and resources, and follow good process, agreement and a very strong mandate can be achieved.

Undoubtedly the KLC has given a clearer definition of fisheries management law. It is my own personal belief that the non commercial sector is now better informed and more capable than it has ever been.

The difficulty is that, with the Fisheries Act and Quota Management System, fisheries management in NZ is like driving a car on ice.

25 years of our world leading Quota Management System has proven that having a Minister of Fisheries making balanced fisheries management decisions, will not see timely rebuilds of depleted fisheries and a healthy aquatic environment. 

The Fisheries Act didn’t, unfortunately, have time-frames for rebuilds or consequences for them not being achieved. There have been relatively few consequences to industry and the goal posts have been continually moved. Perhaps it could be called the Status Quo-ta Management System!!

Rebuilds will not happen quickly with decisions focused on short term economic and financial gains.

We do still need to remain engaged in selected MFish / Government processes. The level of engagement needs to be tempered with the realisation that, while we have always participated in consultation, the gains are incrementally small. The Volkner Rocks lesson was that if you don’t remain engaged, then the steam roller goes on even if you don’t participate. We do still need to protect what we have.

There is also the fact that the current Fisheries Act is / was focused on BMSY, having been implemented at a time when the purpose was to save the commercial sector from themselves.

While BMSY sounds good because it has that magical word “sustainable” in it, worldwide BMSY is now recognised by scientists as the knife edge of a fishery in collapse and is no longer an acceptable level at which to manage a fishery. What we have been endeavouring to achieve, the concept of management above, or well above BMSY, may be closer to being desirable and achievable than we realise. Management at Maximum Economic Yield (MEY) may provide a much more acceptable level of biomass to fishery managers and stakeholders.

A review of the Fisheries Act has been signaled. I believe that we are better prepared than ever before to engage in this process. We could however be a lot better prepared.

Rob Kramer when he visited 2 years ago advised that the entire inshore fishery in Florida was a non commercial only fishery due to it having been proven that their non commercial fishery was of greater value to the economy than a commercial fishery. This is an aspect that nee