whitebait fishery: of the of the - PDF document

whitebait fishery: of the of the l' as an New Zealand Downstream movement complaint relating the \ryhitebait Fishing (West selection by Gqloxias brevipinnis New Zealand and Fresl¡woter Research and models rivers. New J.A.T.; Mitchell, whitebait fishery ZealandFreshwater Fisheries the iower 1995. Inanga spawning New Zealand New Zealand's Marine and Embryonic and Shrimpton, regarding 15 September Environment. 1988. manqgement study: report of Environment, Wellington.Zealand nativeand technologt a symposium. Mitchell, C.P. 1993b. Management the lower 1994a. Recommendations the Braemar Lagoon weir. Conservation Mitchell, C.P. and Associates.1995d. Trapping the and Associates.Associates.)How to locate ønd protect whitebait Christchurch: Freshwater South Island. on the the diet 2: l-84.in New New Zealand and Technologt report to ÍVest Coast 19 93. Whitebait Fishing the Hakarimata New Zealand Journal of 9 3 Fisheries 1932: of the for whitebait of the which the of the fishers, and fishery are for helpful proposed amendnents Services. 40 p,held on some native the whitebait Taihoro Nukurar,gi and an expensive has never resouce is a sustainable be managed The public same as whitebait fishing and other fishery DOC whitebait fishery that all to whitebaiters was introduced,setting nets in large of not though quantitative whitebait production. of fish: breeding populations we look single most the previous a major the productive undertaken previously the regulations of the the fishery, the long-term or in a memorandum a standard had been suggested test at the whitebait giant kokopu whitebait by members giant kokopu over a was appropriate data became was thatbe scientifically which future can be inanga, management did not that the that migratory the early as inanga tides in to exploit - McDowall by the the biggest on bothcan always process needs an opportunity and reveal may affect In this instance, decision-making DOC is adopt much and longer be adopted by the West the long-term making in of their decisions on whitebaiting this is own way. or of do not outspoken and the whitebait being bothbacking) and specifically at dispute over for it to end on the decision rather than the Regulations Review was based kokopu whitebait. also expressed taken at the end the Association in the the RCCthe length a change was, therefore, and presented most peopie any proposed the interests than (and flawlessly by and sought holding further consultation is same as bluntly, a lobby may conflict or trout in the their own them wanting should be interest in (financial gain), necessarily seek is best did, they could the fishery, whitebaiters should their own consultation over and taken the administration/regulations has some provisional intentions Review Committee heard and when such those consulted and season been considered that the existing the resource". implication of second statement in the a study a simple also varies so serious and an was held.was derived the likelihood in factathe Regulations be a in establishing 1964. Gettingreliable figures be costly Catch figures long time series, and the factors little or The fishery may also we know much the scarce research doubts about differently in at all as a basis of fluctuation among fishersas notedunless reasons be any be on the and must monitoring that lead, hopefully, of variation. by a fishery, as catch fluctuations variables must fishery. This investigation in the contributions the runs the Department the Department the fishery the Regulations evidence presented and undertaken its significant past 6 on whitebait by applying and extending e.g. by installing fish migration where this is practicable being better in optimal THE PARLIAMENTARYThe West Association complained action in adequately signalled that the Department should therefore consultation when decision was the objections Whitebaiters' Association, the Regulations Review Committee this report, Review Committee: as koaro, the fish small headwater most rivers, by DOC areas enhancement grounds has This activity popular support inanga spawning.species: Several a substantial, is the priority for Taihoro Nukurong- underway at in part at migration, the fishery;Whitebait migration at night;the fishery;The question on rare the fishery;the report frshery is of the Department by some additional period (McKenzie Marine Department in the 1964 1965during this 1972, and at that bulletin largely fishery was also b; Mitchell was undertaken easiest research the surface". current information much moresaid about basic ecology, four of the involved in the ecology of which is much 1980). There a need made based these decisions particular faction. very few 1994) thoughtDOC was used external on the really grappled there is no implication What is the utmost also important are major as fisheries that DOC that might DOC's primary served. The and performance severe. Thissome possible - to a long This is the fishery. reigning exploitation.maintained and that there a system that fairly Treaty of Waitangi issues as (this is in consultation towards the consuitation inanga spawning rather than undertaking major review consensus, somewhat and based whitebaiters through press releases, etc. IS DOC'S way is the fishery the factors DOC's philosophical and social the fish populations. in a shoveller, pukeko,the harvesting than immediate the fishery. been in on whitebait there were being used" used" regulations that would ban traps from nets" (p.10)Sock nets - signalling that it would be giving "serious consideration .. towhether banning sock they are the RMA., others, on of whitebait A whitebait and research on the whitebait fishery Document invited the views 4) in be takena series the review of fishing fishing the resource" as well as a ,,mechanism ...to ensure sufficient fish get past the nets [: escapement] to breed". A principle ofregulation was that "controls must be clear "evaluate the olosing ccrtain the West forms the fishery's manager. of the an independent consultant, of maintaining West Coast the Department The Public Discussion support of habitat and spawning clear and be taken.is a and more the exploitation SWMEp (Ministry a sustainable the recommendations the management Coast ì¡/hitebait such a the fishing that controlled the fishery;Habitat protection; in the an attempt it. With thenew regulationcommercial whitebaiters did not conditions under in the Nearly all that their and effective registered sites, they were,under valuable fishing site. Consequently, and more caught, staying shifting often result more and more the regulation unsuccessful attempts no official difficulty in catch records the report is discussed at and events that DOC There had been longstanding than the bureaucracy and the activities of both Fisheries usually employed two full these matters a context deforestation; swamp and sedimentation; fìshery. Furthermore, damaging impacts cannot be there were such a decline, records in the fìshery Marine Department Annual Fisheries date However, theirrecords (Marine on Fisheries) entire country, but the late data only the South Island, where always existed, does. These figures were and so on the diversified, maintaining being restricted the West Coast the lateZealand increasingly on the West catch and marketed rivers improved, more whitebaiters Coast roads raffles inand clubs, etc. Increasingly, catch records was driven Taihoro Nukurangi especially on the West the fishery Their history is more national the highly For most of the there have to DOC Marine Department the Marine simplicity and the development November, but opening in and focused did this the regulations on the regulations of text in Coast fishery of the my view), less appropriate whitebait fishery and often uncomfortable conditions, an ever-diminishìng their way up of migration whitebait migrating by whitebait times in the historical Coast, in there had cannot be forgotten; poor more restrictions and management, the upstream the culinary qualities and equallythe rivers the fish in them rapidly on markets the fishery of the and can on the limited funding is briefly are captured of five - listed 1990); however, the V/aikato), Relropinna (known as smelt) as each species' considerable conservation concern are also there are differences between in migration Time during Location of fishing and distance tide during the time elapsed since lobby group to l5 on the on its policy/intentions;of regulation the regulations The Department of the time the These responsibilities newly 1.972), and includes amongst practicable all research needed whitebait fishery regulations already Coast Whitebait Fishing) Regulations fishery outside of the Over the the intention the West and managing various cautious, in its and exploitation Review Committee but this funded only existing research research relevant fishery has catch should collected; however, critical review Association. The Coast Whitebait Regulations, specifically closure on of the and distributed and management frshery, and on the DOC's consultation a result, earlier closure instructed that were outlined The Department its intrinsic the West the Department as conseryative, in its regulations, and is potential It_IIII OF CONTENTSThe context managing the on the Adoption of fishery by review of Review CommitteeThe rationale Catalogui ng-i fishery: a critical of the of the N.Z. : Ltd. II Title. The NIIVA National Institute New Zealand.It tareshwater Researeh New Zealand Ph: 03 348 New Zealand07 856'1026Ph: 07 New Zealand386 0300Fax: 04 386 ISSN tt73-0382NIWA Science and Technology Series No.32Managing the New Zealandwhitebait fishery: a critical reviewof the role and performance of theDepartment of ConservationR.M. McDowallNTWAChristchurchApril 1996 whitebait fishery: of the of the