Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications

#87 May/Jun 2012 with NZ Aquaculture Magazine

The only specialised marine publication in Oceania that focuses on the maritime industry, from super yachts to small craft to large commercial ships, including coastal shipping, tugs, tow boats, barges, ferries, tourist, sport-fishing craft

Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaleditions.com/i/63646

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 33 of 100

solution, as in the commercial fishery, will be to reduce the TARCs by pro-rata cuts to everyone's quotas. This means that some quotas, earned honestly by genuine fishers actually doing the business, will be taken away from them and handed to others, as was done in several commercial fisheries. In parallel with commercial fishery practice, 20 percent of every TARC, hence 20 percent of fishers' quotas, would be taken away for award to Maori. This should not be confused with their own customary catch which is separate and inviolate. Of course, MAF should try to impose a uniform set of rules for all components of TACs, so they should also bring the customary catch fully into the QMS. Iwi should be approached with a view to quantify their customary take and divide it into quotas. These could then be subject to the same regulatory processes as those governing commercial and recreational. The final component of any TAC – the illegal take – would be problematical. However, this writer is sure that the policy branch of MAF would have little trouble coming up with an IPP, proposing ways and means of negotiating with offenders in order to formalise and quantify their take. At the beginning of the quota year in a commercial fishery, every quota holding produces an equivalent amount of Annual Catching Entitlement (ACE) which the owner uses to match his landings or trades to another catcher. Similarly, a recreational quota owner will find that his quota will produce, say, an Annual Recreational Catching Entitlement (ARCE), kilo for kilo or number for number, in each species of his portfolio. As he lands fish and sends in his return, his landings will be deducted from his starting ARCE. If he overfishes by exceeding his ARCE or by catching fish for which he does not hold it (and is unable to return the fish safely to the sea in a state that ensures that it will survive) he/ she must land it and obtain ARCE from another fisher or pay the equivalent of the commercial deemed value charge. This will be a penal charge set at a level to discourage overfishing but low enough to encourage landing it rather than dumping it (which is illegal). There will be a set time limit to do this, and failure to do so would trigger the suspension of the permit. The quota/ARCE system would be a property right for holders. A person may sell his ARCE for that year, or for a stipulated period, to another, retaining his quota for future use, or he/she may sell the quota. He keeps the ARCE for the current year, but after that it will be produced for the buyer. All this would be on a willing seller – willing buyer basis. Supply and demand (market forces) would dictate the values of the various quotas. Where would this system leave future generations? As all the amateur take will be owned by those currently involved in the fishery and/or those to whom they sell it, the only way into recreational fishing for young people would be by buying ARCE from existing quota-holders. The wealthy will tend to accumulate amateur quota, as they outbid average citizens for whatever comes up for sale. This parallels the trends in the commercial fishery, where retiring fishermen, trying to sell up, found the only takers were the big fishing companies who could easily top the prices offered by those few would-be owner-operators who could actually raise finance (many could not). This is why the greater part of all quotas are now owned by companies and why the greater part of amateur quotas will be owned by the rich. Once amateur fishing is fully within the quota management system, many average citizens will find that going fishing will only be possible if they pay for extremely expensive permits and buy expensive ARCE. Questions? Scupper • Marine Diesels • Complete Marine Engineering • Drivelines • Hull Repairs • Stainless Fittings • Precision Manufacturing • Specialised Fabrication Ph (09) 376 0010, Email sales@mge.co.nz 8/1 Westhaven Drive, Auckland, New Zealand www.mgemarine.co.nz May/June 2012 Professional Skipper 31 VIP.S84

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications - #87 May/Jun 2012 with NZ Aquaculture Magazine