As we move into the busy Summer fishing and dive activities industry commentator Daryl Sykes highlights a problem for all legitimate rock lobster fishermen and women.
A blackmarket in rock lobsters has several direct and indirect effects on legitimate customary, recreational and commercial fishermen and women. In the commercial world there are the obvious issues of price-cutting and unfair competition in the market place, but the real impacts are perhaps more subtle. The cost of constraining the illegal activity is borne primarily by commercial operators, but legitimate non-commercial (amateur and customary) users are deprived of fishing opportunity and the potential quality of their fishing experience.
Estimated catches taken by fish thieves are factored into annual stock assessments and management decisions. When making allowances for legitimate shares of the fishery the Minister of Fisheries makes provision for fish thieving before confirming the commercial quotas (Total Allowable Commercial Catch – TACC). In effect, the legitimate commercial operators are being forced to make restitution for the activities of the thieves. This is a unique but entirely inequitable way to ensure the continued sustainability of lobster fisheries.
Fish thieves care little for quality and hygiene, and their activities could damage the hard-won reputation that NZ rock lobsters have in domestic and export markets.
Fish thieves ensure that the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) Compliance and Enforcement budget stays high. A significant proportion of that Compliance budget is recovered from the rock lobster industry by way of statutory government levies.
Fish thieves can certainly deplete stocks in localised areas – a bay or a reef – but it would take an enormously high level of thieving to adversely impact on the resource itself. Such high levels of illegal activity are unlikely to occur. It would be too obvious and legitimate commercial operators are constantly vigilant for fish thieves.
Fish thieves give industry members a bad public profile because reports of fish thieving normally refer to “commercial” quantities of rock lobster – the inference being that (legitimate) commercial fishermen are cheating the system. The inference is invariably wrong, but the public perception of commercial fishermen can be somewhat coloured in any event.
There is no evidence of rock lobsters taken by fish thieves being exported – the NZ domestic market is the target, and that market is clearly willing to buy. A primary concern is that in some areas a blackmarket continues to flourish. Community members who perhaps unwittingly support the activities of fish thieves are undervaluing their fisheries and sanctioning a loss of legitimate fishing opportunity.
Penalties for fish thieving can be harsh.
Commercial fishermen convicted of illegal fishing offences will forfeit fishing vessels and quota, plus incur substantial financial penalties – a $250,000 fine could apply. Fish thieves who are not commercial fishermen (i.e. have no quota/ACE or fishing permit) will face the same penalties if convicted of dealing in commercial quantities of rock lobster. The Fisheries Act defines a “commercial quantity” as being seven times the amateur daily bag limit.
Recreational-fishing offending in New Zealand is subject to an escalating enforcement regime. Minor prescribed breaches may be addressed through education, warning, or infringement notices— commonly $250 for take above a daily limit but not exceeding twice that limit, and $500 where take exceeds twice but not three times the limit.
More serious, repeated, or deliberate offending can result in prosecution, court fines of up to $10,000 or $20,000 for specified amateur-fishing offences, confiscation of fish and equipment, and fishing prohibitions. The Fisheries Act also provides substantially higher sanctions for certain serious and repeat offending, including fines up to $250,000 and, for relevant offences, imprisonment.
Fisheries New Zealand’s recently reported 94% recreational compliance rate should not be interpreted as a population estimate that only 6% of recreational fishers are non-compliant. It is an operational statistic derived from nearly 13,000 summer catch inspections, expressed as instances of non-compliance detected during inspection. Inspection activity is targeted and the published measure does not identify the number of individual offenders, the number of offending trips, repeat offending, or the quantity of unlawful catch.
Nonetheless, even a low single-digit rate can be significant when applied to the scale of the sector. Using the National Panel Survey estimate of approximately 1.2 million annual marine recreational fishing trips, a hypothetical 6% non-compliant-trip rate would equate to about 72,000 non-compliant trips annually. If each involved only two unlawfully retained fish or shellfish on average, this would amount to approximately 144,000 items per year; if each involved a six-item daily-limit equivalent, the figure would rise to approximately 432,000 items.
These are scenario estimates, not measured estimates of illegal take, but they demonstrate why aggregate compliance effects require careful consideration in recreational-fisheries management.
Given that Ministry estimates of illegal unreported removals of rock lobsters have been consistent over time, and the fact that numbers of repeat offenders are apprehended, it might be argued that the heavy penalties themselves are no incentive for proper compliance with fisheries rules. The problem may well sit with the judiciary, who often seem reluctant to impose the full weight of penalties against non-commercial fishermen.
The penalties could also perhaps serve as a huge incentive for offenders to be strongly defending fisheries charges and judges have shown themselves to be persuaded by pleas of poverty, ignorance of the law, or extenuating circumstances which at face value appear improbable to those who know fishing and fisheries.
The second problem may be that MPI does not consistently capitalise on successful prosecutions and draw the attention of the community at large to the level of penalties imposed on offenders.
In the meantime – 0800 4 Poacher (08004476224)
MPI asks callers to provide, where safely possible:
- Exact location and time
- Vehicle and trailer registration
- Vessel name or other identifying details
- Description of people involved
- Species, approximate quantity, fishing method, and direction of travel
- Photos or video, if taken without confronting anyone or putting oneself at risk
MPI says reports and personal details are treated as confidential. Do not approach or confront suspected offenders; personal safety comes first.
