The New Zealand Sport Fishing Council (NZSFC), alongside the NZ Angling and Casting Association and NZ Underwater Association, has made a strong stand against the Government’s proposed changes to the Fisheries Act. Representing tens of thousands of recreational fishers, their recent submission to the Ministry for Oceans and Fisheries lays bare a wide range of concerns—from environmental degradation to loss of public fishing rights—arguing the reforms would hand even more control to corporate quota holders at the public’s expense.
The submission, structured across four major sections, systematically rejects most of Fisheries New Zealand’s (FNZ) proposals, labelling them as rushed, poorly justified, and ultimately damaging to the health of New Zealand’s marine ecosystems. At the heart of the critique is a deep concern that the reforms shift the balance of power away from sustainable, public-first fisheries management and toward a privatised, commercially dominated system.
One of the central flashpoints is the proposal for multi-year catch settings and management procedures for low-information stocks. FNZ suggests these measures will bring more responsiveness and efficiency to fisheries decision-making. The NZSFC disagrees, warning that such changes would lower scientific standards and weaken oversight by relying on unverified, self-reported data from commercial fishers rather than independent scientific assessment. In low-information fisheries—where robust data is already lacking—this could result in irreversible overfishing.
Another major concern is the proposed shift to proportional allocation of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC). Under this model, quota holders would receive a slice of the entire TAC—including fish currently set aside for public, Māori customary, and recreational fishing—essentially transforming public allowances into commercial property. NZSFC argues this is a fundamental betrayal of the Fisheries Act’s intent, which requires the Minister to first allocate for non-commercial needs before setting the Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC).
The submission also sharply criticises attempts to legitimise non-regulatory tools like ACE shelving (voluntary shelving of quota) and catch spreading. While these may sound collaborative, NZSFC notes they are unenforceable, lack transparency, and are often used to avoid accountability. In one example, rock lobster fishers offered to shelve 25% of their quota only after the stock became effectively uncatchable—highlighting the inadequacy of voluntary measures in the face of real depletion.
FNZ’s proposals around onboard cameras also drew fire. While the Council supports expanding camera coverage and clarifying use requirements—particularly full monitoring from port to port—they strongly oppose any exemption from the Official Information Act (OIA). Transparency, they argue, is essential. The only time camera footage has influenced behaviour was when it was released publicly, exposing wrongdoing. Weakening public access to such footage could undo progress in compliance and accountability.
Likewise, attempts to increase the amount of Annual Catch Entitlement (ACE) that can be carried forward year to year—especially for depleted stocks like rock lobster—were roundly rejected. The Council insists that unused ACE often signals an over-allocated TACC or depleted fishery, not an operational hiccup. Allowing more carry-forward without scientific validation only increases the risk of overfishing.
In sum, the Council views these reforms not as modernization, but as a quiet, calculated erosion of environmental protections and public oversight—paving the way for quota holders to gain more control over shared fishery resources. The submission warns that these proposals mirror failed overseas policies, such as those in Canada and Iceland, where similar approaches led to widespread ecological and economic harm.
For New Zealand’s fishers, particularly recreational and customary users, this is about more than just bag limits or quota shares. It’s about protecting a legacy—ensuring that future generations can enjoy abundant, diverse marine life along our coasts. The submission makes clear that these reforms are a step in the wrong direction.
Next, we’ll look at the alternative solution offered by the Council—Rescue Fish Ika Rauora, a comprehensive, sustainability-focused vision for New Zealand’s fisheries future.
Next: A new vision for NZ’s fisheries – Rescue Fish Ika Rauora
Introduction: Fish Fight – The battle for the future of New Zealand’s coastal fisheries
