Bite may have to be put on fishers

About 600,000 New Zealanders go fishing each year. They should pay a fee to help manage the fisheries

Recreational fishing in New Zealand’s marine waters is one of the few remaining free-ofcharge public goods available to everyone. However, managing fisheries is not costless.

Management costs will inevitably be an important consideration for the new Minister of Fisheries, Stuart Nash, as he considers how best to improve inshore fisheries.

The costs of managing these fisheries are partly borne by the commercial fishing sector through cost-recovery levies; the remaining costs of management and enforcing rules are borne by taxpayers, though most do not fish.

New Zealand’s population is near 4.8 million. The best estimate is that about 600,000, or 12 per cent of the population, fish each year. Many of the remaining 88 per cent rely on commercial fishers to supply seafood in supermarkets and restaurants.

Should those who do not fish subsidise the management costs for recreational fisheries, especially if fishers are not prepared to contribute toward those costs?

In many other countries, fishers contribute towards fisheries management costs by paying fishing licence fees. These fees fund fisher-related services and facilities. And, the information gained through licensing helps inform management decisions. Licences generate higher fees from non-residents, including tourists, than from residents.

Trout fishing here is managed by Fish & Game New Zealand. There are nine licences for residents or non-residents. To fish for a full season, a non-resident pays $165 compared to $127 for a resident.

The New Zealand Sport Fishing Council represents about 32,000 fishers, or 5 per The Sport Fishing Council opposes recreational fishing licences. cent of total marine fishers. The council strongly objects to fishing licences. This is ironic given the council has mandatory fees for its affiliated fishing club members who also pay fees to their clubs.

The irony is heightened when considering the potential benefits arising from a licence fee of say $20, which is a small fraction of the cost of fishing each year. Exemptions could easily be made for those unable to afford the fee.

The Sport Fishing Council objects to any suggestion that recreational fishers are not already pulling their (financial) weight due to the taxes they pay on boats, fishing gear, fuel and so on. But the same can be said about those involved in other sports and hobbies.

The Sport Fishing Council claims recreational fishers pay $20 in tax for each kilogram of fish caught. This seems excessive. And, it is difficult to assess if based on the council’s 2016 report that estimated the economic contribution of recreational fishers.

The Ministry for Primary Industries has noted this report’s shortcomings, including explanations of its methods and assumptions. Accordingly, any conclusions drawn from it should be treated with caution.

The Sport Fishing Council also objects to having a peak body to represent recreational fishing interests, despite the success of Recfishwest representing all 740,000 fishers in Western Australia. Recfishwest’s purpose is to advocate for the social, cultural and health benefits of fishing, along with fishers taking up a stewardship role for the environment.

Recfishwest works with the Minister of Fisheries, Department of Fisheries and its commercial counterpart, the Western Australian Fishing Industry Council, to ensure recreational and commercial fishers have equitable allocations of fisheries resources.

Recfishwest is funded by a portion of licence fees. These fees fund engagement with recreational fishers and involvement in all policies that have an effect on recreational fishing.

The department uses the remaining fees to fund management, including more than 20 research and development projects to date aligned with recreational sector priorities.

Recfishwest’s extensive track record contradicts the Sport Fishing Council’s claim that Recfishwest is prevented from lobbying and constrained in its ability to change policy, simply because it receives funding from licence fees.

New Zealand would benefit by establishing a well-funded Recfishwesttype peak body to represent recreational fishing interests. And, there are various options to fund it.

For example, some of the petrol excise tax that boat-based fishers already pay is a viable option.

Petrol taxes are earmarked for roadbuilding, but when petrol is used on boats the tax should also be used to benefit the recreational fishing sector.

Other funding options include fishing licences, voluntary contributions and boat or trailer registration, if the petrol tax option proves unworkable or insufficient.