Consultation for proposal to cut crayfish catch limits off Northland's east coast begins
Photo:
RNZ / Mark Papalii
Consultation has opened on a proposal to
cut crayfish catch limits
off Northland's east coast.
Fisheries Minister Shane Jones said options included seasonal or year-round closures to commercial harvesting of spiny rock lobster, as well as reduced daily recreational limits for spiny rock lobster and packhorse rock lobster.
The proposal would give the fishery a chance to recover, so in the long term there'd be more and bigger crayfish, Jones said.
Healthy populations of crayfish helped keep kina numbers in check, so they did not destroy vital kelp forests, he said.
In May, Jones said the proposal would be "controversial".
"I know that closing down crayfish over the Christmas holiday period will be quite a controversial decision, so the engagement is going to be very, very tricky," Jones said.
Anyone wanting to submit on the plans has until September 22.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Pay equity: Five unions to take government to court over law changes
Pay equity protesters voice their opinions outside Parliament in May. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi Five unions are taking the government to the High Court over changes to pay equity laws. The sudden and controversial changes cancelled existing claims from mostly female-dominated jobs and made it harder for new claims to succeed . Workplace Minister Brooke van Veldengave a figure of 33 current claims that would be stopped, as the legislation was put through under urgency in May. The Nurses Organisation, Tertiary Education Union, Educational Institute, Post-Primary Teachers' Association, and Public Service Association argued the new rules breached the Bill of Rights Act. "The legal challenge argues the coalition government's legislation breaches three fundamental rights: freedom from gender-based pay discrimination, the right to natural justice, and the right to fair legal process," the unions said in a joint statement. "The case gives workers who have been denied their right to challenge gender-based pay discrimination a chance to challenge the government in court. If successful, a Parliamentary Select Committee must consider the declaration of inconsistency and a Parliamentary debate must occur. The government is then required to formally respond." The claim would be formally lodged on 29 August at the High Court in Wellington following a rally by women whose pay equity claims had been cancelled, the unions said. A spokesperson for the office of Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden told RNZ: "The Bill was considered for consistency with the Bill of Rights Act before introduction, and the Acting Attorney-General concluded the Bill appeared to be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act". Public Service Association national Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said the government avoided proper scrutiny, bypassing consultation. "We are asking the High Court to declare that the government's actions are inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 because of the discrimination New Zealand women will face as a result of the government's action," she said. "The government silenced women but we know the High Court will listen to our claims. This is just the start of our campaign for pay equity for New Zealand women and we will be leaving no stone unturned to achieve pay equity. "The decision to cancel claims that were about to be heard by the Employment Relations Authority is inconsistent with the constitutional foundations of New Zealand which do not provide for the government to interfere with the judicial system in this way." Educational Institute national secretary Stephanie Mills said the government did not follow a democratic process. "The scrapping of the teachers claim without consultation and under urgency was a kick in the guts for our teacher members after years of blood, sweat and money getting the claim moving," she said. "We'd had five years of work on it with hundreds of interviews with members about their work, and it was a genuinely joint process with the Ministry of Education and their pay equity team." NZNO delegate and Plunket nurse Hannah Cook said nurses and care workers were devastated by the scrapping of their pay equity claims. "Plunket nurses were so close to finally having our hard work recognised. Nurses and care workers are the backbone of a caring society and the coalition government needs to value us. These changes don't just impact us. They impact our families, our livelihoods and our quality of life," she said. "The coalition government has shown it doesn't value us nurses and those of us in women dominated workforces. It is 2025 for goodness sake. We shouldn't still be paid less than those in male dominated occupations." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Pay equity: Five unions take government to court over law changes
Pay equity protesters voice their opinions outside Parliament in May. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi Five unions are taking the government to the High Court over changes to pay equity laws. The sudden and controversial changes cancelled existing claims from mostly female-dominated jobs and made it harder for new claims to succeed . Workplace Minister Brooke van Veldengave a figure of 33 current claims that would be stopped, as the legislation was put through under urgency in May. The Nurses Organisation, Tertiary Education Union, Educational Institute, Post-Primary Teachers' Association, and Public Service Association argued the new rules breached the Bill of Rights Act. "The legal challenge argues the coalition government's legislation breaches three fundamental rights: freedom from gender-based pay discrimination, the right to natural justice, and the right to fair legal process," the unions said in a joint statement. "The case gives workers who have been denied their right to challenge gender-based pay discrimination a chance to challenge the government in court. If successful, a Parliamentary Select Committee must consider the declaration of inconsistency and a Parliamentary debate must occur. The government is then required to formally respond." The claim would be formally lodged on 29 August at the High Court in Wellington following a rally by women whose pay equity claims had been cancelled, the unions said. A spokesperson for the office of Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden told RNZ: "The Bill was considered for consistency with the Bill of Rights Act before introduction, and the Acting Attorney-General concluded the Bill appeared to be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act". Public Service Association national Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said the government avoided proper scrutiny, bypassing consultation. "We are asking the High Court to declare that the government's actions are inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 because of the discrimination New Zealand women will face as a result of the government's action," she said. "The government silenced women but we know the High Court will listen to our claims. This is just the start of our campaign for pay equity for New Zealand women and we will be leaving no stone unturned to achieve pay equity. "The decision to cancel claims that were about to be heard by the Employment Relations Authority is inconsistent with the constitutional foundations of New Zealand which do not provide for the government to interfere with the judicial system in this way." Educational Institute national secretary Stephanie Mills said the government did not follow a democratic process. "The scrapping of the teachers claim without consultation and under urgency was a kick in the guts for our teacher members after years of blood, sweat and money getting the claim moving," she said. "We'd had five years of work on it with hundreds of interviews with members about their work, and it was a genuinely joint process with the Ministry of Education and their pay equity team." NZNO delegate and Plunket nurse Hannah Cook said nurses and care workers were devastated by the scrapping of their pay equity claims. "Plunket nurses were so close to finally having our hard work recognised. Nurses and care workers are the backbone of a caring society and the coalition government needs to value us. These changes don't just impact us. They impact our families, our livelihoods and our quality of life," she said. "The coalition government has shown it doesn't value us nurses and those of us in women dominated workforces. It is 2025 for goodness sake. We shouldn't still be paid less than those in male dominated occupations." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: Do those who manage rugby want to see a crowd? I have listened to RNZ with growing concern
What is wrong with the people responsible for such genuinely awful planning? Had they started the early fixture a bit later and ensured a wait between games of, say, just 15 minutes before a 4.35pm kickoff for the NPC game, the crowd of probably 12,000 or so people would likely have stayed and enjoyed both games. The vast majority of the significant crowd immediately left at the first game's final whistle and the remaining crowd by the time of the next kickoff, as seen on TV, was the proverbial 'two men and a dog'! This was the first time we had attended at Eden Park for many years. We won't be back. In retrospect, it was 'the smart move' to leave as soon as the schools game ended as, when I gave up in disgust and turned the telly off, Taranaki were giving Auckland a good old-fashioned thrashing. Roger Hawkins, Herne Bay. Covid inquiry I am wondering why the citizenry of New Zealand are surprised when some politicians will not attend the Royal Commission on the Covid response. We elect our leaders to act on our behalf. Normally, everything is transparent and follows due process. A pandemic is an interruption to the normal business of a country; it requires instant, sometimes repugnant outcomes for the people and makes the deliverer of the message very unpopular. Being told to isolate and how and when we may leave our homes is anathema to New Zealanders but in the instance of a pandemic of the severity of Covid, it was necessary. Decision-makers did do what they thought right at that time, with what expert information and scientific knowledge was available to them. Why is the 'rightness or wrongness' of those decisions now being queried? It was over and above the parameters of normal governance. It was a pandemic! Life-threatening. A once-in-a-lifetime event. Yes, money was spent. How much and for how long was those leaders' decision to make. It is not now the privilege of today's political cohort to question the minutiae of detail of the whys and wherefores. New Zealand did not have coffins lining the streets. Perhaps our island nation was saved by the unpopular isolation tactics returning citizens endured but they can be proud they contributed to the safety of all. Do not turn this to a dollar mentality when measuring outcomes. A democratic society pays what is necessary to house and feed its criminals; provides succour to the needy, cares for the elderly – why pillory the decision-makers for money spent saving the nation in the time of a pandemic? Robyn Tubb, Millwater. RNZ's decline As a former senior NZBC announcer, I've listened to RNZ National's decline with growing concern. Richard Sutherland's recent criticism (Media Insider, August 16) confirms what many listeners know: standards have slipped dramatically. Today's RNZ presenters gabble through scripts, mangle pronunciations ('flowan' for 'flown,' 'pardy' for 'party'), and rush through te reo Māori with obvious discomfort. This undermines both our official language's mana and RNZ's credibility as New Zealand's public broadcaster. The problem runs deeper than technical issues. RNZ has drifted toward commercial radio tactics. There is much gabbling and puerile banter, chasing ratings rather than serving its unique public mission. But public radio shouldn't sound like The Rock or ZM, it should offer something better. Excellence means clear, accurate presentation with proper pronunciation of both English and te reo Māori. It means substance over filler, cultural competence and an authentically New Zealand voice that maintains professional standards without stuffiness. The solution isn't complicated: establish clear broadcasting standards, provide ongoing professional development and create a culture valuing craft over ratings. Experienced broadcasters should mentor newcomers, passing on both technical skills and understanding of public radio's role. RNZ National should be the best of New Zealand broadcasting; thoughtful, substantial and respectful of audience intelligence. The talent exists; what's needed is leadership willing to set and maintain standards. Our public broadcaster should make us proud, not require excuses. James Gregory, Parnell.
