Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Fisheries catch under-reported - Expert reaction
Fisheries catch under-reported
- Expert
reaction
16 May 2016
A new study
suggests that New Zealand's total fisheries catch since 1950
is 2.7 times higher than officially
reported.
Between 1950 and 2013, 24.7 million tonnes of fish went unreported, compared to the 15.3 million that was officially reported to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, the international research led by the University of Auckland's Dr Glenn Simmons reports.
The researchers drew on stock reports, peer reviewed studies, unpublished reports and over 300 interviews with industry experts and personnel, to build an estimate of unreported catch.
The majority of unreported fish catch was commercial catch or fish discarded because they were the wrong size or species.
The research was published as a working paper as part of the Sea Around Us project by the Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia.
A media release and copy of the report is available
from the 'Sea Around Us' website.
The Science Media Centre gathered the following expert commentary on the report.
Prof Matthew Dunn, Chair in Fisheries Science, Victoria University Wellington, comments:
"I think everybody in the business knows that fish do get dumped and catches under-reported. I don’t think there is any dispute that the reported catches that come through the Quota Management System (QMS) are not as big as the real catches.
"The question of how big the unreported catch may be is difficult. It sounds as if much of the information in the new report comes from interviews with fishers. Having used interviews in the past, I know these kinds of data are particularly uncertain, and often biased. Where estimates come from Ministry reports, we should remember that the Ministry tends to target fisheries where they think there could be a problem, so these estimates are likely to be higher than the norm. I would expect there to be great uncertainty, and potential for bias, around the estimate of ‘2.7 times’.
"The report’s findings don’t detract from the fact that New Zealand does very well internationally for sustainable fisheries. Most of the main fisheries are doing well.
"If this report stands up scientifically, then we would have to modify some of our assessments of the size of our fish resources. Because catch estimates scale our stock estimates, the irony of that the ‘2.7 times’ could mean there are more than twice as many of these fish in the sea as we think there is. This means sustainable catches, and catch quotas, could also be higher.
"This report does cover a wide time period. We know the under-reporting of catch in some deep sea fisheries was high back in the 80s, with the real catch being as much as half as much again, or even double, what was reported. But by the mid-90s that excess was largely gone.
"The QMS and the deemed value system is not perfect, but it doesn't detract from the fact that a privatised fishery system, like our QMS, is still considered to be amongst the best, if not the best, way of managing fisheries resources. The QMS is 30 years old and would certainly benefit from a review. Those associated with the industry are well aware of the shortfalls.
"In my opinion, we want our fisheries management and industry to be looking forward, not worrying about what happened 50 years ago. But if this kind of research helps to focus people on what needs to change, then that is a good thing. But litigating the past can seem a bit pointless if we know the current fisheries are sustainable, and our industry is performing well."
Owen Anderson, Fisheries Scientist, NIWA, comments:
"NIWA scientists have been estimating bycatch and discards of New Zealand offshore fish species for many years. These estimates are based on thorough and scientific analyses of catch and discard data collected by independent Government observers on board commercial vessels.
"Our analyses show that for 1991-2013, the overall discard rate from the observed part of the fishery (about 20-25 per cent of the total fishing effort) in offshore fisheries was 6.6 per cent. This is in stark contrast to the minimum 20 to 50 per cent reported in the Simmons report.
"An important difference between the studies is that the NIWA analyses are based on empirical data and, unlike the Simmons study, do not attempt to estimate the prevalence of discarding activity that may have been intentionally hidden from observers or make any assumptions about the influence of observer presence on discarding behaviour. We note that regulations allow for legal discarding of any QMS species when an observer is present.
"We also note that the Simmons report relies heavily on anecdotal evidence to apply multipliers to reported catches and discards. It is difficult to independently assess the appropriateness of these multipliers.
"More information on bycatch and discard rates can be found at:www.niwa.co.nz/fisheries ."
Science Media Centre NZ
Our aim is to promote accurate, evidence-based reporting on science and technology by helping the media work more closely with the scientific community.
The Science Media Centre is New Zealand's only trusted, independent source of information for the media on all issues related to science. Thousands of news stories providing context from and quoting New Zealand researchers have been published as a direct result of our work.
Business Canterbury: Urges Council To Cut Costs, Not Ambition For City
Wellington Airport: On Track For Net Zero Emissions By 2028
Landcare Research: ANZAC Gall Fly Release Promises Natural Solution To Weed Threat
NZ Anti-Vivisection Society: Auckland Rat Lovers Unite!
University of Canterbury: $1.35 Million Grant To Study Lion-like Jumping Spiders
Federated Farmers: Government Ends War On Farming
