A Snap(per) [POLL]

Via Fairfax.

Via Fairfax.

National’s Shower Head/Light Bulb policy, the Snapper Slapper, looks like it’s lying in the shallows with gills flapping trying to get the right amount of oxygen to survive.

I thought it might be interesting to see what you think about it all.

What follows are a number questions to see what Whaleoil readers would implement if they were in charge of the Snapper Slapper Review.

Tick the statements you agree with.

Whaleoil's Snapper Poll - tick the statements you agree with

  • I would accept any change, as long as it also applied to commercial fisheries (29%, 191 Votes)
  • Keep the recreational limit the same, but reduce the commercial quota (28%, 184 Votes)
  • The catch limit should come down, but not as far as three (15%, 94 Votes)
  • Leave the catch limit as it is, but increase the size limit (14%, 90 Votes)
  • Drop the catch limit and increase the size limit (8%, 53 Votes)
  • Fish stocks are just fine. No need for any change (6%, 36 Votes)

Total Voters: 405

Loading ... Loading ...

THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • BobaJob

    Hey can we have a Don’t Fish or Don’t Care vote button?

    • Bunswalla

      So you care so little about it you post a comment asking if you can formally indicate that you don’t care about it?

      How about you just don’t vote and don’t comment?

  • Travis Poulson

    A bit disturbing that “I would accept any change” is steaming ahead. Really? you people would accept ANY change?

    Edit: What if the limit was dropped to 3? “I would accept any change, as long as it also applied to commercial fisheries” is unworkable, not to mention unrealistic.

    • Steve (North Shore)

      Any change means let them do what they like – not on.
      The commercial size limit needs to increase, lets have an even playing field

      • Travis Poulson


        • BobaJob

          Or is it a Don’t Care? – Some outcome?

          • BobaJob

            Ok so I’ve considered the options above and have voted. I would have to support the recreational over commercials. Mainly because it looks like they waste to much and partly to get the recreational fisher folks off the roads over the weekend. Imagine 1 million more motorist on the road all day long over every weekend!

    • Whafe

      TP, I think the main jist and anger is the fact that it looks like the recreational limit is being slammed and the commercial is not… Which is political suicide.

      Up the commercial size limit.

    • 4077th

      58 votes so far Travis? Who the hell is putting in those votes? Is the stranded’s website down this morning? I thought the majority of people who visit WO possessed a reasonable amount of intelligence. I don’t get it.

    • cricklewood

      Personally if it is necessary to drop the total snapper catch i would be happy enough if both commercial and rec fishers like myself took an equal drop in terms of total catch. It seems to be lost on most that the snapper stock is steadily improving the current argument is over how to increase the stock at greater speed to a higher level. Personally i had no trouble catching a feed off the rocks within view of the city over summer autumn so i would say the fishery is in rude health compared to many

    • Bunswalla

      The choices were not well-worded IMO. I decided that for my vote, the “accept any change as along as it applied to commercial too” to mean that the proportions would be the same.

      I can’t see the commercial catch being dropped by two-thirds (equivalent being 9 to 3) and since the commercial catch is by far the biggest, it would limit what can be done to recreational.

      For example if the commercial guys gave up 10% of their quota, I’d be happy to round the 0.9 snapper limit up to 1 and accept a limit of 8.

      Similarly, if the size was increased I’d definitely accept that as it would stop the commercial guys being able to catch and land snapper at 250mm. They would have to get new nets to let some of the smaller ones out.

  • Whafe

    Call me stupid, but I would rather a piece of fresh Gurnard over a fresh piece of Snapper anyday!

    • BobaJob

      Stupid….nah just joking, prefer a bit of blue cod myself, but I’m not a fisherman…

    • 4077th

      Snapper is over rated I agree In fact the only problem with fish is it tastes like fish. Smoked Marlin, Salmon or Tuna are my picks. If you enjoy a nice Gernard or Trev you have to either fish the Kaipara or Manukau. Both harbours are equally dangerous and not for the uninitiated. If the tides were not so strong and the danger level about he same as the Hauraki the species in question may be different.

    • Travis Poulson

      Blue cod please.

      • BobaJob

        Only cos its blue!

  • Tude

    Another option…. as suggested on-air through the week. Stop commercial fishing at spawning time, particularly near harbor/spawning grounds.

  • PhantomsDoc

    What I would like to have happen:
    Stop commercial fishing during spawning
    Increase commercial size limit
    Decrease commercial catch limit
    Severe penalties for discarding it as a by-catch
    Max size limit for recreational fishers

    • GazzW

      Result = Snapper just $99.95 per kg.

      • Bunswalla

        All the more reason to go and catch them yourself!

  • Dave

    Left off the vote list. Actively police Maori abusing the “traditional fishing rights” One country, one set of rules for all, zero exceptions.

  • pukakidon

    Leave the limit the same. But make the recreational fishermen pay the same as the commercial fishermen in contributions to the government for fishery stock maintenance, control and research. Implement a fishing license in the Auckland region to pay for it. Lets say $2000.00 per year per rod holder.

    Where do you think the money comes from the carry out the research for the fisheries.

    • cricklewood

      Well that’s a fucken stupid suggestion. Comms pay licensing et all because they are able to sell the fish for profit and sure as hell those costs are built into the margins etc

      • pukakidon

        Exactly the point, there is no comparison between the governance and scientific testing funded by the commercial fishing industry and the recreational rapists of the sea. Just look at the twats taking undersized fish and scoffing baby paua and stripping the beaches. It makes me sick to watch these arse holes trying to get away with taking more than a feed.

        Comercial fisheries seed and test beds and allocate zones by quantity of fish stocks. The moron boatie who goes out to pillage the sea to try to recoup his fuel costs doing immense damage and contribute nothing to the fishing stocks.

        It is these morons that stuffed the fisheries in the Malborough sounds. .