To be attributed to Lisa Futschek, CE Seafood New Zealand:
Seafood New Zealand is aware of the One Ocean Protest convoy taking place in Tāmaki Makaurau on Saturday 22 November 2025. We respect everyone's right to peaceful demonstration as long as it is done respectfully and safely. However, any outcome that resulted in commercial fishers being harassed or unfairly targeted would be unacceptable.
The issues the protest organisers have raised are complex (as is fisheries management overall).
Our industry is proud of what we do – we are grounded in a strong commitment to sustainability, innovation and environmental stewardship. New Zealand fisheries are among the most regulated and science-based in the world, ensuring the long-term health of our oceans and the communities that rely on them. Our levels of sustainable stocks are among the highest globally, a fact supported by reporting from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Marine Stewardship Council and independent fisheries scientists.
We at Seafood NZ are also proud of the positive relationships we maintain with recreational fishing groups across the country, including regional branches of LegaSea. Many commercial fishers are keen recreational fishers in their own spare time and involved as members of regional clubs in their areas too.
A healthy Hauraki Gulf is important to all of us. Our industry relies wholly on healthy marine environments. The government has implemented 19 new or extended protected areas in the Hauraki Gulf, including 12 High Protection Areas (HPAs). Commercial fishing is excluded from the vast majority of these protected areas. We are keen now to see real action to address all the activities affecting the health of the Gulf – climate change, sedimentation, pollution, runoff and more.
One very small exception has been made for five small-scale ring-net fishers to fish within a small part of two HPAs over the winter months, supplying local communities and marae – people who are not able to fish for themselves. When the HPAs were originally drawn up these Kiwi fishers, who provide fish to the local community, were not considered.
This exception is grandfathered. This means it is specific to the individual fishers and cannot be passed on when they exit. It will also be reviewed within three years.
The suggestion by the protest organisers that exceptions might later apply to other commercial fishers is baseless.
Meanwhile, it is incorrect of the protest organisers to state that “the government want to introduce 19 new species to the quota management system, including marlin”.
There is no proposal to add any species to the Quota Management System (QMS). However, two proposals focus on reducing the waste of fish that are currently caught as bycatch and are dead but, under existing law, must still be returned to sea.
At the moment, marlin must be returned to sea dead or alive. The proposal being consulted on would allow fishers to keep and sell dead marlin, while live marlin (about 75% of caught marlin) would still be returned to the ocean. This change has been enabled by the fact that we have cameras on board that can prove the fish was dead.
Allowing this change wouldn’t create a target fishery for marlin. The boats that are incidentally catching marlin are targeting tuna species, which are of a much higher value. However, allowing fishers to provide New Zealand-caught marlin to New Zealand consumers makes sense. The current rule means that all marlin purchased by consumers in New Zealand must be imported.
The second proposal would allow fishers using certain fishing methods to sell 19 species of reef fish that are incidentally caught in small amounts. Right now, this rule applies in the northern North Island. In the rest of the country, these fish can already be caught and sold using any method, and there are no apparent sustainability concerns.
Both the marlin and reef fish proposals aim to reduce waste from the fish that are already being caught and to make better use of our fisheries for all New Zealanders.
The statement from the protest organisers that changes would limit public consultation on fisheries decisions is extremely misleading. The change would not “lock in” catch limits, rather, it is an evidence-based tool that could change the catch limit each year for up to five years. These are called management procedures and are viewed as the international gold standard for fisheries management. The usual opportunities for public input would be provided before a management procedure could be put in place.
This would enable groups to have more input on how the stock is managed from the outset rather than simply providing perspectives on catch limit options. The subsequent TAC changes would then be evidence-based, transparent and a reflection of the input to the management procedure.
The purpose of this change is not to restrict consultation – it is to manage our stocks better. We have 642 stocks in the QMS and only about 30 have a catch limit review each year. This means we rarely review a catch limit for a stock twice in five-year period. Using management procedures would mean more frequent, smaller changes to catch limits and better responsiveness to sustainability concerns. Importantly, if events out of the ordinary occurred, the management procedure would be paused and reviewed.
More than 80% of New Zealanders eat seafood but not many of us have the means to go catch it ourselves. The latest survey estimates about 4% of our population recreationally fish. As a sector we are proud of the nutritious wild caught protein we are able to provide Kiwis.
We completely agree with the name of today’s protest: it really is one ocean, which needs to be managed for long-term use and enjoyment by all of us. We need to work together, and we invite the One Protest organisers to meet with us. While we don’t make the rules, we are keen to share our perspective and perhaps introduce them to a few fishers. Our door is open.