Muriwai Sport Fishing Club

Urgent: Protect our West Coast Diving – Have your say before June 12!

Fisheries NZ is currently proposing new rules to stop the "stripping" of Auckland's rock pools. While the Muriwai Sports Fishing Club fully supports protecting our intertidal zones, the current proposal includes a blanket 200m offshore ban that may accidentally shut down our open-water West Coast diving.

We have drafted a formal club submission arguing that the rules should target land-based shore-strippers, but explicitly exclude sub-tidal areas (anything below 2.0 metres of water).

We need your help. The Ministry judges these proposals by the volume of feedback they receive, so it is vital that you lodge your own individual submission before 5:00 PM Friday, 12 June 2026.

We’ve made it easy for you to have your say.

• Here is the official submission template for you to complete: https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/71834-Submission-template-Review-of-measures-for-shore-based-shellfish-harvesting-in-the-Auckland-Coromandel-area 

• Email it to: FMsubmissions@mpi.govt.nz 

• Some recommended wording that you can copy, paste, or adapt is:

  "I support adopting the following framework for the final regulations:

  • Redefine the "Intertidal Closure Zone" Boundary by Distance and Depth: I propose that the closure zone be defined as:

  "The intertidal area between the mean high-water and mean low-water marks, extending offshore to a sea depth of 2.0 metres below the surface at the mean low-water mark."

  • If the “Intertidal Closure Zone” is redefined as above, then I would support the “Full intertidal closure (no exceptions) (Option 1)” as proposed by Fisheries New Zealand in its consultation documentation."

• A copy of the full MSFC Club submission is pasted below for reference.

If you want more information, MPI's website on the topic is: https://www.mpi.govt.nz/consultations/review-of-measures-for-shore-based-shellfish-harvesting-in-the-auckland-coromandel-area 

Let’s make sure the West Coast voice is heard loud and clear. Get your submissions in today to make sure we retain access!

Regards,

The Committee Muriwai Sports Fishing Club Incorporated

Our submission:

___________________________

Introduction and Executive Summary

The Muriwai Sports Fishing Club (MSFC) welcomes the opportunity to submit feedback on the proposed options to address unsustainable intertidal harvesting across the Auckland and Coromandel regions.

As a long-standing, community-embedded club on Auckland’s West Coast with over 400 members, we are firsthand witnesses to the environmental changes, environmental pressures, and shifting dynamics of our local marine ecosystems. MSFC fully supports the overarching policy objective: to prevent the indiscriminate "stripping" and degradation of vulnerable intertidal rock pools and foreshore platforms.

However, MSFC strongly opposes the current catch-all definition of the "intertidal closure zone" (the 200-meter offshore boundary) as drafted across the proposed options. As written, the definition inadvertently controls and restricts selective recreational fishers and divers selectively targeting species that are already well managed, like rock lobster (crayfish) and pāua.

MSFC advocates for a refined approach: a targeted definition that confines the proposal to areas where “indiscriminate stripping” occurs, and therefore exempting species that are selectively harvested and already robustly governed by existing daily bag limits and minimum legal sizes (MLS).

2. The Core Issue: The West Coast Geography and Catch-All Boundaries

The application of a blanket 200-meter offshore boundary from the mean high-water mark creates vastly different outcomes on the steep-dropping sub-tidal areas of the West Coast compared to the shallow sand flats of the East Coast.

Around Muriwai Beach, Maori Bay, and the broader Waitākere coastline, the 200-meter subtidal zone encompasses virtually the entirety of the recreational fishery for crayfish and pāua. Applying a blanket control within this zone does not just protect rock pools; it unnecessarily controls legitimate, traditional, land-based and shallow-water diving activities.

3. Distinction Between "Indiscriminate Stripping" and "Selective Harvesting"

The consultation document rightly identifies the core ecological threat: a regulatory loophole allowing the bulk, unmonitored extraction of dozens of non-specified rock pool species (e.g., limpets, whelks, periwinkles, anemones) under generous generic bag limits. This practice is inherently indiscriminate.

In stark contrast, the recreational harvesting of crayfish and pāua is inherently selective:

• Strict Statutory Controls: These species are already tightly regulated under the Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 2013 with low daily bag limits and strict, legally mandated minimum size limits.
• Zero Bycatch Risk: Divers targeting crayfish and pāua selectively extract their individual catches by hand. This activity causes zero damage to the surrounding rock face, does not deplete lower-trophic rock pool organisms, and does not contribute to the "stripped-bare" phenomenon driving this consultation.

By failing to differentiate between these two entirely distinct harvesting behaviours, the current proposal unnecessarily captures and controls sustainable recreational fishers without achieving any additional ecological benefit for the intertidal zone.

The proposed 200-meter intertidal closure layer also introduces unnecessary regulatory fragmentation to species that are already subject to highly complex, geographically specific frameworks. For instance, recreational rock lobster harvesting along the Auckland and Coromandel coastline is already governed by a change between CRA1 and CRA2 management boundaries, varying daily bag limits, and a patchwork of localized closures.

Layering an arbitrary 200-meter spatial restriction over these highly technical, species-specific rules creates a compounding "regulatory blizzard." Rather than improving conservation outcomes, this excessive complexity diminishes the public's capacity to clearly interpret the law. This inevitably leads to a rise in inadvertent, non-malicious non-compliance, which ultimately stretches Fisheries compliance resources even thinner.

4. MSFC Proposal: Refining the "Intertidal Closure Zone" Framework

To achieve the Ministry's conservation goals without unnecessarily dismantling legitimate recreational fisheries, MSFC urges Fisheries New Zealand to refine the physical definition of the "intertidal closure zone." Rather than a blunt horizontal distance, the zone should be defined using a multi-dimensional metric that accurately targets the vulnerable intertidal environment while exempting subtidal diving depths.

MSFC strongly recommends adopting the following framework for the final regulations:

• Redefine the "Intertidal Closure Zone" Boundary by Distance and Depth: MSFC proposes that the closure zone be defined as:

"The intertidal area between the mean high-water and mean low-water marks, extending offshore to a sea depth of 2.0 metres below the surface at the mean low-water mark."

• The Logic: Targeting the Methodology, Not the Geography: The "indiscriminate stripping" driving this consultation is exclusively a land-based, foot-accessed harvesting methodology. It is practically impossible to undertake bulk, non-selective rock pool scraping while completely submerged in 2.0 meters of water.
• Enhancing Enforcement and Closing Legal Loopholes: By establishing a clear 2.0-meter depth ceiling, the Ministry preserves enforceable boundaries while protecting sustainable fishers. If a compliance officer encounters an individual wading or standing on the reef stripping unmanaged species, the offender cannot credibly claim they are outside the restricted zone. Conversely, it ensures that recreational divers operating in deeper water targeting heavily regulated species like crayfish and pāua are not inadvertently caught in a net meant for shore-strippers. This significantly reduces the burden on Fisheries Officers to precisely map out or litigate ambiguous horizontal distances offshore.

If the “Intertidal Closure Zone” is redefined as above, then MSFC would support the “Full intertidal closure (no exceptions) (Option 1)” as proposed by Fisheries New Zealand in its consultation documentation.

5. Enforcement and Practicality

MSFC notes the Ministry’s preference for a flat 200-meter boundary to ensure ease of enforcement for compliance officers. However, regulatory simplicity should not come at the expense of fair public access to sustainable fisheries.

Compliance officers are already heavily trained and highly experienced in identifying non-compliance with regulations, and what-ever the definition of the Intertidal Closure Zone, compliance officers will be required to collect evidence to support prosecution.

6. Conclusion

The Muriwai Sports Fishing Club stands with the Ministry in wanting to protect our precious coastal rock shelves from unsustainable exploitation. However, the legislation must act like a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.

We thank the Ministry for considering our submission and are available to discuss these matters further if required.

Yours sincerely,

On behalf of the Committee

Muriwai Sports Fishing Club Incorporated

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

New season started on the 1st of July.

Memberships for the new season are now due. Renew membership online.

Competition online catches

Use the catch form below to submit your catches - Please ensure that you select the correct name from the dropdown list (your name should appear as you start typing)

Catch Form

Please check the calendar for important dates Club Calendar