Pressure to ban fishing of longfin eels rises, as industry faces upheaval

Thursday, 14 July 2016

Longfin eels are a freshwater species endemic to New Zealand.

Which will become extinct first: New Zealand's ancient and unique longfin eel, or the industry reliant on harvesting them?

As debate continues about whether the 'extraordinary' longfin eel will die out, some South Island eelers are giving up due to the prospect of more upheaval.

A commercial eel industry spokesman said a bomb had been placed beneath South Island eelers, and there was more uncertainty to come.

Longfin eels are the largest and longest-lived freshwater eel in the world.

They are only found in New Zealand, where they have existed for over 20 million years, woven into Maori legends of serpent-like taniwha creeping through rivers and darkened caves.

* Eel farming could be the way ahead

* Longfin eel fishing needs to stop - Commissioner

* Protection plan for longfin eel proposed**

Despite being an at-risk species with the same classification as kereru and great spotted Kiwi, longfins are still fished commercially. They have been sold overseas in luxury cat food.

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has been pressured to step in to protect the species, following a 2012 report by Parliamentary commissioner for the environment Dr Jan Wright claiming longfins risked becoming extinct.

MPI recently separated the South Island's eel stock into shortfins and longfins, and is reviewing catch limits. One option is a moratorium on all commercial longfin fishing in the South Island.

This week, Wright reiterated her belief that without such a moratorium, the species would be in trouble.

'I have not seen any evidence that alters my assessment that the longfin eel population is in serious trouble and on a slow path to extinction,' she said

'We must be cautious in our management of this extraordinary creature.'

The Green Party also supported a ban: 'Just as we stopped hunting and eating other threatened species such as kiwi and kakapo, we can stop commercial fishing of longfin eel,' environment spokeswoman Eugenie Sage said.

Following Wright's 2012 report, an international panel determined the longfin population had fallen, but there was not enough scientific evidence to support a ban.

Splitting the eel stock meant eelers had to overhaul everything about their businesses, including where they fished and who they could sell to. The prospect of a complete ban posed a risk to the entire industry.

Commercial eel industry spokesman Bill Chisholm said splitting the stock should not have happened, and fears about the impact of commercial eeling were not justified by science.

'They [MPI] crossed the line professionally. It's unprofessional to come up with proposals for longfin eels which did not give due regard to the science,' he said.

'We're happy to take cuts and restrictions and bans if the science backs up. In this respect, the science doesn't back any of it up, and this process should never have happened.'

He cited a recent report from Niwa that found about 70 per cent of longfin eel habitat was not fished commercially. He said longfins tended to live in the mountainous high-country, where little fishing took place, due in part to the prevalence of national parks.

Even without a ban, some eelers were not meeting quotas because the changes had been too difficult.

'One of the possibilities is that the fishery won't recover. The fishermen will think bugger this, it's not worth catching eels anymore . . . and that's the end of that.'