Rainbow Warrior to campaign on deep sea life

Auckland, Thursday 26 May 2005.

In the lead up to the 20th anniversary of the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior, Greenpeace's flagship vessel leaves today for international waters around New Zealand to highlight the destructive impacts of bottom trawling.

"Bottom trawling is the most destructive fishing practice in the world," said Carmen Gravatt, Greenpeace Oceans campaigner, at a press conference on board the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour. "The deep sea is the largest pool of undiscovered life on Earth. Bottom trawling these unknown worlds is like blowing up Mars before we get there."

When the Rainbow Warrior sailed to the Tasman Sea last year, the crew documented New Zealand and Belizean bottom trawlers hauling in huge amounts of by-catch, rocks from the sea floor and bottom dwelling marine life, including endangered black coral.

Around the world, scientists and environmental groups are calling for a United Nations moratorium on high seas bottom trawling. The Rainbow Warrior will head out to international waters around New Zealand again to underline the lack of government action in the face of the urgent threat that bottom trawling poses to deep sea life.

"Each day bottom trawling continues, more deep sea life gets wiped out and the situation becomes more critical," said Gravatt.

"A moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters is urgently needed to protect life in the deep sea and New Zealand and Australian Governments should be joining other states in leading the global push for one at the UN."

"Since last year, the New Zealand and Australian Governments have only made statements about establishing a regional fishing agreement. But they have been talking about ways to manage the Tasman Sea for 15 years already and so far failed to come up with any effective biodiversity protection. By the time they sign any agreements, it will be too late."

"The New Zealand and Australian Governments are risking their international reputations and contributing to the destruction of ancient ecosystems we know little about, for the sake of a few fish."

Peter Willcox, captain of the first Rainbow Warrior when it was bombed, will be skippering the ship again during this trip.

"The bombing of the first Rainbow Warrior was a terrible tragedy, but there could not be a better way to commemorate the event than to continue challenging the big environmental issues of today such as bottom trawling in international waters," he said.

For more info:
Carmen Gravatt, Greenpeace Campaigner 021 302 251
Erin Farley, Communications Officer 021 034 8818
Dean Baigent-Mercer, Communications Officer 021 790 817

A daily weblog will be published via satellite from the Rainbow Warrior at: http://weblog.greenpeace.org/deepsea/

High-resolution images and video samples will be available for download at: http://www.greenpeace.gen.nz/gallery/press
Username: media
Password: download

Good show! I hope they're able to generate more interest at the U.N. this time, but then that's always an iffy proposition.

took the words right out, Erich.

Well, she's on her way. Just a few pics of the vessel leaving ...., and of people and stuff.

That's Matt Jones talking to Dean Baigent-Mercer (of Greenpeace) about something to do with green things, fish, bottom trawling and the reckless destruction of the environment and its myriad adorable, cuddly, yet sadly mute invertebrates.

.... and just a few more.

It's a wet and miserable day here today, but that's not putting them off! They've got big fish to fry.

Yes indeed, best of luck to them on this trip.

I'd forgotten how attractive a vessel Rainbow Warrior is. Is it a 1950s design?

Go Rainbow Warrior. Bob Hunter would be proud.

just in case anyone cares about my opinion
i think the idea of stopping bottom trawling is pretty decent even though i dont agree with it i do see the destruction its causing. i just think greenpeace is using a very un-green and un-peaceful way.The Ocean Conservancy (http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=home) another marine concervancy uses the the right idea. they just buy the boats from the fishermen, give them their money for the boat, and let them keep the boat but they cant use it for fishing, everyone wins! this seems better than sueing and causing public panic. this is probably the most sucsessful marine conservancy in my eyes because they do this complete dignity and are respected even by fishermen.

The only problem with this approach, logical as it may well be, is that the government indicated last year (maybe a year earlier) that this was not an option (buying back quota). The industry is seriously overcapitalised ... big, horrendously expensive boats ... All that would happen here is that the tax payer, already overtaxed, would foot the bill of buying back vessels and quota ... and we, the tax payer, are not the ones that are benefiting (financially) from this exercise.

It's a lose-lose situation. I'd rather the few that benefit and exploit suffer than have the masses that don't fork out more hard-earned dollars.

What about the next industry? Mining for instance, or oil. When the oil runs out should a government buy back a rig? When a mine is exhausted does the government buy back the hole? When a fishery is exhausted ... tough ... sink the boats and create artificial reefs ... give something back to the environment that they have destroyed!

Ultimately, when the fisheries collapse, all the vessels will be either tied up or converted into deep-sea manganese-nodule mining ships. Eventually, decades down the line, they will all be scrapped (and all the manganese nodules will also be gone). When the fisheries finally recover, decades if not centuries, perhaps a few restrictions will be placed on fishing ... given people learnt from earlier mistakes ... with only a few boats permitted to work restricted areas; only then will a fishery (like we see today) be sustainable. Boom & bust.

Yep, everyone's happy when it's the Boom part and when they finally see the Bust part arrviing, they blame something for not telling them, that the Boom part cannot be sustained.

Cheers Chrono. Another thought, in response to my earlier post, is that Greenpeace (on behalf of the global populace) is calling for a moratorium on bottom trawling in INTERNATIONAL waters. In International waters anyone can fish ... so who is to be taxed and who is to purchase the vessels of another country? This isn't about quota at all, because there is no quota in International waters.

No, until we have a global currency and global government we will not be in any position to purchase vessels from any other country in order to get them out of the oceans.

What is required here is sensationalised activism to get the message across, because we've all been talking like gentlemen around tables for so long AND THIS APPROACH HAS RESULTED IN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING POSITIVE HAPPENING. It is time to roll the sleeves up ....

I support Greenpeace in their stance, and endorse whatever they get up to on the high seas. I just hope that nobody gets hurt, because this is going to get ugly, so very ugly. What else can you do when faced with a barrage of lies and deceit from a few outspoken fat cats in the fishing industry (the guys at ground zero will confirm that all is not well in the oceans .... it's called CPUE, Catch Per Unit Effort). If someone lied to you would you consider them a friend? No! You would have nothing to do with them anymore. Well, those fat cats in the industry, the likes of Owen Symmans, are lying through their teeth.

.... and themz fighting words!

Hm....are you suggesting an all out war between fisher-folks and Greenpeace activists?

They wouldn't say...

Hm...but an all out war would be very interesting.....

Very interesting, indeed.

More power to greenpeace and all their backers. They are in the field making an immediate impact. Wish I could be with them. But we all do our part. In reality, I guess being on the high Seas in pretty exciting. I guess I'll have to stay in the classroom and breed junior environmentalists. It's frustrating at times because you don't see immediate results. I'll have to wait twenty years to see if anyone listened to me. IS it worth the wait? Yes! If three students out of 20 fight for the earth, I guess we made progress. Go GREENPEACE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

More power to greenpeace and all their backers. They are in the field making an immediate impact. Wish I could be with them. But we all do our part. In reality, I guess being on the high Seas in pretty exciting. I guess I'll have to stay in the classroom and breed junior environmentalists. It's frustrating at times because you don't see immediate results. I'll have to wait twenty years to see if anyone listened to me. IS it worth the wait? Yes! If three students out of 20 fight for the earth, I guess we made progress. Go GREENPEACE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chin up! My High School Biology Teacher got so fed up he quit teaching and now runs a local restuarant! But he was dead chuffed when I appeared there for lunch one day and said I was marine biologist......he reckons that it made his day that at least ONE student listened to him!!! (he was one of the best bio teachers I had!)

So this reward may yet be down the road for you!

J

The weather in the Tasman sea at the moment is pretty awful. I hope the Rainbow Warrior is still in the Pacific.

Hm....are you suggesting an all out war between fisher-folks and Greenpeace activists?

sorry to say this but i have my money on the fisherfolks :grin:

sorry to say this but i have my money on the fisherfolks :grin:

Blasphemy!!

My money is on the environment, and for common sense to prevail!

The lack of education in the general public of the damage done by the fishing industry is staggering...some people I have talked to accused me of outright lying when bringing up facts...then you should see their faces after you pull out the hard information.
Go greenpeace!

as far as a war would go, just because we believe in a sensible approach to global use of resources, does not make us weak in the fist... :smile:

greg

Hmmm...perhaps the SS Tonmo needs a five inch gun and forward torpedo tubes?

Bloody fishermen.

greg

Yes, would have been great fun to be out there with them again too (except maybe not, given the present weather), but the timing was wrong... so I have to be another landlubbin' supporter this time around, glued to the weblog. And it should be verrrrrrrry interesting. :wink:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10329368

'It's not fishing, it's extinction'

This ancient piece of coral was tangled in a fishing net and dumped by the boat who dragged it up.

07.06.05

By Kevin Taylor

Bottom-trawling destroys the ocean floor, says Greenpeace, which has released a striking photograph to illustrate the damage wrought by the practice.

The photo, taken in 2003 in the Tasman Sea off the North Island, shows fishermen trying to untangle a huge piece of "gorgonian" coral the environmental organisation says is more than 500 years old.

Greenpeace oceans campaigner Shirley Atatagi-Coutts said: "This isn't fishing, this is extinction."

Spokesman Dean Baigent-Mercer asked why the practice was legal when it was illegal to clearfell native forests on land.

The organisation heard of the photo's existence and obtained it under the Official Information Act from the Ministry of Fisheries.

The boat was New Zealand-registered but Greenpeace was not told its name or who operated it.

Mr Baigent-Mercer said Greenpeace wanted an end to bottom-trawling in international waters and the Government to listen to scientists about its impact on domestic waters.

The photo was one of the best images globally showing the practice's impact, and it was being released as a UN meeting on ocean issues began in New York.

Mr Baigent-Mercer said bottom-trawling involved large underwater nets up to 40m wide that were dragged along the sea floor.

Huge chains or rollers attached to the front of the nets destroyed everything in their path, including coral forests, sponges, sharks, giant crabs, boulder fields and rocky reefs.

The method is the most common way of fishing in New Zealand's exclusive economic zone and internationally.

:sad:

Interesting, throughout that whole article I was waiting for the 'but... ' that surprisingly never came. Anyone else think someone's arm got twisted to write that report? 'We hear... ' 'He says... ' 'Apparently... ' maybe they should just finish it off with '... but we all know it's a pack of lies' just in case the audience didn't get the between-the-lines hints. :hmm:

Hmmm...perhaps the SS Tonmo needs a five inch gun and forward torpedo tubes?

Bloody fishermen.

greg

I've seen the SS tonmo - not quite what I'd recommend in hull-design for this sort of work. How about a decommissioned Soviet-era icebreaker? Nice and strong... 8-)

Posted below, as these links have a habit of being deleted.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Greenpeace-in-high-seas-stoush-with-fishing-trawler/2005/06/07/1118123834138.html

Greenpeace in high seas stoush with fishing trawler
June 7, 2005 - 6:53PM

A high-seas drama unfolded when Greenpeace activists were "shot" at with potatoes when they targeted a New Zealand-based fishing boat for bottom trawling in international waters on the Tasman Sea on Tuesday.

Greenpeace New Zealand campaigner Carmen Gravatt, who was on board the protest boat Rainbow Warrior II, said activists delayed the vessel, the Ocean Reward, from deploying its net by attaching an inflatable life-raft.

She said crew from the Ocean Reward, owned by Nelson company Talley's Fisheries Ltd, responded by shooting whole potatoes at the activists from compressed air guns and sprayed them with high pressure fire hoses.

Gravatt said nobody was hurt during the incident that happened at midday, about 560km west of the North Island.

Bottom trawling is when fishing vessels fish with nets by dragging them along the sea floor.

Huge chains or rollers attached to the front of the nets destroy everything in the their path, including coral forests, as well as sponges, worm tubes, mussels, boulder fields, and rocky reefs, Gravatt said.

"This type of fishing is considered by scientists to be the greatest threat to deep sea biodiversity and every trawl does incredible damage," Gravatt said in a statement.

"A global moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters is urgently needed to protect life in the deep sea."

"Greenpeace is taking action against bottom trawling in international waters because governments have failed to establish a moratorium to stop the destruction," she said.

"Every trawl we disrupt, we could be saving coral forests that took hundreds of years to grow."

Talley's Fishing head Peter Talley said he would not comment about the incident until he had spoken with the vessel's crew.

Greenpeace also released a photograph of a giant piece of coral caught in a fishing boat's net which it says highlights the destructive practice of bottom trawling.

The 2003 photo taken on board a New Zealand-registered vessel in the Tasman Sea off the North Island was obtained in the past week by Greenpeace from the NZ government through freedom of information legislation.

It shows crew untangling from their fishing nets a piece of gorgonian coral which the environmental group says is more than 500 years old.

Both the New Zealand and Australian governments do not support calls for an international moratorium on the practice, which is being discussed at an informal United Nations meeting on oceans issues in New York this week.

NZPA/AAP

bloody fishermen.

greg

Go Go Greenpeace!!

Have had some interesting talks with a friend of mine who spent about 15 years working on Large scale shrimp boats between Labrador and Greenland.

I was curious about the process of their netting and after he described (in great detail) how the nets work I was shocked. Steel doors, steel balls, huge steel chain and steel sliders, all weighing in the tonnes, dragged along the ocean floor.

I asked him if he ever thought about what they were doing to the bottom with their fishing and he said that at the time it never crossed his mind, or if it did he didn't care.

Well, this discussion developed into a debate on the destruction level of trawler fishing and he was set in his mind that the ocean floor "up there" is "nothing but mud". For our next meeting (we work together) I gathered a little more info and continued the debate. He was honestly shocked and surprised at what studies have been showing and started to get a bit shaky on his previous stand. To finish it off, I sent him here to this site to do a little reading. :smile:

Well, the next day he actualy came to me and apologised over the strength of his previous debate as he really didnt know. I gather from what he was saying that there is no information, or a real lack of it, for the actual fishermen to read about this topic. It's almost kept supressed. Wee big brother stuff.!!

Anyway, this guy is a great guy. We both volounteer(sp?) at an organic fair trade coffee roaster and he has a real concious for world affairs including environmental. He still feel s bad and has been trying to contact his old fishing buddies to try and share all of this information and maybe start "spreading the news"

I know it's been said many times on this site but I have to stress the need to educate the general public on the destruction levels from this type of fishing. So again I say Go Go Greenpeace. Getting, and keeping, this stuff in the news will hopefully open some peoples eyes like I was able to do with my friend.

Sorry for the long story,

Arthur

I know it's been said many times on this site but I have to stress the need to educate the general public on the destruction levels from this type of fishing. So again I say Go Go Greenpeace. Getting, and keeping, this stuff in the news will hopefully open some peoples eyes like I was able to do with my friend.


:notworth: I am greatly impressed by your reaching out to your friend about this. My biggest beef with environmental organizations is that they are frequently so interested in rallying their members by being as polarized as possible that they alienate possible valuable allies. I believe that a great deal of positive progress can be made on environmental issues by reaching out to people who have sound sensibilities, but aren't (and don't want to be) "environmental zealots." Rather than embracing an "us vs. them" attitude, I think it's a great idea to educate the fishermen about the truth, and get their support in effecting change!

I think (although perhaps I am naive) that a lot of people in the fishing and forestry industries are very much like your friend-- but often, they have been brought into the "group think" of their communities to think that environmentalists are all unrealistic and idealistic and "out to get them." And likewise, many environmental groups seem to raise money and energize their members by vilifying fishermen, foresters, corporate leaders, and the like.

There are certainly bad people out there who propogate FUD (http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/f/FUD.html) about environmental issues, but there are substantial numbers of people who are merely ignorant, and would be willing to be educated if they didn't have to put up with being (pre)judged. "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance" seems to apply here, if you interpret ignorance as including "just not knowing" as well as "deliberately avoiding knowing."

Because I agree with Greenpeace's stance with respect to bottom trawling, I haven't been inclined to mention this, but I think Greenpeace has frequently been guilty of taking political and strategic positions that are part of the problem more than part of the solution, frequently because of internal factions and a need to pander to their supporters idealized and romanticized positions on issues, even when those are at odds with what's actually good for the environment or what would make the most effective impact on the problems. I know a number of very smart people who care deeply about the evironment who have left Greenpeace in various degrees of disgust, as well as some people who have been attacked by Greenpeace as "the enemy" who actually would have been open to being (or even had been) Greenpeace supporters!

I feel mildly guilty for this rant, because I also respect Kat and :oshea: enough that I don't want to come across as saying supporting Greenpeace is bad or anything, but I really think that Greenpeace and other environmental organizations are stuck in a bad, intellectually inbred place that makes them much less effective than they could be. I'm also curious if other people have not seen these problems with Greenpeace, or if they just tolerate them because they believe in the cause? There seem to be a number of other folks who are concerned about this kind of thing, e.g. http://www.greenspirit.com/ http://www.lomborg.com/ and http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/feature_earth.asp

Anyway, just my :twocents: -- sorry if letting out my pent-up frustrations on effective environmentalism is a "downer"

...as well as some people who have been attacked by Greenpeace as "the enemy" who actually would have been open to being (or even had been) Greenpeace supporters!

... Ja, I'm a Landrover owner, 12mpg, and they're coming down pretty hard on me too. I guess that I'm guilty of a little hypocracy ... mind you, as Landrover refused to sponsor me, GO GREENPEACE, get those fuel inefficient gas guzzlers off the road (shame the pushbike cannot tow the boat)!

(shame the pushbike cannot tow the boat)!

crazy vision of :oshea: on top of his boat, cracking the whip to *ahem* motivate? his students to tow the boat faster.... *shivers*

Similar to Archynorth, I've had long (often heated) discussion with an Icelandic friend of mine who used to work on whaling ships and trawlers (for pocket money during summer :wink: ). He couldn't see the consequences of it all and from his point of view, it was good easy money for a student and stopped only because he moved to London (and the smell was quite bad as well). After many a talk, and the producing of rational arguments backed by facts and "good" science, he realised that it was bad(tm).

To echo Monty's post, it's my impression as well that more often than not Greenpeace's actions (albeit 100% justified) alienate the "opposing faction" when conversion and education are possible. We end up with a very manichean vision (bad vs good, no grey area) in which if you're not on "our" side (whichever that may be) you're the ennemy. Yes, they raise awareness about a lot of important issues but the "follow-up" (at least in France, I'm told) is totally lacking. You'd get to see those "crazy Greenpeace folks" whizzing around in their inflatables around a massive ship, the TV anchor would turn around to face the camera, smirk, ask what will they think of next and proceed to tell you about the weather. The ideas, strategies and options offered by GP would not make it through to the general public. :hmm:

In the end, Go Greenpeace
(i don't want to be towing the boat....)

TPOTH

http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/nelsonmail/0,2106,3307145a6007,00.html

Claim trawler's nets cut at sea by activists
08 June 2005
By CANESSA PHILLIPS

Nelson-based Amaltal fishing company was planning to file for an injunction against Greenpeace today, saying activists cut a trawler's nets in an act of high-seas "piracy".


"They are being attacked by a bunch of hairies and hippies with knives and gaffs," Amaltal director Andrew Talley said on Wednesday.

"We are shocked at this attack.

"It's an act of piracy."

However, Greenpeace rejects that it cut the Ocean Reward's nets with knives or gaffs in the drama on Tuesday, saying instead that activists trying to stop the vessel from bottom trawling were shot at by fishing crew armed with potatoes in compressed air guns, and were sprayed with high pressure fire hoses.

Greenpeace says the fishing crew shot at it after activists delayed the Ocean Reward from deploying its net by attaching an inflatable life-raft.

The confrontation happened about midday, 560km west of the North Island in the Tasman Sea while the Ocean Reward, a deep sea trawler, was fishing for orange roughy.

Mr Talley said he did not know if the Ocean Reward crew fired potatoes at the Greenpeace activists, or sprayed them with hoses, but if they did, they did so in defence.

After speaking to the fishing crew this morning, he said Greenpeace activists on board the protest boat Rainbow Warrior had slashed the trawler's nets in an unprovoked attack.

Several thousand dollars worth of damage had been done, he said.

The skipper was shooting the net into the water when the attack happened, and found the damage when the net was pulled out again, Mr Talley said.

"When anyone attacks a boat on the high seas it's piracy," he said. "The crew will take any steps to defend themselves."

AdvertisementAdvertisementThe Ocean Reward was seven days into a two-week fishing trip.

While Amaltal disputed Greenpeace's argument that deep sea trawling was damaging the ocean floor, Mr Talley said the matter was not about "political messages", it was about the rules of seamanship being observed.

The Rainbow Warrior was still near the Ocean Reward this morning, so to ensure there were no more problems, Amaltal planned to file an injunction against the Greenpeace vessel and skipper in court on Wednesday, citing a breach of maritime and safety rules, Mr Talley said.

Greenpeace New Zealand campaigner Carmen Gravatt said from the Rainbow Warrior today that activists were protesting peacefully, and did not use knives on the trawler's.

However, at one point an inflatable craft was unintentionally caught up in the trawler's net, and she could not rule out that the net was torn then. "We don't want to damage any of their equipment or harm their crew in any way," she said.

On Wednesday the Rainbow Warrior was staying close to the Ocean Reward, filming its practices and documenting what came out of its net.

She said deep sea trawling did incredible damage, with huge chains or rollers attached to the front of the nets destroy everything in the their path, including coral forests, as well as sponges, worm tubes, mussels, boulder fields, and rocky reefs.

"A global moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters is urgently needed."

Mr Talley said Greanpeace's talk about bottom trawling damage and unsustainability was "unsubstantiated claptrap".

Latest release (might not have been picked up by the press yet)

Greenpeace Again Halts Bottom Trawling in International Waters

Tasman Sea, Wednesday 8 June 2005: For the second day in a row, Greenpeace has disrupted a New Zealand bottom trawler in international waters. Bottom trawling the sea floor is the biggest threat to life in the deep sea, and every trawl does incredible damage.

Using the Rainbow Warrior and inflatable boats, activists successfully stopped four trawls by the vessel, the Ocean Reward in the international waters of the Tasman Sea.

Activists first used a cable to connect the vessel's several-tonne trawl doors together, choking off the net and preventing it from being deployed. Hung from the cables were signs reading 'End Deep Sea Destruction'. Later, floating barrels reading 'Protect Deep Sea Life' were repeatedly attached to the net, forcing the vessel to haul the net back in.

"Greenpeace is taking action today because government's are failing to end the destruction," said Greenpeace oceans campaigner, Carmen Gravatt.

Less than four percent of the deep sea is rocky areas such as seamounts, ridges and plateaus. It is these few areas that hold some of the largest diversity of species and undiscovered life on earth. Unfortunately, this also means these areas are also the prime target for bottom trawlers.

"At the moment it's a race against time as bottom trawlers wipe out life in the deep sea before we even know what's down there. Every trawl we stop could save a coral forest that took hundreds of years to grow. We urgently need a moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters."

"While we did our best to stop the destruction by a bottom trawler today, the only way to protect deep sea life for the future is for governments to act."

Before taking action, the Rainbow Warrior informed the skipper of the Ocean Reward that Greenpeace were undertaking a peaceful protest and did not intend to interfere with their navigation, endanger their crew or damage equipment.

Contact:
Carmen Gravatt, Greenpeace New Zealand campaigner on board Rainbow Warrior on +872 1302412
Erin Farley, Greenpeace New Zealand communications officer on board Rainbow Warrior - +872 1302412

Dean Baigent-Mercer communications officer in Auckland 021 790 817

Getting heated; another release (also, this might not have been picked up by the press yet).

Media release for immediate release Wednesday 8 June 2005

Maritime Union backs Greenpeace protest action against bottom trawling

The Maritime Union of New Zealand is supporting the direct action by
Greenpeace activists on the Rainbow Warrior against bottom trawling
fishing vessels in the Tasman Sea.

Maritime Union General Secretary Trevor Hanson says it has become
obvious that overfishing and bad practices such as bottom trawling were wrecking the environment, and would also destroy the industry that depends on the environment.

"The time has come to stop talking and start direct action, because in
our experience that is the only way to get things done."

The Greenpeace action is against the practice of bottom trawling, where weighted nets are dragged along the ocean floor, tearing up the habitat of sealife and causing massive damage.

Mr Hanson says New Zealanders need to think about the livelihoods of
future generations as well as the environment.

He says the fishing industry needs to be completely overhauled with much stronger regulation and a long term strategy to overcome its problems, especially with regard to pay and conditions for workers, and the sustainability of fish stocks.

"The Maritime Union has been demanding action on the shocking treatment of overseas crews fishing in New Zealand waters, and if that is how workers are being treated we can only shudder to think of how the environment is being wrecked."

For further information contact Maritime Union General Secretary Trevor

"sun green" by neil young

sun green started makin' waves
on the day her grandpa died
speakin' out against anything
unjust or packed with lies

she chained herself to a statue of an eagle
in the lobby of powerco
and started yellin' through a megaphone
"there's corruption on the highest floor"

suits poured out of elevators "they're all dirty"
phoneheads began to speak "you can't trust anybody"
but security couldn't get her down
she was welded to the eagle's beak

sun green leaned into that megaphone
and said, "truth is all i seek"
security brought in some blowtorches
news cameras recorded the speech

"when the city is plunged into darkness
by an unpredicted rolling blackout
the white house always blames the governor,
sayin', 'the solution is to vote him out'"

on top of that great bronze eagle
sun's voice was loud and clear
she said, "powerco is workin' with the white house
to paralyze our state with fear"

it was a golden moment golden moment
in the history of tv news
no one could explain it
it just got great reviews

"hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too"

the imitators were playin'
down at john lee's bar
when sun went down to see 'em
someone followed her in a car

so now when she goes dancin'
she has to watch her back
the FBI just trashed her room
one of them kicked her cat

the damn thing scratched his leg
and he had to shoot it dead
and leave it lyin' in a puddle of blood
at the foot of sun green's bed

"hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too"

john lee's was rockin'
the imitators drove it home
sun was dancin' up a heatwave
for a while she was all alone...

when up walked a tall stranger
he shadowed her move to move
in perfect unison
a supernatural groove

he took her by the hand
and the room began to spin
he said, "i'm earth... earth brown
you know the shape i'm in

i'm leavin' tonight for alaska
and i want you to come in the spring
and be a goddess in the planet wars
tryin' to save the livin' things"

"i'm ready to go right now,"
sun green told earth brown
"let's go back to my place,
pick up my cat and leave this town behind"

hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too

next day sun green got busted for pot
and it made the headline news
but then the charges all got dropped
and the story got confused

she'd still like to meet julia butterfly
and see what remedy brings
and be a goddess in the planet wars
tryin' to save the livin' things

but that might not be easy
livin' on the run
mother earth has many enemies
there's much work to be done

"hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too
hey mr. clean, you're dirty now too"



I know it's not the right Neil, but it's still a Neil....

Mighty fine lyrics. Ta!

Here's the journo version ....

http://xtramsn.co.nz/business/0,,5009-4453416,00.html

Fish Co Seeks Greenpeace Injunction
08/06/2005 07:01 PM - NewstalkZB

Nelson based company Amaltal fishing is planning to file an injunction against the environmental group Greenpeace.

This follows Greenpeace protesting against trawlers' nets in the Tasman Sea.

Amaltal director Andrew Talley claims Greenpeace cut through trawlers' nets in what he calls an act of piracy.

However Greenpeace denies it cut through the nets, and says it has been protesting peacefully without harming anyone or damaging equipment.

Greenpeace also says it was attacked by Amaltal workers, though Mr Talley says any preemptive strike was by Greenpeace, and the workers would have been defending themselves.

Mr Talley says his company is the victim of Greenpeace, which is looking for media attention.

........................................ ...................


And old news again ... these are not greenies, hicks, or long-haired yobbos. They're environmentalists, and should be proud of that fact!!! Understand the threat to the deep-sea environment.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3719590.stm

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3307499a7693,00.html

Greenpeace accused of 'piracy'
09 June 2005
By ELEANOR WILSON and NZPA

A Nelson-based fishing company says it will go to court today to seek an injunction against Greenpeace, which it accuses of high-seas "piracy".

Amaltal Fishing said it would apply for a court order to prevent activists approaching its trawler, the Ocean Reward, claiming Greenpeace was guilty of piracy by breaching maritime safety regulations and causing thousands of dollars of damage.

Amaltal director Andrew Talley said Greenpeace campaigners from the Rainbow Warrior cut Ocean Reward's net in the Tasman Sea on Tuesday with knives and gaffs.

"They are being attacked by a bunch of hairies and hippies with knives and gaffs," Talley said of his crew. "We are shocked at this attack. It's an act of piracy."

Greenpeace denied cutting the net, saying its members had been trying to stop the boat from bottom-trawling by attaching an inflatable liferaft to the net when they were shot at by fishing crew armed with compressed-air guns firing potatoes, and were sprayed with high-pressure water hoses.

Greenpeace said it continued to disrupt trawling yesterday by obstructing the vessel's trawl doors and using inflatable boats, and it claimed to have stopped four trawls.

Talley said he did not know if the Ocean Reward crew fired potatoes at the Greenpeace activists or sprayed them with hoses, but if they did they did so in self-defence.

"They are being attacked by a bunch of hairies and hippies with knives and gaffs. We are shocked at this attack. It's an act of piracy." - Amaltal Fishing director Andrew Talley

"When anyone attacks a boat on the high seas it's piracy," he said. "The crew will take any steps to defend themselves."

The Ocean Reward was seven days into a two-week fishing trip for orange roughy, 560km west of the North Island.

Although Amaltal disputed Greenpeace's argument that deep-sea trawling was damaging the ocean floor. Talley said the matter was not about "political messages", it was about the rules of seamanship being observed.

The Rainbow Warrior was still near the Ocean Reward, so to ensure there were no more problems Amaltal planned to file an injunction against the Greenpeace boat and skipper, citing a breach of maritime and safety rules, Talley said. But Greenpeace New Zealand campaigner Carmen Gravatt said from the Rainbow Warrior that activists were protesting peacefully and did not cut the nets with knives.

However, at one point an inflatable craft was unintentionally caught up in the trawler's net, and she could not rule out that the net was torn then. "We don't want to damage any of their equipment or harm their crew in any way."

AdvertisementAdvertisementThe Rainbow Warrior was staying close to the Ocean Reward, filming its practices, she said.

From Greenpeace's Auckland base, spokesman Dean Baigent-Mercer dismissed Amaltal's claims that it planned to file an injunction as "bluster".

Greenpeace is campaigning for a Government moratorium on bottom-trawling, which can involve nets the size of a rugby field and three storeys high.

There's stuff happening out there on the high seas .....

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3308156a11,00.html

Greenpeace targets trawler for second time
09 June 2005

Greenpeace activists have targeted a Nelson-based trawler for the second consecutive day, preventing it from bottom trawling in the Tasman Sea.


Amaltal fishing company, which owns the Ocean Reward deep sea trawler, says it is pushing ahead with plans to file for an injunction to stop the activists interfering with its boat.

Amaltal director Andrew Talley said the company would file for an injunction in the High Court in Auckland today because of safety concerns for the crew.

Greenpeace said it stopped four trawls by the Ocean Reward yesterday in the Tasman Sea, using its protest vessel Rainbow Warrior and inflatable boats.

The action follows a high-seas drama on Tuesday when the activists complained about being shot at with potatoes from compressed airguns and sprayed with high pressure hoses by crew of the Ocean Reward as they used a liferaft to interfere with its operation.

Mr Talley said the activists had cut the boat's net with knives and gaffs in what he described as an act of piracy.

Greenpeace oceans campaigner Carmen Gravatt said activists continued their protest action against bottom trawling yesterday, using a cable to connect the Ocean Reward's trawl doors together, choking off the net and preventing it from being deployed.

Later, it attached floating barrels to the net, forcing the vessel to haul the net back in, Ms Gravatt said.

The organisation claimed it was taking action to stop the destruction of the ocean floor because governments were failing to do so.

The Maritime Union of New Zealand has backed Greenpeace's action against bottom trawling.

Maritime Union general secretary Trevor Hanson said over-fishing and bad practices such as bottom trawling were wrecking the environment, and would also destroy the industry that depended on the environment.

Mr Hanson said the fishing industry needed to be overhauled with stronger regulation and a long term strategy to overcome its problems, particularly pay and conditions for workers and the sustainability of fish stocks.

But Nelson-based Orange Roughy Management Company chief executive George Clement said today Greenpeace was overstating its case.

"If it looks like piracy and smells like piracy, let the court decide," Mr Clement said.

He said that any type of food production business changed the environment to some degree, but it was a matter of balance, and the level of impact from bottom trawling was extremely small compared to the amount of ocean. Two-thirds of New Zealand's zone was not trawled because it was too deep or closed by regulation, Mr Clement said.

He said if Greenpeace thought what the industry was doing was wrong, it should work with the industry to solve problems, not against it.

Two-thirds of New Zealand's zone was not trawled because it was too deep or closed by regulation

Dear George. You seem to be missing the point. Let me explain something to you ....

1) This is in INTERNATIONAL waters

2) I hope that you are not confusing the 'NZ Region' for the NZ EEZ again. Are you?

3) The stuff that lives on the sea floor differs according to depth and latitude. If you don't understand this rather fundamental biological principle then I suggest you come along to university and do some courses. I will ensure FREE admission for you ... I'd even consider some FREE extra-curricular coursework for you and anyone else in the industry that legitimately wanted to learn more (or perhaps wanted to learn a new career). You see, at the rate that things are going, you will all need to retrain within a decade anyway, and the vessels themselves, well, scrap; they'll be sunk and converted into new deep-sea reef to compensate for the damage that present-day fishing practices have done to homogenise the seabed substratum, eventually to be covered in life, like Rainbow Warrior 1 (such a fitting purpose for this once-proud vessel).

If you haven't the time or inclination to study further, look out a window at a mountain and note how the vegetation changes with altitude. It's the same thing with depth. It's the same thing on the intertidal platform.

Free education aside, whatever lives deeper is different, so the reality is that you are not protecting anything that occurred shallower by not trawling deeper, because it never occurred there in the first place. Sadly this statement serves only to show your lack of appreciation of and consideration for the myriad life forms for whom the clock is ticking, or those for which time has run out.

This industry practice, deep-sea bottom trawling, is NOT WORTH $1.2 billion a year - it is probably worth ~ $70 million (for Orange Roughy), and this figure is decreasing all of the time (a bit like CPUE) - poultry dollars compared to the total revenue generated by fisheries in NZ waters, including many practices that are environmentally sustainable (or at least considerably less pervasive). In reality, including recently exhausted oreo stocks, this bottom-trawling practice has annihilated most hard-ground fauna (like corals) to 1500m depth! It's also killed my squid and octopus; it is killing the whales!! Hey, I'm not too happy about that. Shame on you for prostituting the truth otherwise. Shame on you!! Shame, shame, shame! Check out the term 'megafaunal zone', or 'megafaunal discontinuity'; you'll be surprised to learn that we've known of this thing called 'zonation' for centuries ... You could probably check out the term 'biogeography' also - you could learn several things in one day and impress the dog.

4) The life (aka stuff, bottom filth, invertebrates, bycatch) that is found in or on sediments differs from that found on seamount and deep-sea reef habitat. The differences are rather obvious - a major one being that much 'stuff' that occurs on reef/seamount habitat is stuck there ... as in SESSILE ... you know, like 'anchored' or 'fixed', or 'cemented' even - it is extremely susceptible to trawling impact because it cannot escape the net. The 'stuff' that is found on soft sediments is generally MOBILE ... you know, 'not fixed' to the seabed - but it is equally susceptible to impact, in a different way. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to figure out that concentrating >70% of your fishing effort within one habitat (seamounts and deep-sea reef) that comprises <4% of all total habitat types in the oceans is an unsustainable practice. How can you possibly justify such a practice?

5) Did it ever occur to you that it is hard to trust (therefore 'work with') an industry compelled to lie, deceive and bully; I wouldn't tolerate this sort of behaviour from anyone. Why do you not approach us - we'll help out freely.

The latest release; yet to be picked up by the press.

Amaltal Miss the Boat with Dodgy Legal Tactics

Thursday, 9 June 2005: After two successful days disrupting destructive bottom trawling, the Rainbow Warrior has headed off to find bottom trawlers from other nations, including Australia. The Rainbow Warrior had already steamed away from the Ocean Reward on its mission when Greenpeace received notice that Amaltal was going to apply for an injunction.

"The fact that companies like Amaltal are allowed to continue destroying our global marine heritage and wipe undiscovered species off the face of the planet, is completely outrageous. This highlights the urgent need for the international community to take action to protect deep sea life so that we don't have to," said Greenpeace campaigner, Carmen Gravatt.

"New Zealand is not the only country involved in bottom trawling in international waters. We are now taking the Rainbow Warrior further out into the high seas to look for other vessels to show the world the range of countries involved in deep sea destruction. The New Zealand vessel, the Ocean Reward, is fishing in an area where there is no fisheries management agreements in place and where we know that New Zealand-flagged vessels have in the past fished alongside vessel under flags of convenience," said Gravatt.

Meanwhile, fishing industry voices attempted to defend the world's most destructive fishing practise by claiming innocence for their weighted bottom trawl nets, saying they had little impact.

"The industry is being dishonest in its defence of bottom trawling. Bottom trawling is now considered by marine scientists to be the biggest threat to deep sea biodiversity and the UN last year called on States to take urgent action to address the impacts of destructive fishing such as bottom trawling."

In January this year the report of the Millennium Project's Task Force on Environmental Sustainability * a UN Advisory group looking at how to achieve the Millennium Development Goals - recommends that "global fisheries authorities must agree to eliminate bottom trawling on the high seas by 2006 to protect seamounts and other ecologically sensitive habitats and to eliminate bottom trawling globally by 2010.

Right now the UN is discussing how to manage the world's oceans at a meeting in New York, and it is at this global level that we need action.

"The writing is on the wall, the science is leading the charge and grabbing at legal tactics will not change the fact that the days of high seas bottom trawling are numbered", concluded Gravatt.

Please forward it on

http://www.greenpeace.org.nz/ecards/fishfingers

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10330040

Activists head for foreign trawlers

10.06.05 1.00pm

Greenpeace activists harassing a Nelson trawler in the Tasman Sea have now sailed on to target foreign trawlers.

The protest ship Rainbow Warrior has sailed away from Amaltal's deep sea trawler Ocean Reward, to hunt for more bottom trawlers from other countries, Greenpeace says.

Nelson-based Amaltal filed for an injunction in the High Court in Auckland yesterday, after two days of high seas drama with Greenpeace activists earlier this week.

The company sought an injunction to prevent Greenpeace from interfering with the Ocean Reward's operation.

The campaigners had been tampering with the boat's nets to stop it trawling for orange roughy in international waters of the Tasman Sea, about 500km off the coast of New Zealand, protesting that the fishing method was destroying biodiversity on the ocean floor.

The High Court in Auckland will make a decision next week.

Greenpeace said Rainbow Warrior had already steamed away from Ocean Reward when it received notice yesterday that Amaltal was applying for an injunction.

"New Zealand is not the only country involved in bottom trawling in international waters," said Greenpeace campaigner Carmen Gravatt.

"We are now taking the Rainbow Warrior further out into the high seas to look for other vessels to show the world the range of countries involved in deep sea destruction."

Amaltal director Andrew Talley was not available this morning to comment on whether the company would push ahead seeking an injunction now that the Greenpeace activists had sailed away from its boat.

The New Zealand Seafood Industry Council said the Greenpeace "assault" on Ocean Reward was "dangerous and disgraceful".

Council chief executive Owen Symmans said the fishing techniques used by the New Zealand industry minimised impact on the biodiversity of the ocean bottom.

He said boats fly trawl gear above the sea bottom to target fish, rather than dragging heavy trawl gear across the floor.

Greenpeace has dismissed the fishing industry's defence of bottom trawling, saying it was being dishonest with its claims.

It's only fair that both sides of the story are presented:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU0506/S00134.htm

Greenpeace assault on a New Zealand fishing vessel
Thursday, 9 June 2005, 12:38 pm
Press Release: Seafood Industry Council
9 June 2005

“Greenpeace’s assault on a New Zealand fishing vessel this week in the Tasman was dangerous and disgraceful. It is entirely appropriate that the Government considers what action it can take to protect New Zealanders legally going about their business wherever they are,” says New Zealand Seafood Industry Council chief executive Owen Symmans.

“The facts are the fishing techniques utilized by the New Zealand industry minimises impact on the biodiversity of the ocean bottom where fishing takes place. New Zealand fishers simply do not drag heavy trawl gear across pristine sea floor as suggested. Technology allows boats to ‘fly’ trawl gear above the sea bottom to target the fish, with little impact on the sea floor or organisms that live on the bottom. Fishing only occurs in a very small area of ocean, which has generally been fished for many years. Much of the area cannot be fished because of the size, slope and structure of the sea floor.

“New Zealand fishing companies operate within the most effective sustainable fishing management system in the world. Indeed Greenpeace themselves identified New Zealand bottom trawlers as ‘good operators’1 in a March 2005 case study.

“Clearly it is in the best interests of the fishing industry to protect the ocean habitat because that is the best way of ensuring there will be fish to catch. The New Zealand seafood industry invests heavily in research and technology to minimise the impact of bottom trawling with significant success and this investment will continue into the future,” says Mr Symmans.
The claim New Zealand fish stocks are at risk is misleading, said Mr Symmans. Independent assessments contracted by the Ministry of Fisheries to instruct the Minister when making decisions about how much fish can be caught show this is not the case, he said.

ENDS

August 04 Background Information

Bottom Trawling in the New Zealand EEZ and in the High Seas

NZ EEZ

Trawling is by far the most common fishing method used to catch fin fish in the New Zealand EEZ.


With the exception of bottom long lining, trawling is the only method used by New Zealand fishing operators to catch deep water fish species in the high seas.

Scallops, oysters and scampi are also harvested using dredging or trawling.

SeaFIC estimates that over $800 million of the $1.2 billion earned from seafood exports in 2003 was from species caught by trawling and related bottom methods. This is similar to global fisheries statistics. Globally, about 70% of fish and shellfish production comes from trawl fishing.

Most of the 26,000 jobs that the seafood industry has created in New Zealand relate directly or indirectly to trawl fishing. The only exceptions are for people employed in aquaculture, longline fishing and rock lobster and paua harvesting.

New Zealand fisheries are managed sustainably through the Quota Management System. This ensures that catch limits are set to ensure long term sustainability and provide strong incentives for quota holders to fish responsibly.

More than 65% of the New Zealand EEZ cannot be fished by trawling, because areas are closed to trawling, the water is too deep or there are no fish present of commercial interest.

The remaining 35% available for trawling is only fished where the sea bottom terrain is suitable and where fish can be located. Fishing therefore takes place only in selected areas. Fishers generally fish in similar areas each year which means that new areas are not being damaged.


High Seas

Outside the EEZ in the high seas, trawling for deep water species can only take place in a very small area of suitable terrain at depths between 800 to 1200 metres.

Globally and in New Zealand, most bottom trawl fishing takes place on a flat or undulating sea bottom generally covered in muddy sediment. This is generally not a suitable habitat for corals. Trawling in these areas will come into contact with and disturb the bottom sediments. However the ecosystem impact is minimal.

Deep water trawling for species like orange roughy takes place on undersea slopes, mounds and seamounts. The terrain is sometimes rocky and can be a habitat for cold water corals. New Zealand deepwater fishers have modified their fishing techniques to minimise contact with slope surfaces. This lessens the impact on both the sea floor and fishing gear.

Trawl gear cannot be deployed on slopes of greater than 20 degrees. Much of the deepwater slope and seamount terrain cannot be fished as it is too steep, thus avoiding any chance of contact with corals. More of the deepwater slopes and seamount terrain is not fished than is fished.

Deepwater species like orange roughy commonly aggregate in plumes above slopes. Fishers will bring fishing gear down on such aggregations in a broad arc, and thus minimize the period where gear might come into contact with the sea floor.

It is a complete misrepresentation of deep water trawling for orange roughy to assert that it is conducted by rolling and crushing trawl gear indiscriminately across the sea floor.

However, it is also important that the lies perpetuated by this industry are not believed!!

Two images, trawled and untrawled, NZ seamounts. Must be some very special gear that they use - feather dusters on the ground rope to cause so little damage. See if you can spot the difference between the two, because Owen Symmans cannot.

Also, excerpt from the following paper:
Koslow, J.A.; Gowlett-Holmes, K.; Lowry, J,K.; O'Hara, T.; Poore, G.C.B.; Williams, A. 2001. Seamount benthic macrofauna off southern Tasmania: community structure and impacts of trawling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 213: 111–125.

INTRO
Although concerns about the direct and indirect impacts of trawling on seafloor habitats and demersal fish communities can be traced back to the 14th century (de Groot 1984), trawling effort and its impacts have expanded enormously over the past hundred years. A rapidly growing literature has shown that trawling may substantially alter marine benthic habitats and communities (Bradstock & Gordon 1983, de Groot 1984, Sainsbury 1988, Hutchings 1990, Jones 1992, Dayton et al. 1995, Auster et al. 1996, Collie et al. 1997). Several studies have also demonstrated significant secondary, or indirect, impacts on elements of the community, such as juvenile or adult fishes, that utilize biogenic structures on the seafloor directly impacted by trawling (Bradstock & Gordon 1983, Sainsbury 1988). These latter studies both led to areal closures to trawling.

Trawl fishing has not only intensified, it has also expanded into a range of hard rocky and reefal environments not previously accessible to this gear, based on the development of strong synthetic net fibres, rockhopper gear—large rubber bobbins and metal discs along the footrope—and precise electronic positioning systems both for the vessel and to monitor net performance. Seamounts are one such environment to become subject to intensive trawl fishing in recent
decades.

Give us a call Owen; we'll admit you into the university free of charge (perhaps in the optometry clinic), just as we will George Clement.

Shame on the both of you

Sorry to bombard, but this is rather important.


PRESS RELEASE: Deep Sea Conservation Coalition * (New Zealand arm)

Media Release: Friday 10 June 2005:
Today the New Zealand arm of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (1) released a report and photographs that debunk the fishing industry's claims that the high seas bottom trawling industry is sustainable.

The report, "Red Herrings" (2), written for the DSCC by the Washington-based Marine Conservation Biology Institute, addresses, and scientifically debunks each industry claim about high seas bottom trawling.

It provides new evidence of the destruction of important deep sea biodiversity by bottom trawling in New Zealand and international waters. The report's findings contradicts Nelson high seas bottom trawling company Amaltal's director Andrew Talley's comments that talk of bottom trawling damage and the unsustainability of the industry is "unsubstantiated claptrap".

"This report shows that the bottom trawling industry's denials lack credibility. Over 1000 international marine scientists agree that the damage caused to the seafloor is huge," said Shirley Atatagi-Coutts, Greenpeace campaigner.

"Less than 4% of our ocean floor is comprised of seamounts, - these small areas are the 'national park forests' of our waters," said Forest & Bird Conservation Officer, Debs Martin.

"Around 85% of these seamounts in New Zealand waters have been trawled. On the Challenger Plateau (east of Taranaki), some of these seamounts have been trawled to the point where stocks of orange roughy are only 3% of their original population and 97% of their coral forests cleared. This kind of overfishing is abusive, indiscriminate and may already have caused extinction."

Evidence shows it's not just orange roughy caught in these nets, but giant coral forests, starfish, kina, squid, and deep sea sharks.

"One sweep with the bottom trawl, and it's as though you've felled a forest. Considering these 'forests' take hundreds of years to grow, the fishing industry is doing some of the greatest destruction on this planet," said Cath Wallace of ECO.

The information in the report has been backed up by first-hand reports from people active in the fishing industry in Nelson, where members of the DSCC have been speaking with people at information stalls over the past month.

"I have been overwhelmed by the number of fishers who approach us and say 'well done'," said Ms Martin. "One woman told me: 'I've been working for them for years. You should see the stuff that comes in * coral, crabs, even a giant squid. It's disgusting. I just hope you're not too late'."

The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition is joining with the international scientific community in calling for a UN moratorium on bottom trawling. The issue is being discussed at the UN this week.

"New Zealand must make the commitment to stop this damaging practice. New Zealand is one of the top 11 bottom trawling nations on the high seas. Our fishing fleets are dragging these devastating trawls across seamounts right now * and Government attention is needed to stop it," said Cath Wallace.

Contacts:

Debs Martin, Conservation Officer, Forest and Bird, 027-684-0599

Cath Wallace, ECO, 021 891 994

Shirley Atatagi-Coutts, Greenpeace 021 858 010

Notes:

1) The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition is an international organisation. New Zealand members are Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society (Inc), Greenpeace NZ, and the Environment and Conservation Organisations of NZ.

2) The Red Herrings report can be found at:

http://www.greenpeace.org.nz/pdfs/RedHerrings2005.pdf

Information specific to New Zealand is on pages 9, 10 and 11.

======================================== =====
IMAGES AND VIDEO
======================================== =====
http://www.greenpeace.gen.nz/gallery/press
LOGIN: media
PASSWORD: download

Bravo! I like where these reports are going.

well, we really should forward this site and particulary this thread to poeple since most are too ignorant to even know what is bottom trawling....only 10& of poeple in our school has heard of bottom trawling and less than 1% actually understands how bottom trawling works, it's a disgrace....

Another interesting facts, I seem to sense that these reports are starting to sound similar to how the War on Iraq was reported...

But still, at least Greenpeace is doing something...unlike me, that is.

Here's an industry worth almost twice as much as the orange roughy industry!! We supposedly protect the whales, but we don't protect the environment in which they live AND FEED. Check out those whale diet threads on this forum. There'll be some interesting posts in those shortly.

Nevertheless, malnourished whales are stranding on New Zealand beaches; whales with the remains of Antarctic squid in their stomachs, and very few, if any locally sourced squid.

Owen and George - your industry is not worth as much to this country as you think it is. You are expendable. Your time is running out.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3301056a7693,00.html

Live whales worth $120m to NZ - report
03 June 2005
By SUE ALLEN

A new report into the economic value of whale watching in New Zealand will be used to boost the growing anti-whaling lobby against Japan.


Introducing the report yesterday, Conservation Minister Chris Carter said it demonstrated in graphic financial terms "why living whales are so much more important than dead ones".

More than 425,000 people went whale or dolphin watching in New Zealand last year - almost double the 1998 figure of 230,000 - contributing an estimated $120 million to the economy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare report said.

The 2001 Hoyt Report estimated whale watching was a US$1 billion (NZ$1.4 billion) industry worldwide, attracting nine million participants in 87 countries.

"I hope this will go some way to supporting New Zealand's strong argument that whale conservation, besides its intrinsic value for biodiversity, is also really important from an economic point of view," Mr Carter said.

The report was made public as Prime Minister Helen Clark met her Japanese counterpart, Junichiro Koizumi.

Though the issue was expected to be on the agenda, Miss Clark said it had not been raised because time was short.

Miss Clark has told Japan's Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura that New Zealand is taking part in a 10-country campaign to persuade Japan not to push for an extension of its whaling programme. Australia, the United States and many European countries have also signed up.

Mr Carter said he would formally issue the New Zealand economic report at this month's International Whaling Commission in Korea.

Japan is expected to push to extend the number of minke whales caught each year to 900 and to resume whaling of humpback and fin whales at the same meeting.

Concerns are growing that Japan might quit the IWC and that it is using aid money to buy support from poorer member countries.

Mr Carter said he hoped Japan would stay in the IWC and that leaving could expose them to more wrath from environmental groups like Greenpeace.

As well as diplomatic pressure, Mr Carter said New Zealand had "good opportunities" to sell its argument through Japan's growing environmental movement.

There is a concern that an increase in Japan's scientific whaling quota could affect New Zealand's whale-watching industry. Only about 2000 humpbacks migrate past this country to Tonga, but they could be killed by Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean, Mr Carter said.

"The biggest threat to our multimillion-dollar industry is the threat of increased whaling," Mr Carter said.

The fund's Asia Pacific director, Michael McIntyre, said that more than 24,000 whales had been killed by Japan and Iceland under scientific quotas and by Norway, which killed commercially, despite a 1998 moratorium on whaling.

"Let me make this clear today: This so-called scientific whaling programme is a sham. There is no science in this programme, it has never been peer reviewed, it is just commercial whaling in disguise," he said.

Owen and George, it's a political issue now. You'd best be voting National, because I cannot see our Labour or Greens parties tolerating your practices for much longer!!

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10330131

Greens target bottom-trawlers

11.06.05

By Kevin Taylor

An end to bottom-trawling in domestic waters will be a high priority in any post-election talks between the Greens and Labour.

The aim is a major plank of the Green Party's conservation policy being launched by co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons at tomorrow's Forest and Bird annual meeting in Wellington.

She said the "massive devastation" of New Zealand's undersea environment had to be stopped.

Although the Greens are not talking bottom lines before the election, it is understood the issue will be given high priority in any post-election talks with Labour to form a government.

Ms Fitzsimons said bottom-trawling was one of the main focuses of the policy, under which fishing companies would be forced to prove their methods did not cause damage to marine ecosystems and protected species. This would end the practice in many areas surrounding New Zealand.

Greenpeace this week released a striking photograph of coral dredged up by a New Zealand bottom-trawler, and the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior trailed such a vessel off the North Island's west coast.

On Wednesday, protesters from the Rainbow Warrior used inflatables to dart near the Ocean Reward, owned by Nelson fishing firm Amaltal.

The activists cabled shut giant doors so the net could not be released. They also attached floats to the net to prevent it being lowered to the sea floor.

There were angry scenes the day before as frustrated crew on the trawler fired potatoes from compressed-air guns and aimed high-pressure water hoses at the protesters.

There is increasing concern internationally about bottom-trawling, in which nets up to 40m wide are dragged along the sea floor.

Huge chains or rollers attached to the front of the nets destroy everything in their path. The method is the most common way of fishing in New Zealand's exclusive economic zone and internationally.

Ms Fitzsimons said if New Zealanders could see what was happening, they would be outraged.

"The best way to illustrate it is to imagine a large bulldozer crashing its way through a forest, crushing and destroying everything in its path in an effort to net a handful of fantails."

It was abhorrent to think that such an environment was being shattered for the sake of fishing company profits.

"New Zealand's undersea forests deserve the same protection as those on our land."

But, said Seafood Industry Council chief executive Owen Symmans, "New Zealand fishers simply do not drag heavy trawl gear across pristine sea floor as suggested. Fishing only occurs in a very small area of ocean, which has generally been fished for many years."

Greenpeace itself had identified New Zealand bottom-trawlers as "good operators" in a report in March, he said.

George Clement, chief executive of the Nelson-based Orange Roughy Management Company, said any type of food-production business changed the environment to some degree, but it was a matter of balance, and the impact from bottom-trawling was extremely small compared with the amount of ocean.

Two-thirds of New Zealand's zone was not trawled because it was too deep or closed by regulation.

additional reporting NZPA

Bureaucrats everywhere!!

http://www.bridlingtontoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=803&ArticleID=1049216

Area may face a trawling ban
TRAWLING could be banned from the sea around Flamborough Head.

The North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee, which manages the coastal waters, is to carry out further research to find out if trawlers are damaging the site of special interest.
Environmental body English Nature has told the committee it believes trawling is damaging rare chalk reefs, fauna and corals around the headland and wants it to bring in a ban. But chief fishery officer David McCandless says the evidence for that is "inconclusive". "We want to do further seabed study work in the Flamborough area to see if we can improve our knowledge of what impacts, if any, affect the site. We may be able to put a strong enough case together that trawling does not damage the site." If not, a ban of sorts is inevitable under environmental legislation.
At its meeting on Tuesday the committee set up a working group to look at changing the rules for trawlers. It is looking at allowing existing licensed vessels to continue trawling in the area but the right to trawl would cease if the vessel was sold and new vessels would not be allowed to trawl.
"Ultimately it will lead to a total ban as existing users cease operating," said Mr McCandless.
The committee has until December 2006 to complete its studies or bring in the changes. Crab and lobster fishing is not affected.
10 June 2005
......................

It will be too late before this 'committee' reaches a verdict.

Thank you Steve for keeping us up to date on the issue...it is very interesting...however, it hits the feelings pretty hard. I have been busy closing out my school year..

Gaetan

ps..Just found the article on the giant squid featuring yourself and roper in the "Ranger Rick" magazine. Have you ever presented for young children?

I've done many a talk in my time Gaetan. I wasn't too happy about the factual errors in that article; I had corrected them once before ... I was not impressed that they perpetuated that nonsense - the animal is cool enough without exaggerating.

I would have to agree with you. It is the sad thing that is happening in society, Steve. If you, as a teacher are not standing on your head every day or projected on a tv screen in a video game the kids are not interested. The magazine is trying to pull the kids in, and hoping that they never find the truth.....wrong..I have the habit of being very honest in school..sometimes getting in trouble for it...you know biting my tongue and such. Thanks for the response...

Gaetan

:mad:

Check out the text in red!! Any Brits out there, be wary of what you eat!!

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3289667a1864,00.html

Rosy future for seafood
23 May 2005

The audience at the annual seafood conference last week was told changing habits are creating opportunities for the industry, writes Adrian Bathgate.

Fresh fish is riding a culinary wave.

In London, young professional people with high discretionary income but low amounts of spare time want a meal that is quick to prepare and healthy.

It's a scene that market research shows has already begun to be played out, and the prediction is that it's a trend that will continue.

Fish might even be the new chicken.

Last week, more than 400 delegates gathered to hear words of optimism about New Zealand's ability to compete and supply into this equation.

Problems that have plagued the $1.2 billion industry in the past few years have been well documented. The kiwi dollar has skyrocketed into territory almost unthought of in the halcyon days when it was at US45c.

Prices for fish have remained stable while the biggest ongoing cost to operators, fuel, has also risen. Although the rise in the kiwi has offset this impact to some degree, fishing companies are faced with a different cost structure to that of a few years ago.

Fishing operators are facing the prospect that the conditions they are operating under are structural not cyclical, with neither the United States dollar nor the cost of oil showing any signs of returning to former levels.

This is significant because this is the year that many operators' currency hedging arrangements begin to expire, meaning they will bear the full brunt of currency changes.

But a recent review of the sector done by the ANZ Bank says "fundamentally the sector looks sound".

It says the supply side, governed by the quota management system, has established a sustainable management system which will provide long-term security at a time when some international stocks are in danger of collapsing.

Also late last year the Aquaculture Reform Bill was passed, lifting a moratorium on new developments. However, strict controls were placed around new marine farming developments.

The ANZ says the industry is set to "ride the cyclical trough" and its sustainable foundations give it a solid longer-term outlook.

The great opportunity for seafood is based around consumers, and the changing face of both society and the way we eat, says Ed Garner, communications director with the British arm of research giant TNS.

These changes will not be news to New Zealanders, as they can be seen here. Basically, more people live alone, on average they earn more and are willing to sacrifice cost for convenience and quality. The so-called breakdown of the nuclear family is well known. Now, 50 per cent of "meal occasions" take place alone, compared to 15% 20 years ago.

Perhaps the statistic which can best encapsulate the seafood opportunity is that average meal preparation times have dropped from 60 minutes in the 1980s to 19 minutes in 2003.

Meals are becoming "lighter", using fresh produce, often picked up on the way home from work. This is especially true of younger, more wealthy and more health-conscious consumers.

What these changes represent is a potential move away from the mainstay of exporting – frozen fish – towards fresh or chilled fish. Not only that, but fish which is pre- processed and ready to cook straight out of the packet.

Garner says looking at the research, these are the consumers who will pay more money, more often, for a premium quality product.

Even though Garner has looked mostly at the British market, obvious parallels can be drawn with lifestyle changes evident in the wider European and North American markets. Europe takes about 20% of New Zealand's seafood.

In 1997, British consumers spent about 659 million ($NZ1.7 billion) on chilled fish and slightly less than that on frozen fish. In 2005, expenditure on chilled fish had risen to 1.1b, but frozen had only risen to 711m.

Garner said the indications are this market will continue its steep growth curve of about 10 to 15% a year.

The ANZ says this demand for seafood could lead to a lift in prices. The increasing Chinese market and resurgent European and American markets could also lead to export growth which is less cyclical than other commodities.

The challenge now is to get Kiwi fish in front of these consumers.

New Zealand has a natural advantage it should play on, the clean, green quality image already present in front of the British consumer in products such as lamb, says Jeremy Horton, category development manager of Young's Bluecrest, Britain's largest seafood chain.

This is combined with the fact the average British consumer is getting more adventurous in the foods they will eat, Horton says.

Young's Bluecrest does catch some of its supplies itself, but it is increasingly sourcing fish from outside Europe. "A key part is making the right connections, getting that product into the restaurants and onto the shelves," says Ross Graham, a New Zealand Trade and Enterprise sector specialist.

Kiwi fish is already present in Britain, but the opportunity is there. While concerns over the state of the cod fishery lingers, opportunity for whitefish such as Hoki remains.

Many New Zealand players already have a degree of presence in Britain and will be looking to the opportunities, says Owen Symmans, chief executive of the Seafood Industry Council.

Horton advocates development of the "New Zealand brand" when it comes to seafood, as the British consumer still does not associate New Zealand with fresh seafood. He says many Kiwi exporters already have the initial contacts – it's just waiting for someone to try to grow the market opportunity with consumers themselves.

"In theory, New Zealand has a massive opportunity to grow its presence, not just in Britain but in Europe as well."

He says one of the biggest opportunity is in shellfish. This is a relatively new area to the British market, but one that is driving the growth in fresh seafood.

Seafood is enjoying a resurgence in Britain and the US, driven by government recommendations about the health benefits. While the positive benefits of fish can be countered by negative images of overfishing, or the dangers of high levels of mercury in some fish, by and large the industry has a good image.

.............

SNORT

Hehe,

Remind me never to piss you off.....

the red word sound like some sorta bull**** to me. :shock:

the red word sound like some sorta bull**** to me. :shock:
:lol:

Yeah, that red text shows how some people value advertising and images over what the product is and how it is made.

Quite frankly, I think this whole planet's mentality is moving in the wrong direction. There is too much unneccessary deliberation and when a decision is made, it is either too late or not enough help.

__________________
Ban bottom trawling BEFORE 2006!

sorry for sounding off topic, but it does have some relevence. I was reading a book by Tom Clancy called Rainbow Six and it has a bunch of "Enviromental Activists" forming a Geneticly Modified Ebola Virus and plans to spread it around the world, wiping out all humans in a single year, except for poeple with super immune systems and the Enviromental Activists themselves, who have a "safe house"...suppose this really happens, with nobody in the world to operate the houses and no demand for fish, bottom trawling will come to a halt, along with the rest of humanity. A scary prospect, but it might work and save the planet, will it?

Sounds diabolical. I like it.

I hope I'm not giving any ideas to Greenpeace...

For any and all of you who have missed out on reading "the Monkey Wrench Gang" by Edward Abbey...please do so!!!!

I'll say it again...Bloody Fishermen...

greg

Well, we've exposed them as a bunch of crims today; check out the Rainbow Warrior website in a few hours!! It should be all over the (domestic) news this evening; sorry all of you international folk.

http://weblog.greenpeace.org/deepsea/

'CLAPTRAP' SUBSTANTIATED WITH CONCRETE EVIDENCE

Sunday, 12 June 2005: Last week Amaltal director Andrew Talley called Greenpeace assertions "unsubstantiated claptrap". Today, photos and footage taken by the Rainbow Warrior crew prove him and others supporting bottom trawling wrong.

Greenpeace crew from the Rainbow Warrior today captured images of endangered black and red corals being hauled aboard a New Zealand bottom trawler in international waters near Norfolk Island.

"Again and again, we have caught the bottom trawling industry red-handed with the evidence of deep sea destruction in their nets. How many more pictures of clearfelled coral forests do governments need to see before they recognise that a moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters is urgently needed?" said Carmen Gravatt, Greenpeace oceans campaigner.

"Fishing industry leaders scraped the bottom of the barrel last week when they claimed bottom trawl nets didn't touch the sea floor. Well, once again we've got the proof," said Gravatt. "We'd like to see the fishing industry swallow their pride, realise that bottom trawling is not sustainable and support our calls for a UN moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters".

The nets of the Waipori, owned by the Tasman Pacific company, seemed to have few fish but many pieces of the corals. Greenpeace filmed a range of bottom dwelling species that were also in the haul of the New Zealand vessel, including a rare crab (Paralomis cf. yaldwyni).

The New Zealand Government delegation at last week's UN meeting on oceans got the message and made strong moves to get governments globally to take responsibility for the destruction of bottom trawling in international waters.

The 2003 scientific NORFANZ expedition surveyed throughout this region and identified it as a 'biodiversity hotspot'. It has been described as a marine 'Jurassic Park' - with ancient species that are the tuatara of the sea, as old as dinosaurs.

The images were taken on the West Norfolk Ridge, just over 200 miles off the coast of northern New Zealand.

NB Although the smaller corals looks red, it is the skeleton of the coral that is black. The large red coral is a centuries-old gorgonian tree coral.

CONTACTS:

Carmen Gravatt, Greenpeace New Zealand campaigner on board Rainbow Warrior on 00872 1302412 or 00872 324 453 510
Erin Farley, Greenpeace New Zealand communications officer on board Rainbow Warrior - 00872 1302412 or 00872 324 453 510

Dean Baigent-Mercer communications officer in Auckland 021 790 817

Hm....how come no can they actually deny that bottom trawling affects the bottom of the ocean? It's total bull**** to me...

Hm....how come no can they actually deny that bottom trawling affects the bottom of the ocean? It's total bull**** to me...

I guess it sounded like a good idea at the time.

ABSOLUTELY CRIMINAL!!!

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0506/S00101.htm

I AM SEEING RED!

Yes, that is frustrating.

:mad:

That fisher with the crab looks so pleased with himself :mad:

I always remember seeing a NIWA staff member with a bit (OK a tree) of Bubblegum coral that had been hauled up by a trawler, it was just so sickening.

Surely even from the point of view of the fishers this can't really be economically viable? (not counting thefact that these things are often nursery areas for fish) but getting a net full of coral instead of fish can't really be what they're after plus nets get damaged or lost on corals........................grrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrr!

I was talking to one of our local fishers (admittedly small boat owner) the other day and he was commenting that bottom trawling was a waste of time!!! (& he supports the environmental aspects of not bottom trawling........he's a rare species himeself tho'). He was helping us show children the equipment on our research vessel and was telling the children that the echosounder was great for helping you avoid things like bryozoan colonies and in deeper water things like coral and sponges!!!!!! so not all fishers are tarred with the same brush!


Cheers

J

So much to say....not enough time (or room)....feel like exploding :mad:

Just watched the video on Greenpeace's website
http://www.greenpeace.org.nz/multimedia/video/13-June-05-waiori.wmv

Well it doesn't get much clearer than this. I'd love to have a pro-Bottom trawling scientist (they are out there) try and explain that what we see on said video is not what it seems. :mad:

TPOTH

reminds me of poeple denying that concentation camps existed in WWII and the photos about the Holocuast were faked...This is a total disgrace to humanity and that Ebola-Shiva Virus is starting to actually sound good.

Power, corruption and lies.

Thanks Steve for the posts! I really miss not being able to read your NZ newspapers (so much better than our Canadian ones). Freakin' unbelievable! Makes me proud to know you's guys, and excited to get out East (Halifax/university) and see if I can some how help the cause. No doubt Canada doesn't have one of the most angelic fishing industries...sigh, enough to make a guy depressed.

Well, just gotta keep a straight posture, stay true to the cause, and some time some one will listen.

Cheers,
Jesse

Chrono (and anyone else), if you like the activists-release-virus theme, you might want to check out the movie "12 Monkeys" if you haven't seen it.

Neal Stephenson's novel "Zodiac" is also a funny-ish novel about environmental activism sorts of things, too (not to be confused with Graysmith's "Zodiac" book, which is a true(sorta) crime book about the zodiac killer)

Certain individuals and groups would like to paint all environmental activists, whether they engage in civil disobedience or other "direct action" methods or not, as "eco-terrorists". It strikes me as funny that Tom Clancy has "environmental activists" unleashing a genetically-modified strain of ebola (gee, where'd they get the funding for that?). Anyone actually concerned about protecting endangered species would probably have a problem with what this would do to our primate cousins. It destroys great ape populations as assuredly and quickly as it kills people.

I'm personally a bigger fan of the Jules Verne approach to getting things done, at least from an innocently fictional standpoint.

Incidentally, Tom Clancy was a resident of the county in rural Maryland where I used to live. He evidently enjoyed chasing elderly couples off his beach with a shotgun for daring to continue their decades-old practice of taking an afternoon stroll by the water together. Oops. New property owner: zero tolerance for senior citizens! "How DARE they step on my pebbles! Those are MY pebbles!" Jerk.

Neal Stephenson's novel "Zodiac" is also a funny-ish novel about environmental activism sorts of things

Plus, it takes place in and around Boston, which is cool if you know the area. And helps you forget the obnoxiousness of the main character. :wink: This Other Eden by Ben Elton is another interesting take on eco-terrorists, and a fun read. (Not to be confused with This Other Edam, a book on gourmet cheeses.... eh.) :roll:

Gourmet cheeses? What's the ISBN number on that one? :smile:

Er... 0908790872 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0908790872/qid=1118722855/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/103-4757885-1520650?v=glance&s=books), but the original title was a limited edition and the New Zealand Amazon site is down at the moment. :wink:

But :nofeet: !! (Käsefüße (http://odge.info/german-english/K%E4sef%FC%DFe+%7Bpl%7D+(ugs.).html)... ? Heh heh)

He evidently enjoyed chasing elderly couples off his beach with a shotgun for daring to continue their decades-old practice of taking an afternoon stroll by the water together. Oops. New property owner: zero tolerance for senior citizens! "How DARE they step on my pebbles! Those are MY pebbles!" Jerk.


Well, he didn't say that all enivromental Activistis are like that, but you can't write a exciting book about spud guns, can you?
And Tom Clancy with a shot gun protecting 'his' pebbles is actually quite crazy, are you sure that this happened?

It's been a rather hectic time here over the past day, and will continue through into the new week.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10330556

Trawlers annihilating seabed, says scientist
14.06.05
By Anne Beston

Bottom-trawling is "absolute annihilation" of the seabed and must be stopped, says a New Zealand marine scientist.

Dr Steve O'Shea, a marine biologist at the Auckland University of Technology who specialises in the study of the mysterious giant squid, said he had had a "gutsful" of the misinformation about the effects of bottom-trawling.

"We are being misled. Bottom-trawling is environmentally unjustifiable," he said.

As the fishing industry and environmentalists wage a war of words and dispute figures of exactly how much of the ocean floor is being affected by bottom-trawling, Dr O'Shea said it was time the Government lived up to its promise to impose marine reserve orders on 10 per cent of New Zealand's marine environment by 2010.

"There should be some urgency. For God's sake let's do something practical now before it's too late."

Greenpeace has been waging an intensive campaign against bottom-trawling, dogging trawl boats on the high seas round New Zealand to highlight what it says is a practice that is wiping out deepsea marine life.

On Sunday, the organisation photographed a New Zealand vessel, Waipori, pulling up a piece of "gorgonian" coral that it says is centuries old.

Greenpeace protesters, working from inflatables launched from the Rainbow Warrior, also took photos of a rare crab being caught in the Waipori's net.

The fishing boat was working in an area known as the West Norfolk Ridge, 320km off northern New Zealand.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0506/S00142.htm

Government Talks While Precious Areas Destroyed
Tuesday, 14 June 2005, 4:29 pm
Press Release: Greenpeace New Zealand
14 June 2005
Government Talks While Precious Areas Are Destroyed

Tasman Sea, Tuesday 14 June 2005: The Government's announcement today that Chile will join Australia and New Zealand in discussions on a Regional Fisheries Management Organisation is not the urgent solution needed on bottom trawling, says Greenpeace.

“These talks are not new - they've been going on for 15 years,” said Carmen Gravatt oceans campaigner for Greenpeace.

She said the New Zealand Government had taken the last 15 years to get this far. By the time they actually come to an agreement more precious areas will be destroyed.

“Without a moratorium on bottom trawling, it's in the fishing industry's interests to lobby and drag out these talks for many years to come. This way, the industry can continue its bottom trawling on the high seas where there are no rules.”

”If the Government is seriously interested in preserving biodiversity, they should advocate to get a UN moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters in place while these talks continue. This will ensure there is both fish and other deep sea life left at the end of the talks.”

"It will keep the bottom trawlers away while scientists investigate what exists in these deep sea areas and agreement can be reached over what areas need protection, what can be fished and what fishing method might be acceptable.”

Last weekend, Greenpeace found the New Zealand vessel the Waipori hauling up ancient corals from the deep sea floor in international waters near Norfolk Island. This was in a region known to be one of the planet's “biodiversity hotspots”.

“If it was on land, this area would be protected as a National Park”, said Ms Gravatt. “Why sacrifice areas like this to destructive bottom trawlers while politicians and bureaucrats continue talkfests over management?”

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411368/591432/

Parties outline conservation policies
Jun 13, 2005

Four of the political parties have outlined aspects of their conservation policies at the Forest and Bird Conference in Wellington.

Labour told the conference it would focus more on marine issues and the high country tenure review process in the South Island.

National said it would improve laws to protect the ocean and biosecurity and look at establishing a new national park in Northland.

United Future told the conference the party wants an emergency summit on pest control and a moratorium on the use of 1080 while the issues are addressed.

The Green Party outlined plans for new restrictions on the fishing industry as part of its conservation policies. Co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says it wants companies to prove methods such as long-lining and bottom trawling don't damage the environment before they are approved.

She says the party also wants a near zero limit on the number of threatened birds and mammals which can be caught by accident. Fitzsimons says the Greens know the industry can reduce its by-catch and this is an effective way of ensuring it does.

The Greens also want to increase funding for ground based pest control and limit land ownership to people who live in New Zealand for at least 185 days a year.

http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/default.asp?id=51976

Green Party warns the planet's oceans are being abused and damaged by methods such as bottom-trawling

13 June 2005

The Greens want new fishing technologies to be put through environmental assessments.

They say conservation in the sea is lagging a long way behind what is happening on land, so the planet's oceans are being abused and damaged by methods such as bottom-trawling.

Greens co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says along with the fish, they are taking albatrosses, petrels, seals, dolphins and rare corals hundreds of thousands of years old.

She says there should be a limit on the amount of by-catch in each season, and if it is exceeded the fishery should be closed.

Jeanette Fitzsimons says some of the methods used are the equivalent of using a bulldozer to clear-fell a forest just to catch a few fantails

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0506/S00267.htm

Greens call NZers to boycott bottom trawled fish
Tuesday, 14 June 2005, 10:37 am
Press Release: Green Party

Greens call on NZers to boycott bottom trawled fish
The Green Party is calling for New Zealanders to boycott orange roughy and deep-sea dory (oreo) as a protest at the clear-felling of undersea forests by bottom trawler fishing.

"It is clear that fishing companies and producers will only clean up their act if their profits are affected," Green Party Co-Leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says.

"While much of the deep sea catch is exported, the effect of having New Zealanders refuse to purchase these species of fish would make companies think again about what they are doing."

Orange roughy is a long-lived species, which is highly vulnerable to fishing on seamounts. It grows slowly, does not breed until it is 25-30 years old and can reach up to 150 years of age. Most populations are now below 20 percent of their original unfished size, with one at just 3 percent. Little is known about the remaining levels of deep-sea dory - also known as oreo.

However, both species are fished by bottom trawling. This method decimates seabed macro fauna and fragile seamount habitats. As well as netting orange roughy and deep-sea dory, bottom trawlers also kill non-target species, including deepwater sharks such as seal shark, Baxter's and shovel-nosed dogfish, soft corals, tall sponges, bryozoans, gorgonia and other corals that have been aged at over 500 years.

"Just last week we saw graphic pictures from the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior showing huge corals ripped from the seabed by bottom trawling.

"If New Zealanders as a whole refuse to purchase these fish species it will send a message to those companies that we don't want our precious seas destroyed. Restaurants serving orange roughy will soon take if off the menu if their customers tell them they won't buy it anymore. Supermarkets will think twice about stocking these products if they remain unpurchased in their freezers.

"Forest and Bird, Greenpeace, ECO and the Green Party have been campaigning on this issue for some years. Now it's time New Zealand as a whole sent a clear message to these companies," Ms Fitzsimons says.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10330745

Boycott fish to stop bottom-trawling, say Greens
15.06.05

By Kevin Taylor
The Greens want consumers to boycott orange roughy and deep-sea dory because they are caught by bottom-trawling - a fishing method it says is "clear-felling undersea forests".

Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said yesterday that fishing companies and producers would clean up their act only if their profits were affected.

The row over bottom-trawling has been fed in the past few days by Greenpeace photographs of New Zealand trawlers dredging up coral and other sealife in the Tasman Sea.

The Greens say a ban on the practice in domestic waters will be a high priority in any post-election talks with Labour, because of the damage it does to marine ecology.

The fishing industry responded to the boycott call by saying that trawlers fishing for the two species do not set out to bottom-trawl, as their nets get damaged.

Seafood Industry Council chief executive Owen Symmans said fishing techniques minimised the impact on the ocean floor.

New Zealand fishermen did not simply drag heavy trawl gear across the seafloor, as opponents liked to portray.

"Technology today allows boats to 'fly' trawl gear above the sea bottom to target the fish with little impact on the seafloor or organisms that live on the bottom."

But Auckland University marine biologist Steve O'Shea attacked his statement, saying it was absolutely wrong: "You cannot catch orange roughy by any other means than bottom-trawl."

Forest and Bird senior marine researcher Barry Weeber agreed with Dr O'Shea, and said the industry's claims were "bollocks".

Meanwhile, Fisheries Minister David Benson-Pope has announced progress in a fisheries management agreement with Australia and Chile to help protect biodiversity in international waters - outside each country's exclusive economic zone.

Chile last week agreed to developing a "regional fisheries management organisation" to cover non-tuna fisheries in the South Pacific.

Mr Benson-Pope said one of the new body's key roles would be managing adverse impacts of fishing on biodiversity.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0506/S00134.htm

Rainbow Warrior Back From Bottom Trawling Protests
Tuesday, 14 June 2005, 9:34 am
Press Release: Greenpeace New Zealand

Nelson, Thursday 16 June 2005: The Rainbow Warrior will sail into Nelson Friday for a weekend of public open days and discussion, after nearly three weeks at sea highlighting the destruction of the deep sea by bottom trawling in international waters.

While at sea, Greenpeace was able to document clear evidence of the impact of bottom trawling, including a tree-sized piece of ancient coral that was hauled up by the New Zealand vessel, Waipori.

"The Rainbow Warrior is coming into Nelson to talk", said Carmen Gravatt, "We want to talk with the community of Nelson about what is happening out in international waters and why Greenpeace is calling for a UM moratorium on high seas bottom trawling." said Gravatt. "Bottom trawling in international waters is the biggest threat to deep sea life."

The Rainbow Warrior will also hold a series of open days for the public in Nelson, Wellington and Auckland before it travels to Matauri Bay, for the twentieth anniversary of the bombing of the first Rainbow Warrior. Members of the public will be able to come onboard over the weekend to learn about the workings of the ship, it history and the impacts of bottom trawling on deep sea life.

.... and there's something else happening right now!! Time is running out for bottom trawling!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Trawlers-damaging-coral-Greenpeace/2005/06/14/1118645783648.html?oneclick=true

Trawlers damaging coral: Greenpeace
June 14, 2005 - 9:49AM

Greenpeace says it has obtained pictures of a bottom-trawling fishing boat hauling up huge chunks of coral from the ocean floor near Norfolk Island.

The images disproved claims bottom-trawling nets could fly over the surface of the sea floor without damaging the ecosystems, the environmental group said.

The group's website shows large pieces of red coral up to two metres long being removed from the New Zealand boat's nets.

Greenpeace oceans campaigner Carmen Gravatt said the endangered black and red corals were pictured being hauled aboard a bottom trawler in international waters by the group's flagship, Rainbow Warrior.

Ms Gravatt said the federal government was yet to support global moves for a moratorium on bottom trawling.

"Again and again, we have caught the bottom-trawling industry red-handed with the evidence of deep-sea destruction in their nets," Ms Gravatt said in a statement.

"How many more pictures of clear-felled coral forests do governments need to see before they recognise that a moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters is urgently needed?"

She said the nets were on the Waipori, owned by the Tasman Pacific company, and seemed to have few fish but many pieces of the corals.

Ms Gravatt said Greenpeace also filmed a range of bottom dwelling species in the haul, including a rare crab of the Paralomis family.

The images were taken on Sunday on the West Norfolk Ridge, just over 200 nautical miles off the coast of northern New Zealand.

"A scientific expedition in 2003 identified this region as a 'biodiversity hotspot'," Ms Gravatt said.

Auckland University of Technology research fellow Dr Steve O'Shea said the area had been described as a marine Jurassic Park, with ancient species as old as dinosaurs.

Want to tell Owen Symmans what you think? Go on, have your say!

SymmansO@seafood.co.nz

I think it's worth pointing out that this method of fishing (for orange roughy and oreos) has been going in nz waters for over 20 years. Much of the damage to the slope and seamount environment occured years ago. You could probably drag a net over these regions now and not pull anything up as the damage has already been done. So it is disingenuous of the fishing industry to say that their nets do no damage as the damage was done years ago. When no one was really looking very hard and information was that much easier to control (no internet).

I'm currently working one group of fishes that are taken as by-kill (let's not beat around the bush here, they are ALL dead fish by the time they are brought to the surface) in orange roughy fisheries. Called rattails, they are not commercially valuable fish in this fishery. These fish have been coming up in orange roughy bottom trawls for years but virtually nothing is known about them or how they interact with their environment. This is also true for much of the other marine-life at this depth. I'm working on what these fish are eating and I'm sending off examples of these prey items to experts for identification. I'm not expecting to get these animals back identified, chances are no one will know what they are much past family level.

There is a