Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones has released Ministry for Primary Industries analysis showing bottom trawling covered 1.7 percent of New Zealand’s combined territorial sea and Exclusive Economic Zone in the 2024/25 fishing year, with most of that area previously fished. The figure landed on Friday as Jones pushes his contested Fisheries Amendment Bill through select committee and braces for a long-running election year fight with environmental groups.
In the Beehive release, Jones said the analysis shows trawling is “concentrated in specific fishing grounds” and that “the area impacted by trawling is extremely limited and has remained relatively stable for decades.” He framed the announcement as evidence-based pushback against critics, telling reporters bottom trawl fisheries deliver around 70 percent of New Zealand’s commercial catch, support an industry worth $1.57 billion in exports and directly employ about 9,000 people. He acknowledged the practice “needs to operate under evidence-backed checks and balances.”
The 1.7 percent figure is real and sourced from MPI, but it is also the most generous framing available to the minister because it uses the entire four million square kilometre Exclusive Economic Zone as the denominator. The zone is one of the largest in the world and is dominated by abyssal waters that no commercial trawler would ever target. Environmental groups argue the meaningful number is the share of trawlable continental shelf, seamount habitat and submarine canyon that is repeatedly worked, where impact concentrates on fragile coral and sponge communities that take centuries to recover.
Green Party Oceans and Fisheries spokesperson Teanau Tuiono has been blunt that the minister’s broader fisheries package is “a handout to the fishing industry” and that “sustainability is to Shane Jones what fossil fuels are to climate action.” In a video reported by The Spinoff in March, Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said, “The Greens ardently oppose this complete nonsense and will be doing everything in our power to ensure that it does not pass.”
Greenpeace Aotearoa Oceans Campaigner Ellie Hooper has called the Fisheries Amendment Bill “a blank cheque written for the trawling industry” and points to “hundreds of tonnes of coral” dragged up over the past 35 years, alongside the collapse of orange roughy and tarakihi stocks in some fisheries. Greenpeace polling by Talbot Mills in February found 78 percent of New Zealanders want bottom trawling banned in the South Pacific high seas, including 74 percent of National voters, 82 percent of ACT voters and 73 percent of NZ First voters. The same poll found 83 percent want cameras on every commercial vessel.
The political timing matters. Jones’ bill is at select committee after 90 percent of the 27,000 submitters opposed the original provisions. In late March Prime Minister Christopher Luxon publicly forced Jones to drop a clause that would have removed minimum size rules for commercial snapper, and ACT leader David Seymour told media his caucus was “not happy” about other parts of the bill. The remaining contested provisions restrict release of on-boat camera footage with fines reportedly up to $50,000, shorten public consultation windows and adjust bycatch penalty rules for some deepwater operators.
Labour’s Fisheries spokesperson Rachel Boyack has said the opposition will work to “make changes to the bill so that it’s not as bad as what it could be.” Former Labour minister Rachel Brooking had previously proposed banning trawling from up to 89 percent of the Hauraki Gulf, compared with the 27 percent then closed, giving a sense of where Labour might land at the 2026 election.
It is also worth noting what is already off-limits. Around 31 percent of the Exclusive Economic Zone and 21 percent of the territorial sea are closed to bottom trawling, including a network of Benthic Protection Areas covering roughly 30 percent of the zone. Inside a Benthic Protection Area the entire seabed is protected, with trawling within 100 metres of the bottom prohibited. Industry groups like the Seafood NZ Deepwater Council point to those closures as proof that meaningful protection is already in place and that the remaining trawl footprint is sustainable when managed against catch limits.
The argument Jones wants to win is whether voters see fisheries policy as a question of evidence and economic value, where his numbers are strong, or as a question of stewardship and intergenerational caution, where the polling is overwhelmingly against him. With the election just over four months away and Greenpeace, Forest and Bird and recreational fishing voices all running active campaigns, the 1.7 percent figure is unlikely to settle the dispute. It will, instead, define the terms on which both sides argue through to election day.
Heading to the polls in October? Check where your party stands on fisheries, marine protection and climate before you vote with the Newswire voting tool.
What do you think of the minister’s framing, is the 1.7 percent figure the right benchmark or should it be the share of trawlable habitat? Tell us in the comments.
This article was written by AI, briefed to report the facts, hopefully without some of the bias people bring to the job 🙂
Leave a Reply