Complaint to Minister – Fisheries – Kayak Appeal Refused
Complaint to Minister – Fisheries – Kayak Appeal Refused: While there has still been no acknowledgement of the broader complaint submitted to theMinister a response to an earlier appeal has now been received. The appeal concerned the possibility of allowing commercial
fishing from a kayak in addition to existing fishing operations from a ski-boat, but not simultaneously.
The request was motivated by the fact that kayaks offer a significantly lower-cost means of accessing marine resources and could help improve the economic viability of small operators. The response to the appeal was received exactly six months after
submission.
The appeal was refused by Minister Aucamp, accompanied by a suggestion that the matter be
taken to court if the decision is challenged. Given the financial realities within the linefish sector,
this is not a practical option for the majority of the small operators for whom this exemption
would have the greatest value.
The decision was contained in a lengthy legal document, and the refusal appears to be based
on the position that the request is not aligned with gazetted linefish policy and that the Minister
does not have the authority to deviate from or override such policy.
However, the regulatory framework appears to contain a comparable example. In the West
Coast Rock Lobster (Nearshore) sector, long-standing permit conditions allow fishers operating
from non-motorised rowboats (“bakkies”) to access snoek, despite this arrangement not being
reflected in the broader West Coast Rock Lobster policy. This is remarkably similar to what was
requested for the linefish sector. What is particularly noteworthy is that permission to catch
snoek, a linefish species, was granted within a sector that would not ordinarily have access to
linefish at all.
This raises an obvious question of consistency. If permit conditions can lawfully extend species
access and operational parameters beyond what is explicitly stated in policy, it is difficult to
understand why similar flexibility was considered unavailable in this instance. It should also be
noted that the exemption request did not seek access to additional species; it merely sought
permission to utilise an additional vessel type.
It is also difficult to avoid the conclusion that more effort was devoted to finding reasons to
refuse the request than to exploring ways in which it could have been accommodated. The
refusal was presented in a detailed 22-page legal document. If genuine legal obstacles existed,
one would have expected at least some indication that the department intended to investigate
amendments to the policy framework or alternative solutions. Instead, the response appears to
have been limited to explaining why nothing could be done.
Another concern raised in the response was that granting permission to one individual would be
unfair to others. However, this objection appears relatively easy to overcome. The application
was submitted by a single individual because that individual does not speak on behalf of the
entire fishing industry. If the concern is fairness, then the obvious solution would be to extend a
similar opportunity to any qualifying linefish permit holder who wishes to fish from a kayak under
appropriate conditions.
The broader issue is not kayaks. It is whether the fisheries administration is genuinely interested
in finding practical ways to improve the viability of small operators, or whether every proposal is
approached primarily from the perspective of why it cannot be done.
This matter was previously described as a live test of responsiveness and accountability within
the fisheries portfolio. The Minister has now responded, but the response has raised further
questions rather than resolving them. In particular, it remains unclear why flexibility that appears
to exist elsewhere within the fisheries regulatory framework was considered unavailable in this
case.
The issue is now firmly in the public domain. The Minister has been made aware of the apparent
inconsistency, and stakeholders will be watching closely to see whether the decision is
reconsidered, whether a satisfactory explanation is provided, or whether the department simply
continues to defend the status quo.
Anton Kruger
Here are the links to existing and past Sardine Sighting Maps. With instructions on how to install The Sardine News right on your phone, tablet, or even desktop.
Channels
Brucifire Surf Retorts – highly entertaining surf reporting
Master Watermen – news from way down deep
The Sardine News – neva miss a single sardine
FishBazaruto – 1000 pounds plus
MYDO Tackle Talk – highly technical sport fishing
Surf Launching Southern Africa – getting out there safely
Water Woes – complain about your municipality here
Websites
umzimkulu.co.za – fishing, charters, accommodation
umzimkuluadrenalin.co.za – will get you right out and onto the edge
thesardine.co.za – never miss a single sardine
masterwatermen.co.za – news from under water
fishbazaruto.com – dreams are out there
brucifire.co.za – surf retorts
fishmad.co.za – destination Madagascar
andantelodge.co.za – Transit luxury in Pretoria
