
Southland Commercial Fishers And Seller Fined $36,900 For Black-Market Seafood Sales
Thousands of dollars of black-market seafood sales have cost three Southland commercial fishers and another man fines of $36,900.
Commercial fishers Michael Noel Hawke (61), Stuart Teiwi Ryan (48) and Peter George Fletcher (32) were sentenced in the Invercargill District Court having pleaded guilty to multiple charges under the Fisheries Act. Another man, Duncan William Davis (39) was sentenced on two charges under the Fisheries Act for illegally selling a large amount of kina, some pāua and blue cod, following a successful prosecution by the Ministry for Primary Industries.
Mr Hawke was fined $6,000, Mr Ryan $13,000, Mr Fletcher $3,900, and Mr Davis $14,000.
The prosecution was part of a larger 2023 investigation into illegal sales of kina, pāua, crayfish, blue cod and oysters. Fishery Officers gathered evidence of the illegal sales by studying seafood landing records and electronic communications between the fishers, black-market suppliers and potential buyers.
'Our investigation found Mr Hawke sold about 1000 dredge oysters during the 2023 season that were not part of his allowable commercial take. They were his allowable recreational take and should have been in his landing report.
'Based on 2023 prices of $37 a dozen, the oysters were valued at more than $3,000. Bluff is the only wild oyster fishery in the world and selling fish illegally has a serious effect on sustainability,' says Greg Forbes, Fisheries New Zealand District Manager.
The investigation found a deckhand aboard the fishing vessel was also selling his allowable recreational catch.
'Mr Ryan was found to have sold 114 crayfish and about 40 blue cod. Crayfish retails at about $140 a kg and blue cod $75 a kg. Mr Ryan made around $2,250 in illegal earnings.
'Most commercial fishers follow the rules because they want their fishery to remain sustainable into the future – black-market sales of recreational catch is a slap in the face to the majority of commercial fishers who do the right thing.'
Electronic evidence found Mr Davis, who is not a commercial fisher, sold seafood including up to 400 punnets of kina roe, some pāua and blue cod on the black market he had either caught, or bought from Mr Ryan to resell.
'This was up to $5000 of kina that was sold illegally and finfish valued at about $2000. This was deliberate and the motivation was simply to make money.'
Meanwhile, Fishery Officers found the third commercial fisher, Mr Fletcher, sold about 200 dredge oysters illegally on about six occasions.
'None of these fishers held permits allowing them to sell fish, nor were they Licensed Fish Receivers or fish farmers. When we find evidence of deliberate illegal sales of seafood – we will take action.
'Poachers steal from everyone because the shared resources belong to all New Zealanders. Their behaviour also undermines the Quota Management System and our reputation for sustainable kaimoana,' Mr Forbes says.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
16 hours ago
- Scoop
Name Release – Fatal Crash, Manurewa
Please attribute to Counties Manukau District Commander, Superintendent Shanan Gray: Police are formally releasing the name of the man who died in a fatal crash in Manurewa on Friday, 27 June. Today, he can be named as Iu Toalua, aged 45, of Auckland. Police extend our condolences to his family and friends at this difficult time. A 56-year-old man has been charged with driving dangerously causing death, dangerous driving causing injury and driving while forbidden has been remanded in custody and will reappear in Manukau District Court on 18 July. Police enquiries will continue, and further charges cannot be ruled out as we investigate further. While matters are before the Court, we can advise that parties in both vehicles were known to each other. Police are continuing to ask any witnesses with information or footage to come forward. If you have information, please update Police online now or call 105. Please use reference number 250627/8090 or cite 'Operation Highbury'.


The Spinoff
18 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Prominent New Zealander strikes again
The list of crimes attributed to Prominent New Zealander would make Al Capone blush. The news sent shockwaves across the nation. It quickly rose to the top spot on RNZ's website, then spread, inexorably, to the Otago Daily Times. Discussions sprang up on Reddit. Posts trickled out on X. Minions memes continued to dominate Facebook. The clamour was loud and persistent; the offending predictable, inevitable. Prominent New Zealander had struck again. Few people have been credited in the media with as many misdeeds as the prolific offender known as Prominent New Zealander. Their decades-long crime spree would make Al Capone blush. Its genesis may have been 1927 case, when a man described as a prominent Onehunga resident pleaded guilty at the Police Court to a charge of drunk driving. Since then, the offending has spread far from its Auckland epicentre, extending to any cranny that prominence can touch. The crimes have, if anything, picked up. In 2015, a person described as Prominent New Zealander appeared in court on a number of secret charges. The media has continued to attribute alleged crimes to Prominent New Zealander, notably in 2016, 2017 and 2019. The name Prominent New Zealander is, of course, a pseudonym given out by news organisations when someone vaguely connected with the concept of fame is granted name suppression by the courts. There's strong evidence it is in fact multiple people. In January, after years of appeals in multiple courts, a ' prominent political figure ' who committed sexual assault was named as former Act Party president Tim Jago. A similar process played out before a ' prominent businessman ' and abuser could be referred to by his true name, James Wallace. Often though, the identity of a Prominent New Zealander is never revealed. In 2014, a Prominent New Zealander was discharged without conviction and granted permanent name suppression after admitting to sexually assaulting a woman in Queenstown. A 'leading entertainment figure' still has name suppression after being convicted of sexual offences. A ' well-known musician ' retains name suppression after being convicted of domestic violence. This secrecy causes problems for the prominent community, which is often the subject of wild rumour and speculation when a Prominent New Zealander is before the courts. In trying to protect the privacy of a single alleged offender, courts routinely besmirch the reputations of hundreds of other vaguely celebrity New Zealanders. The issue was particularly pernicious during Jago's trial, where media organisations eventually took to clarifying the alleged offender wasn't a sitting member of parliament, presumably to ward off a portion of the online innuendo. The suppression also has an impact on the non-prominent, or 'peasant', community, mainly as an ongoing reminder of the justice system's inequities. As former justice minister Kiri Allan bemoaned on Q&A in 2021, name suppression gets given out to people with the means to fight for it in New Zealand. Poorer people don't get the chance to go by Prominent New Zealander. They tend to appear in court under their government name. The disparity cuts along intersecting economic and racial lines, with Pākehā getting suppression at three times the rate of Māori. Even if Prominent New Zealander isn't one person, they're certainly representative of a single, two-tiered, system; one where the wealthy, connected or well-known get to hide their identities behind alleged prominence, while less well-heeled are left to fend for themselves. Other countries seem to get by without such stringent restrictions. Maybe if they were less assured of their anonymity, a Prominent New Zealander would be less likely to offend in the first place.


Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
COVID-19 Fraud Sentencing
An Auckland woman was sentenced to home detention on charges of defrauding three government schemes set up to help companies adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns. Emma Jane Dentice entered a guilty plea and was sentenced on receiving and fraud charges when she appeared in the Waitakere District Court on June 27, 2025. Dentice was sentenced to 6 months home detention, a sentence which allows her to care for her elderly mother. In April 2020, the Government announced a new Small Business Cashflow Loan (SBC) scheme with applications open from 12 May, 2020. That month, an associate of Dentice's accessed the myIR account of a company using the login details of a former director of the company, and applied for a SBC loan. $11,800 was put into Dentice's bank account. She withdrew nearly $2,000 and spent it. The rest was transferred to another of her bank accounts. In February 2021, the Government introduced the Resurgence Support Payment (RSP) scheme to provide grants to businesses that were adversely affected by the raise in COVID-19 alert levels. In September 2021, Dentice applied for a RSP but was turned down because she didn't meet the criteria. In 2022, the Government introduced the COVID-19 Support Payment (CSP) to help support viable and ongoing businesses or organisations which experienced a 40 per cent or more drop in revenue as a result of COVID-19 circumstances. Dentice applied for a CSP in March 2022 but it too was declined because she didn't meet the criteria. The SBC, RSP and CSP schemes were implemented under urgency using a 'High Trust' application model to ensure eligible businesses could access funds to support the business in a timely manner. Dentice was not entitled to any of the money she applied for. Her offending was premeditated, spanned a 2-year period and was motivated by personal gain.