Seafood NZ Prepares For 'Thoughtful' Conference – Seafood's Science, Storytelling And Health Benefits All On The Table
The group representing New Zealands commercial fishing sector is hosting around 250 industry leaders at the Conference, including scientists, operations experts and hands-on fishers.
Providing 'Food for Thought', as well as literally providing the best possible food for New Zealanders, are themes of the Seafood New Zealand 2025 Conference, kicking off on Wednesday 6 August in Nelson.
The group representing New Zealand's commercial fishing sector is hosting around 250 industry leaders at the Conference, including scientists, operations experts and hands-on fishers.
This year's theme is 'Seafood for Thought' – an obvious play on the phrase 'food for thought' – which is all about encouraging fresh thinking, new conversations, and smarter ways of working together.
Conference delegates will hear from a range of speakers including Shane Jones, the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries, who will open the 2025 Conference.
Seafood New Zealand CEO, Lisa Futschek says there are three main strands to the Seafood for Thought theme.
'We're focused on the science that backs up our industry. We'll be asking how we can develop fishing technology that reduces our impacts and also allows us to fish in a smart and efficient way.
'Another area of focus is telling our story. New Zealand commercial fishing is lauded overseas – for example, a recent FAO report from the UN put us second in the world for sustainable management – and yet locally we are not so well recognised. How do we get better at sharing our stories with New Zealanders?
'And then we will look at the latest science around the health benefits of seafood consumption. We are fortunate enough to have two distinguished Australian scientists joining us in Nelson, who have just completed a review of the latest science around this very topic. We're looking forward to them revealing what their review of 281 of the newest and highest quality scientific papers says about the nutrition that seafood can provide and the impact that can have on human health.'
Other topics on the table, providing Seafood for Thought are:
• How the sector can sustainably grow its export value. Seafood is already worth around $2.2 billion a year to the New Zealand economy, so how do we increase this in a way that is sustainable for our ecosystems
• What we can do to manage the trade-related challenges we face in today's fast changing geopolitical environment
The Conference will also hear about safety at sea and on land, careers in seafood and how skippers can contribute to the science needed to manage our fisheries with greater certainty.
The 2025 Seafood New Zealand Conference runs for two days – August 6 and 7.
Fast Facts – Key Data about New Zealand Commercial Fishing
• New Zealand's commercial wild capture fisheries are worth $1.6 billion in export revenue
• Our seafood sector produces $2.2 billion in export revenue in total (including aquaculture)
• 16,500 Kiwis are employed either directly or indirectly in seafood
• Fisheries management is complex – there are 642 fish stocks under
management
• New Zealand fish stocks are in good shape. 97.3% of total commercial landings by weight are from stocks that are considered sustainable (see MPI data).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Reserve Bank keen to know how Kiwis use cash
Image: RNZ The Reserve Bank is asking people how they use and store cash, saying it needs more up-to-date information as it redesigns the system. The random postal survey asks people how they prefer to pay, how often they use cash, how easy it is to deposit and withdraw coins and notes, and whether they store cash and why. The central bank is asking new questions this year such as whether people are having challenges in using cash. It will now carry out its survey annually instead of every two years. "As the steward of money and cash for New Zealand, we need to ensure that New Zealanders can access, use, and bank cash," the central bank's director of money and cash Ian Woolford said. The survey will inform its work to redesign the cash system. Retail New Zealand chief executive Carolyn Young told Morning Report the use of cash was diminishing, to less than 10 percent of transactions. While some people never used cash, there were times and places where it was critically important, she said. "In rural areas versus urban areas there is more cash that goes through transactions. "And we know intrinsically that people that are on a really tight budget, that cash is a really great tool for managing budgets." Young said cash was indispensable in emergency situations when electricity or eftpos connections go down. Hospitality businesses were more likely than retailers to no longer take cash, she said. "The Reserve Bank perspective is you don't have to take cash but you have to have an alternative method if somebody can't pay by a card." New Zealand First has put forward a members' bill to protect cash as a key option in transactions, requiring stores to take it for purchases up to $500. Young said retailers recognised the importance of cash but didn't back it being compulsory. There was a risk of robbery for businesses holding cash, and counterfeit notes were common, she said. The survey runs to October 10. If people receive a letter to voluntarily participate they can check it is legitimate by visiting the Reserve Bank website, emailing cashusesurvey@ or phoning +64 4 472 2029.
1News
3 hours ago
- 1News
Keen on cash? The Reserve Bank wants to know how you use it
The Reserve Bank is asking people how they use and store cash, saying it needs more up-to-date information as it redesigns the system. The random postal survey asks people how they prefer to pay, how often they use cash, how easy it is to deposit and withdraw coins and notes, and whether they store cash and why. The central bank is asking new questions this year such as whether people are having challenges in using cash. It will now carry out its survey annually instead of every two years. "As the steward of money and cash for New Zealand, we need to ensure that New Zealanders can access, use, and bank cash," the central bank's director of money and cash Ian Woolford said. ADVERTISEMENT The survey will inform its work to redesign the cash system. Retail New Zealand chief executive Carolyn Young. (Source: Breakfast) Retail New Zealand chief executive Carolyn Young told Morning Report the use of cash is diminishing to less than 10% of transactions. While some people never use cash, there were times and places where it was critically important, she said. "In rural areas versus urban areas there is more cash that goes through transactions. "And we know intrinsically that people that are on a really tight budget, that cash is a really great tool for managing budgets." Young said cash was indispensable in emergency situations when electricty or Eftpos connections go down. ADVERTISEMENT Hospitality businesses were more likely than retailers to no longer take cash, she said. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including the West Auckland builder sentenced over massive meth haul, fire on a commuter train, and how Bluey could teach kids about resilience. (Source: 1News) "The Reserve Bank perspective is you don't have to take cash but you have to have an alternative method if somebody can't pay by a card." New Zealand First introduced a Member's Bill to mandate trade vendors to accept cash payments for goods valued up to $500 – meaning if passed, cash payments would have to be accepted by law. Young said retailers recognise the importance of cash but don't back it being compulsory. There was a risk of robbery for businesses holding cash, and counterfeit notes were common, she said. The survey runs to October 10. If people receive a letter to voluntarily participate they can check it is legitimate by visiting the Reserve Bank our website, emailing cashusesurvey@ or phoning +64 4 472 2029. ADVERTISEMENT
The Spinoff
3 hours ago
- The Spinoff
NZOA has saved reality TV and soaps – what about all the shows left to die?
NZ on Air is confronting a very uncomfortable question: what to save, and what to leave behind. Funding announcements from NZ on Air are not typically newsworthy in and of themselves. The agency functions as a local version of the BBC, but instead of existing as a non-commercial umbrella brand, it funds a variety of media which runs across a wide range of largely commercial mediums and platforms. Funded work often consists of a mix of returning shows and new projects, which are either predictable (another season of Q+A, or a fresh David Lomas project) or largely unknown (another murder in rural New Zealand, cast tbc). The most recent round was strikingly different, making news in a way which reveals challenges to the agency's model, and shows just how bad the choices are for NZ on Air now. Three very familiar shows collectively received more than $5m in funding. They are Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island and The Traitors NZ. All are broad in their appeal and comparatively popular. Yet none would have been considered good candidates for funding until very recently. That's because NZ on Air was set up to address a market failure. Due to our small population, some forms of 'programming reflecting New Zealand identity and culture' (according to its legislation) are not commercially viable. The legislation makes specific reference to 'drama and documentary', with everything else somewhat in the eye of the beholder. For decades that meant scripted shows (such as comedy and drama) were NZ on Air's core business, while most other formats (from current affairs to breakfast TV) were commercially funded, due to TV networks being able to sell enough ads to make them on their own terms. That didn't mean it lacked value, just that it didn't need the support. News is the canonical example of a commercially funded genre – TVNZ's 6pm bulletin remains among the highest-rated shows on television, despite costing a bomb to make. Reality TV wasn't even a genre when NZ on Air was founded, and the agency has tended to be fairly circumspect in its funding of it over the years, only getting involved when, as with Match Fit, or Popstars, it fulfilled another worthy goal. Shortland Street, our only true soap, was briefly funded as a kind of TV startup, but cranked along under its own steam for decades afterwards. This was helpful because reality TV and soaps are considered less intellectually nutritious by the kind of people who care about the culture we fund. The end of that era This has not been an uncontested idea. Critics, including those at The Spinoff, and the makers of reality TV have long felt that NZ on Air was too prescriptive in its definition of 'reflecting New Zealand identity and culture'. They believe that reality TV and soaps are popular, show a diverse range of New Zealanders and bring voices, vernacular and perspectives to our screens, just as scripted comedy and drama do. This past week, they won the argument. Shortland Street has returned for a second funded season, after last year accessing two different strands of public funding to stay on air. More striking was the return of The Traitors NZ and Celebrity Treasure Island, two shows which had previously been commercially funded. Celebrity Treasure Island is a revival of an '00s-era format, and has drawn praise for its use of Te Reo Māori and addressing 'complex issues like ageism, sexism and queer politics, all on primetime mainstream television', according to my colleague Tara Ward. The Traitors NZ is a hit local version of a smash international format, with a diverse cast and a strong strain of New Zealand-specific humour. In addition to the cultural arguments, there's also a broader systems-level case for their funding. The shows have consistently rated strongly, particularly with the kind of middle-aged audiences which have abandoned linear television over the past decade. The thinking goes that by keeping these tentpole shows on our screens, you also help keep our networks and production companies viable. The path not taken Despite the solid arguments in favour, there remains a case against, too. To contemplate it, you only need to cast your mind back to a little over a year ago. It was a bonfire of the journalists. We lost longform current affairs stalwart Sunday, the venerable consumer rights show Fair Go, the magazine-style 7pm staple The Project and, most wrenchingly, the whole Newshub operation, all in the space of a few harrowing months. The death of those shows was attributed to the awful financial equation facing TV networks. That despite all rating very strongly, at least by comparison to the rest of the schedule, none could justify the investment required to keep them running. It was a shocking, visceral event, one which made New Zealand a cautionary tale across the Tasman – the country you need to look hard at to figure out how to avoid its fate. Now, a year on, and NZ on Air has been persuaded by the arguments of TVNZ and Three, that these reality TV and soap formats are too important to be allowed to die. To be clear, none of Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island or The Traitors NZ is fully funded. The budgets aren't public, but production industry sources suggest the agency's investment would cover no more than 50% of the associated costs, and perhaps considerably less. Still, the risk of moral hazard is clear. The networks and production companies have established that no show is beyond help, and as audiences decline, there is a manifest case for continually topping up the public funding component of budgets. The implication is that paradoxically, as they get less popular and ad revenue declines, they should receive more help. None of which is to say these decisions are wrong in isolation. But looking at the slate of what we publicly fund now, we seem a long way from home. Pulpy true crime documentaries, reality TV shows with large chunks devoted to selling McDonalds, regularly re-named shows built around the interests of a single comedian. Still, what else can we do? Linear TV audience decline is a global phenomenon, and no public or private broadcaster has successfully ported their audiences across to digital at the same scale as they once had, let alone been able to defend the same advertising revenues. NZ on Air faces bad choices everywhere as it seeks to fulfil its mission and defend its model. It may not have even been given the chance to save the news. But as we slip gently into a new era, where everything which can be argued can be funded, it's important to remember the shows we didn't save too. And ask whether the foundational mission of NZ on Air is better served by what we kept, or what we threw away.
