Evidence of Martin Unwin - Environment Canterbury

More documents

Recommendations

Info

36Table 12. Distribution of estimated angling effort (thousands of angler-days ± 1 SE) in2007/2008 by fishing region and angler origin (New Zealand resident vs. overseasvisitor). Percentages in the first three columns show the effort expended in eachregion as a percentage of the national total; thus New Zealand residents expended11.3% of their effort in the Southland region, whereas overseas visitors expended25.3% of their effort in this region. The final column shows the effort expended byoverseas visitors in each region as a percentage of the total effort in that region; thusoverseas visitors accounted for 11.4% of the effort expended within the Southlandregion.Region Total NZ resident Overseas visitor % o’seasNorthland 4.0 ± 0.6 ( 0.3%) 3.7 ± 0.5 ( 0.3%) 0.0 ± 0.0 ( 0.0%) 0.0%Auckland/Waikato 30.7 ± 2.4 ( 2.4%) 29.8 ± 2.4 ( 2.5%) 0.9 ± 0.2 ( 1.3%) 2.9%Eastern 215.6 ± 8.6 (17.0%) 209.5 ± 8.5 (17.4%) 6.1 ± 0.9 ( 8.9%) 2.8%Taranaki 16.9 ± 1.6 ( 1.3%) 14.9 ± 1.3 ( 1.4%) 0.5 ± 0.2 ( 0.8%) 3.2%Hawkes Bay 36.1 ± 2.6 ( 2.8%) 32.5 ± 2.4 ( 2.7%) 3.6 ± 0.9 ( 5.2%) 10.0%Wellington 45.1 ± 2.6 ( 3.5%) 44.4 ± 2.6 ( 3.7%) 0.7 ± 0.2 ( 0.9%) 1.4%Nelson/Marlborough 41.1 ± 2.1 ( 3.2%) 34.4 ± 2.0 ( 2.9%) 6.6 ± 0.7 ( 9.6%) 16.1%West Coast 51.3 ± 2.4 ( 4.0%) 44.5 ± 2.3 ( 3.6%) 8.2 ± 0.8 (11.9%) 16.0%North Canterbury 200.1 ± 8.6 (15.7%) 195.4 ± 8.6 (16.3%) 4.6 ± 0.6 ( 6.7%) 2.3%Central South Island 251.4 ± 9.0 (19.8%) 240.7 ± 8.9 (20.1%) 10.8 ± 0.9 (15.6%) 4.3%Otago 224.9 ± 9.4 (17.7%) 215.4 ± 9.4 (17.9%) 9.5 ± 0.9 (13.8%) 4.2%Southland 153.7 ± 6.2 (12.1%) 136.3 ± 5.9 (11.3%) 17.4 ± 1.8 (25.3%) 11.4%Total 1 271.4 ± 19.7 1 202.4 ± 19.5 69.0 ± 2.8 5.4%SJE-388879-28-627-V1:axm
37Figure 1: Estimated usage of New Zealand lakes and rivers by overseasvisitors in 2007/08, with rivers and lake polygons coloured according tothe percentage of total usage contributed by overseas licence holders.SJE-388879-28-627-V1:axm
Page 1 and 2: BEFORE THE CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUN
Page 4 and 5: 42.2 The upper Hurunui River sustai
Page 6 and 7: 6the details of the survey methodol
Page 8 and 9: 85.3 For the 2001/02 and 2007/08 su
Page 10 and 11: 106.5 One of the considerations whi
Page 12 and 13: 126.12 The Hurunui catchment sustai
Page 14 and 15: 146.18 The North Canterbury region
Page 16 and 17: 16intermontane valleys in the footh
Page 18 and 19: 188.2 The distribution of Chinook s
Page 20 and 21: 20headwater spawning tributaries, a
Page 22 and 23: 229.2 The upper Hurunui River susta
Page 24 and 25: 24ReferencesBonnett, M.L.; Davis, S
Page 26 and 27: 26Table 2. Attributes of the Hurunu
Page 28 and 29: 28Table 4. Attributes of the Hope,
Page 30 and 31: 30Table 6. Estimated annual usage (
Page 32 and 33: 32Table 8. Estimated annual usage (
Page 34 and 35: 34Table 10: Sales of FGNZ whole-sea
Page 38: 38Salmon Salmon Spawning Spawning S

Evidence of Martin Unwin - Environment Canterbury

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?