| option4
Address to the Auckland Conservation Board
By
Scott Macindoe
28-08-03
Good morning and thankyou for this opportunity to again speak to
the Auckland Conservation Board.
Today, our message is simple. Please engage with the public in a
comprehensive process designed to thoroughly explore and debate
the very complex challenge of protection of the marine environment.
The last 8 months have been characterised by well-intentioned entities
proposing marine reserves. These proposals have been promoted in
the absence of agreed upon
- Risk and threat analysis
- An integrated approach to addressing these risks and threats
- Achievable desired outcomes
We have heard much of the various initiatives under way to adequately
assess the above i.e. Oceans Policy development, the nature and
extent of customary rights, the potential of customary management
mechanisms, the establishment of a new marine division within the
Department of Conservation, a new Marine Reserve Bill etc. There
is talk of science review, stock take of habitat.
However all of these very important and fundamental understandings
are “work in progress”. It has become clear to us that
the public are demanding completion of this work before marine reserves
can be taken seriously and enjoy the all important widespread public
support and endorsement necessary for their successful implementation.
What is the hurry? Lets not forget, these initiatives are designed
to be forever – this change of status demands full and proper
process. With so much work in progress it is inappropriate to have
so much focus on but one tool available, as yet undefined.
We invite you, the Auckland Conservation Board, to take a leadership
role and encourage/facilitate the timely and all-important process
of public debate and education to ensure the protection of the marine
environment is achieved correctly.
A daunting task, however an essential step in securing public support.
Remember, we will get where we need to go by way of cooperation,
not competition. As things stand we find ourselves very much adopting
competitive positions that will inevitably lead to division and
mistrust.
We offer you an extract from Floor Anthoni’s website, www.seafriends.org.nz
that attempts to summarise the issues remaining unresolved as far
as marine protection is concerned. As you can see it is a long list.
I invite you to read and respond with comment for or against this
summary.
Thankyou
Scott Macindoe
option4 spokesperson
Extract from www.seafriends.org.nz
An introduction
Marine reserves were meant to be simple to understand and put in
place. Protect an area from all human influence and it will return
to a near-pristine state because nature can repair. The problem
is that this is entirely true. What people don't realise is that
fishing is not the only manmade threat and in recent times not the
largest either. Even marine scientists are unaware of the changed
circumstances in the sea. When you don't know that other very large
threats remain in there, you are bound to make mistakes.
If your only tool is a hammer, then the discussion centers on where
to put the nails.
(comment on the present state of the no-take marine reserves debate)
too simple a belief, public perception
- The no-take marine reserve idea is so simple that it has taken
hold in the minds of many. It needs very little education. To
displace it with a more complex idea, is difficult and takes time.
- The marine reserve is too narrow a concept for conserving (saving)
the sea. We must look at all issues from human population to our
needs and how to do things better. Education and self responsibility
are also potent conservation tools. Read conservation principles
and resource management on this web site.
- Marine reserves (conservation) work where all manmade threats
are removed. These places are no longer found along the coast
of the main islands, but they do exist around remote islands.
Hardly anyone knows this.
- People do not understand the huge differences between land and
sea. Even marine scientists are often insufficiently aware. Biodiversity/sea-land.
Marine habitats intro.
- People working with the sea understand the sea better than landlubbers.
They are concerned. They must become the sea's guardians. They
too need to learn more, and we can also learn from them.
- The Government is confused. Fisheries must exploit the sea to
the max to balance the Current Account deficit. The MfE doesn't
care about the sea. DoC makes marine reserves for research now,
but for biodiversity later (Bill before parliament). Protagonists
want reserves to save fisheries. Others for an insurance. These
conflicts must be resolved in the pending Oceans Policy which
may end as just a discussion forum.
- Very few scientists appear to be able to see the huge damage
from degradation happening everywhere and how fast this problem
is accelerating. They refuse to accept the facts and have no data.
- Protagonists take the moral high ground, which is hard to oppose.
It takes much courage to do so. Dr Robert Shipp's article. (The
tyranny of the moral high ground)
- Much propaganda and disinformation has been spread to promote
marine reserves, even to our children at school. How can it be
undone? Read Frequently Asked Questions on this web site.
- Protagonists have spread fear about the state of the oceans,
its fisheries and its future in order to gain political advantage.
However, such fear of fishing is unwarranted because compared
to the land, the sea is still in a relatively good state. Not
knowing what to do, concerned landlubbers are seeking political
action on fishing rather than on landbased pollution.
What is wrong at the top
- The NZ Biodiversity Strategy (Marine) is flawed. It ignores
the threats from the land
completely. It assumes (without proof) that fully protected marine
reserves provide the only solution to conserve biodiversity. This
is false. FAQ.
- Ten percent of the sea follows from 15-30% of land protection.
This is false. FAQ. Others state that this is only the beginning,
and that 20% is needed to save fisheries from collapsing. One
cannot compare land with sea.
- Ten percent implemented by 2010 is a mistake. There is no hurry.
Education must also take place. Why cast our mistakes in concrete?
We have so many marine reserves that have failed.
- DoC and Government have been advised by protagonists who do
not even dive. Armchair conservationists are misinformed about
the sea.
- It is wrong to harm others without compensation because of strong
but false beliefs.
- The Marine Reserves Act was a costly mistake, and so was the
Marine Mammals Conservation Act. FAQ. The Fisheries Act contains
all the mechanisms necessary for marine conservation of areas,
habitats and species.
- Worldwide the trend goes in the direction of Marine Protected
Areas of all kind with marine reserves here and there. But even
for this, our Marine Reserves Act does not have enough flexibility.
It is obsolete and should be abolished.
- Authorities falsely believe that land and sea should be managed
in one hand because of a mysterious connection between the two.
However, whereas the sea has hardly any effect on the land, the
influence of land erosion on the sea is profound and it can arrive
from areas far away from the sea. See Westcoast reserve proposal.
- Those advising our Government believe we are in a race and that
we should somehow lead the world in the number of marine reserves.
This is a very bad reason for having more failed marine reserves.
Instead of leading the world in mitigating land based pollution,
we are leading it in soil erosion.
- Since the Department of Conservation and local and regional
government are bound to execute directives from Government laid
down in law, marine reserves are now pushed hard by a well-funded
bureaucracy, even in the face of overwhelming well- informed public
opposition. It has become a senseless war.
- The public is continually being harassed by an army of bureaucrats
who are keen to legislate the people's rights away - without compensation.
What will the world eventually look like? Obviously, this tendency
must be halted. No-take areas, quotas, concessions, proof of guilt.
It is now said that fishing is a privilege rather than a right.
Is owning land a privilege? What about our rights as laid down
in Common Law?
Entering a world of scarcity
- The main cause behind all our problems is overpopulation while
nature shrinks.
Regulation aims at dividing the cake while keeping some. The number
of new regulations each year is accelerating, while most are ineffectual.
- An army of people in Wellington is busy regulating our freedoms
away and this gets worse.
The environment may become the biggest issue in coming years,
absorbing large amounts of money, time and other resources. It
may become unaffordable.
- We must now look for solutions that deliver most bang for the
buck. We can't afford feel-good solutions that do not deliver.
Many laws and regulations must be abolished accordingly.
- We owe it to our children.
The cost not considered
- The cost could amount to $100 million per annum in lost exports;
1000 families on the
dole. 50,000 fishermen displaced, having to fish elsewhere. Sustenance
fishermen are badly affected. If 20% is set aside, these costs
will double.
- There is no compensation. One group in society can take from
another with neither redress nor accountability.
- The cost/benefit has not been weighed against other solutions.
The benefits negligible
- Most of the benefits of marine reserves just sprouted from ideas
of protagonists. They
are not real. Marine conservation.
- Spill-over because the protected area contains more fish is
negligible. FAQ.
- Reserves are thought to produce more larvae but this has not
been proved. Neither has it been proved that more recruits arise.
The situation is more complicated due to the vagaries of plankton
ecosystems, which are seriously threatened by land based pollution.
FAQ. Dr Robert Shipp.
- People espousing the thistle-down effect are not aware that
marine organisms spawn 99.99% to make food in the plankton food
chain, but 0.01% to reproduce. This planktonic environment is
largely unknown. Scientists use computer models which suffer from
false assumptions. FAQ.
- The most important benefits are those to human visitors and
a protected area's age structure (old fish). Marine conservation.
Only places with clear water and good access can provide economic
benefits.
- Marine reserves do not fix the causes of our problems. They
do not prevent over fishing. They work for small areas only. There
are better ways.
Marine reserves in the wrong hands
- 10% of the sea ends up in the hands of the wrong people, managed
by the wrong
people who have no affiliation with the sea or understanding of
it. FAQ.
- International literature recommends local management but DoC
won't relinquish control and the budget. Resource management,
FAQ, Marine Reserves Bill 2002.
- DoC is excellent for managing land reserves. They should now
become active in land preservation to save the sea. So should
Forest & Bird. Why are they waiting?
Marine Reserves Act not flexible enough
- The Marine Reserves Act was an unnecessary and costly mistake.
Marine reserves of
all kind (total closure, partial closure, customary fishing) can
be created under the Fisheries Act, managed and policed by those
who know the sea and frequent it.
- Worldwide the trend goes in the direction of Marine Protected
Areas of all kind with marine reserves here and there. Yet our
Marine Reserves Act does not have this flexibility. It is obsolete
and should be abolished.
- Since coastal marine reserves no longer work, fisheries regulations
will be the ones that work best. They address the causes of the
problems. They work for all areas, not just 10%. Where no-take
reserves are needed they can be combined with managed and lightly
fished boundaries. Sustenance fishing by locals must be looked
after.
Poor timing
- There exists no compelling evidence for haste. The fishing situation
has not been
getting worse rapidly. Instead, the Quota Management System is
showing signs of stocks at sustainable levels. The 10% by 2010
mandate is hopelessly wrong.
- The existing marine reserves have not been evaluated for their
effectiveness for biodiversity (sustainability for all species).
Instead research has focused on a few commercial species, measured
with a flawed method (baited camera) FAQ. Otherwise DoC would
have been aware that 2 out of 3 are not working (reserves summary).
- The very large areas (3000km2) of de-facto marine reserves in
ammunition dumps and cable ways have not been studied for their
effectiveness as no-take marine reserves (of which there is only
150km2 around mainland NZ).
- Instead of making priority with these de-facto reserves in their
marine reserves proposals, DoC is proposing new and contentious
areas.
Poor
management
- Most of the existing reserves are inadequately marked and policed
[1]. They do not
reach their potential. Why have more like these? Get this right
first.
- Where compliance problems are encountered, this can be traced
back to poor consultation and not listening to valid objections
[1]. Local people have a wealth of knowledge to contribute.
- Poor consultation is evident now in EVERY marine reserve proposed
since 2002. Read the marine reserve proposals indexed above.
- Although the whole world recommends local management as a prerequisite
for success and compliance, DoC has explicitly ruled this out
in the new proposed Bill. It will not hand over the management
budget either. This must be resolved first.
- The sudden and rapid creation of new marine reserves exhausts
the resources of the public. It highlights the unfair difference
in funding between the aggressor (DoC) and the victim (the fishing
public). This is a poorly managed aspect of the of a so-called
democratic process.
The new threats
- Mud from erosion and sewage from animal husbandry and people
cause the new
threats in the sea. Erosion.
- Mud and sewage release nutrients in the sea. The nutrients fertilise
the plankton which blooms excessively, causing many problems.
Erosion/sea. See diagram.
- In moderation (natural amounts) this is beneficial for fisheries
but when over nourished, problems occur. Read the Plankton Balance
Hypothesis.
- Mud suffocates when it settles on sensitive organisms, in calm
places first. See diagram1, diagram2.
- Combined with diatom strings and bacteria, mud can become very
sticky, suffocating organisms even in more exposed places that
are cleaned regularly by wave wash. In 1983 a dense plankton bloom
of an otherwise harmless diatom species (Cerataulina pelagica)
caused massive kill of water-breathing species from scallop to
fish [2].
- Poisonous cyanobacteria can be part of the 'sticky fluff', killing
grazers like snails and sea urchins.
- Dense plankton blooms take the light away from kelp forests,
which can die over large areas. Survey93.
- Dense plankton blooms can become highly toxic, threatening the
entire food chain including people.
- Plankton toxins are highly poisonous, able to kill almost any
animal and even plants.
- Shellfish fisheries have been closed in 1993-1996, and 2003
due to such toxins. They are being monitored.
- Major fish mortalities have occurred, playing havoc with fisheries
management models. Of many fish stocks the models now correct
for 'unaccounted losses' amounting to several years of fishing
effort (MFish). NoFish93.
- Before 1983 these problems were not noticeable. They are threatening
now. Article.
- New Zealand soils are very deep and sensitive to erosion. Soil
NZ.
- Raindrop impact damage on bare soil is our worst enemy. Diagram.
- Torrential downpours have become common. Only these cause most
of the soil erosion.
- Our rate of erosion is 5-30 times what is natural, depending
on soil type and slope. 300 million tonnes /year; 7 tonnes per
person per year.
- We are losing our precious soils as we are killing the sea and
losing our beaches. They belong to our children. A triple stupidity.
- Our economy and welfare depends on the conversion of sunlight
to exports, both on land and in the sea. It is stupid to kill
the hand that feeds us. SoilNZ.SpecialNZ.
- In 1986 the subsidy on fertiliser was abolished. Hill country
with most of our problem soils was no longer fertilised. Soil
degraded and is now washing into the sea at an ever increasing
rate. Map.
- The number of earth digging and shifting machines is increasing
rapidly. They are not left idle.
- The situation is getting worse decade by decade.
- Good and bad years and the trend
- There is a ten-year cycle, co-incident with the Interdecadal
Pacific Oscillation (IPO). The very large South Pacific Gyre comes
to a standstill, causing hot oceans and coral bleaching in the
west Pacific while the sardine fishery collapses in the east Pacific.
- In the bad years (El Niño) the warm water currents from
the north weaken. The seas around NZ become cold (-2º to -3 ºC)
and dirty. Nutrients accumulate over the continental shelves.
Plankton blooms more violently. These have become problem years
for NZ. Graph.
What used to be three in thirty years has become four bad years
in ten. 1981-84, 1991-96, 2002-??.
- Shellfish closures, shellfish diseases, fish mortalities, fish
diseases, recruitment failure, habitat collapses.
- In the good (La Niña) years the waters are warm and clear
(relatively). Foreign species catch a ride to NZ on strong ocean
currents. Snappers spawn ten times more successfully. Habitats
recover somewhat.
- The problems started since the early 1980s. In 1986 the subsidy
on fertiliser was abolished.
- The trend is worsening. My estimate is 50-150% worse every ten
years (Floor Anthoni).
Flawed scientific research
- The sea is unbelievably and unintuitively different from the
land. If you don't know this,
you will be uninformed. See biodiversity/marine and habitat intro.
Even many (marine) scientists are insufficiently aware.
- The sea is hostile and difficult of access. Waves and weather
are always in control. We can be underwater only for one to a
few hours each day. Compare this with tramping the forests, and
it is clear that we have very little opportunity to become marine
naturalists. In the warm clear tropical seas this gets better.
Remember how much knowledge was gathered by ecologists who were
also keen naturalists?
- As a result, the marine ecology is largely unknown. The plankton
ecosystems are also largely unknown.
- With their limited general knowledge, scientists do 'controlled'
ecological experiments from which they derive far-reaching conclusions,
which often leads to nonsense.
- Marine scientists do not have their own boats and are not free
to dive any place any time. They must account for every hour to
some budget. They have hardly enough time in the water to finish
their own experiments. As a result, very few experienced marine
naturalists are found among marine scientists.
- Marine naturalists must be confident in diving, which takes
the best of ten years experience. They must learn to see, remember
and understand the functions of myriad sea creatures. After about
20 years one can begin to see how it all works together and how
it degrades.
- Marine research done in the lab is of high quality. But studying
the ecology cannot be done there. Controlled experiments are seldom
possible. The scientific method as defined by Francis Bacon fails
there. Read Science, technology & human nature. A different
approach is needed but not done (yet). FAQ.
- Scientists cannot react to sudden events, changing the course
of their studies. First a budget is needed, and someone must be
found to pay for it. Time must be accounted for. As a result,
many significant events have not been studied. Degradation has
not been observed. o Studying degradation is not 'sexy'. It does
not earn scientific admiration.
- We have omitted monitoring the sea for its clarity and sedimentation
rate. A network of simple sedimentation traps on all wharves and
some buoys could have kept us up-to- date with the disastrous
trends that have been with us for over fifty years, but which
are accelerating steeply now. This has not been done. It is not
even being considered.
- Many marine scientists are politically motivated, having traded
objectivity for their beliefs. Science funded by DoC is bound
to give results pleasing DoC, much as that funded by the tobacco
industry pleases its funders. One does not easily bite the hand
that feeds. The DoC funded research cannot be critical of DoC.
- Many scientists now earn their living from marine reserves.
It has become a major source of income for many institutions.
- A swarm of politically motivated marine 'scientists' is now
involved with marine reserves, quoted as a 'growth industry'.
They want marine reserves to work for the environment, science,
fisheries, biodiversity and much more but they fail to see when
and why these reserves don't work. Most of these scientists work
with computers and models to make their point.
- These 'scientists' do not take the precaution of distinguishing
apples and pears, and uncritically apply findings about tropical
reefs to the situation in NZ. Even here they do not distinguish
the special nature of some spots on the coast. The area around
Goat Island for instance, has always been a special place without
equivalent. To compare other places with it must be done with
care. Yet these 'scientists' do not exercise such care. FAQ.
- Nearly all travelling protagonists for marine reserves are not
frequent divers, having no personal appreciation. They are not
marine naturalists. Yet their influence has swayed many and has
been decisive for this Government's flawed policies.
- Failure of marine reserves is almost never published. Yet about
two thirds of 1306 surveyed MPA’s failed to meet their objectives
(Kelleher et al. 1995).
Flawed marine education
- Rather than teaching our children to think critically, they
are fed a stream of
propaganda by DoC about marine reserves, by MFish about fisheries,
by the forest industry about forestry.
- The flawed urchin barrens hypothesis, lacking any proof, is
now taught at schools and university. How much worse can it get?
Children are taught that feeding the fishes is bad, without balancing
viewpoints.
Bad news is bad
- The Government spends millions of dollars each year to promote
a clean and green
NZ image. To say that we are in reality far removed from that
ideal, could cost the nation dearly in lost revenue from tourism.
Yet an ecological disaster of unequalled magnitude is looming
over NZ.
- Eco tourism, glass bottom boats, whale watchers and so on, are
all dependent on the tourism dollar. They spread counteracting
propaganda and step up their marketing and advertising. So how
is the public to know the bad news?
- For DoC the message that coastal marine reserves are no longer
working is akin to death. They will not do what is right for us
but what is right for themselves.
- Marine reserve protagonists who have clamoured for their cause
for large parts of their lives are not going to say 'we were wrong'.
Instead they are stepping up their flawed efforts with more fervour.
- The media do not like to press minority views, particularly
when the news is bad.
What next?
Half the solution rests in recognising that there is a problem.
Let's admit it. Let's say
we were wrong. If that does not happen, a solution will not be forthcoming.
It is necessarily the first step.
The marine reserves process
- We must stop the marine reserves process before more mistakes
are cast in concrete. There is no justifiable haste for marine
reserves.
- We must not ask ourselves just where to put marine reserves
or how many but we must look at all issues because every issue
that helps is therefore also a conservation issue, and this includes
population, education and self- responsibility.
- Then we must start at the top, removing all conflicts from an
overarching Oceans Policy. MFish must be given the goal not to
only produce more fish but to also act with more caution (is in
the pipeline now). They should be made responsible for all marine
conservation and reserves. New Zealanders should have first right
to their country's bounties.
- Most immediate benefit comes from more refined fisheries management
with more local input and management.
- Eventually the MRA and the Marine Mammals Protection Act must
be abolished and acted upon from the Fisheries Act.
Over nourishment (eutrophication)
- Soil erosion + loss of fertility + sewage cause over nourishment
of coastal
seas. It must be reduced from all of its causes. This is our main
battle.
- Sewage must be collected into coastal tankers and released far
out to sea where nutrients are needed. Eventually we should be
able to recycle it.
- Farming methods must change to farm soil rather than sheep/stock/milk.
We must not graze the grass too short. We must not overstock.
- There should be less pressure on farming more from less land,
which leads to over fertilisation, overstocking and loss of fertiliser/
fertility to the sea.
- There should be incentives to farm marginal and isolated lands
more productively and more environmentally friendly. There should
be incentives to sustain healthy rural communitites.
Erosion and loss of soil fertility
- Solutions won't have an overnight effect. We must above all
learn to farm soil sustainably. Soil is our most precious resource,
belonging to future generations and we all bear the responsibility
to keep it in good health.
- A farm advisory service must be established which is able to
give FREE advice to farmers, and educate them about maintaining
soil fertility, minimising erosion and how to get state help.
It must also be able to take soil samples and maintain a national
soil database.
- As a temporary measure, the subsidy on fertiliser should be
reintroduced for problem soils and hill country. (not for dairy
farming) It is not about productivity but about soil cover. Some
islands may need to be top-dressed in their entirety (Great Barrier
Island, Ruapuke I, Stewart I).
- A financial incentive must stimulate the planting of trees and
the fencing of sensitive areas.
There must be incentives to remove noxious animals and plants
from our environment.
Coastal erosion
- Financial incentives should see all of our coasts, mangroves
and wetlands fenced and possums removed.
- Many of our coasts need to be reseeded and fertilised to prevent
imminent and already ongoing erosion.
Research
The direction of current research must be changed. We must start
measuring degradation and aim our brains at how to mitigate the
new threats. We must direct research to our largest problems first.
None are so blind as those who will not see
Just go over the above list again and ask yourself how it is possible
that so much went wrong in the marine reserves debate. The obvious
thing to do is to halt the whole process so that all fallacies can
be ironed out and the right things done for the right reasons. We
owe it to our children.
TOP
|
