Submission to : Department of Conservation

Cnr Liverpool St & Karangahape Road
Auckland

On: Great Barrier Island Marine Reserve Proposal

By: Leigh Fishermen's Association (Inc)

P O Box 158 Leigh

Date: 26 June 2003

Leigh Fishermen's Association objects to the marine reserves act being developed ahead of the government's Oceans Policy and the Marine Protected Areas strategy.

We strongly object to an arbitrary goal of 10% of the EEZ being protected in the absence of a more rational approach to protection that might otherwise be developed in the Oceans Policy or the Marine Protected Areas strategy.

No underlying information on our marine biodiversity - what is it? Where else is it? How does it differ from other parts?

The cable and shipping zones already incorporate the varying degrees of marine biodiversity - covering sandy beach, sand and mud bottom, the nor' west reef off Little Barrier (up to 33 metres), deep-water reefs, plus whatever other habitats are within the Great Barrier Island proposal. The cable/shipping zone adds another 4.5% of marine protected area to the gulf, and is an area that should be studied fully. We believe that far too many people are not even aware of the bans imposed in the cable/shipping zones. This area must be recognised for what it really is, and the public should be informed as to the real extent of marine protected areas already in the gulf.

No assessment of what risks exist or will potentially affect biodiversity or what range of tools are available to address those risks. No strategy on how we protect this 10%. We understand that a strategy will soon be released but will have no statutory force. No assessment of the costs and benefits of establishing a marine reserve. No overall management plan.

Proposals so far all indicate that part of the reason for proposing these reserves is to assist in the management of fish stocks. What is the purpose of this marine reserve application? Is it for maintaining fish stocks, (as is suggested several times in the discussion document)? The Quota Management System is in place for that, and all indications show it is working and that fish stocks are increasing

There are huge safety issues involved. The north east coast contains the only safe anchorages on the eastern barrier shoreline. In the event of adverse weather from the north west to south west (if the proposed reserve comes into force), it will effectively force commercial and recreational fishers alike, to travel some 12+ miles (being 1 - 3 hours travel) away from adequate shelter. This could then result in loss of life or serious injury.

Arid Cove has a designated safe anchorage position on the marine chart. We wish to know how it will affect any fisherman who may already have fish on board should they wish to seek safe anchorage.

A 'no take' reserve will not on it's own deliver the appropriate tool to protect biodiversity from all of these known threats. IT WILL ONLY STOP FISHING. Fishing and fishing related impacts are already managed under the Fisheries Act. Under the Fisheries Act there are a full range of measures that may be taken to control fishing, including excluding fishing. Therefore the Marine reserves act should not seek to duplicate what the Fisheries legislation already provides for.

Passive lockout provisions are simply not sufficient given the displacement of current rights holders within the context of a Marine Reserve.

October 29 th 2003

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you again today.

option4 have spoken to the Board three times this year with the intention of informing you of what the public are saying regarding marine reserves and marine protection in general. As an independent body representing community interests in their rights to fish for food and marine protection it is only fair we make this effort to share with you what feedback we are getting.

Great Barrier Island marine reserve

I note with interest the comment in the unconfirmed minutes of the August Board meeting that the analysis of the submissions would be available to the public by the end of September. I understand this has been delayed and would like some indication of when the analysis will be available. There is a huge amount of interest in this proposal and in particular the process undertaken by DoC to gather support for the reserve, the process and basis of their analysis of the public feedback.

Public Meetings

Also noted is the comment that the ‘Drop In' meeting held at the Marine Rescue Centre was “ in effect a public meeting”. In no way can that meeting be considered a public meeting in consultation terms. If we look at the definition on effective consultation in the Court of Appeal decision arising from the case between International Airport Ltd and Air New Zealand (CA 23/92, 73/92[1993] 1 NZLR 671). The relevant section of the decision is as follows:

‘Consultation must allow sufficient time, and a genuine effort must be made. It is a reality not a charade. To consult is not merely to tell or present. Nor, at the other extreme is it to agree. Consultation does not necessarily involve negotiation towards an agreement, although the latter not uncommonly can follow, as the tendency in consultation is to seek at least consensus. Consultation is an intermediate situation involving meaningful discussion. Despite its somewhat impromptu nature I cannot improve on the attempt at description, which I made in West Coast United Council v Prebble at p. 405:

‘Consulting involves the statement of a proposal not yet fully decided upon, listening to what others have to say, considering their responses and then deciding what will be done.'

Implicit in the concept is a requirement that the party consulted will be (or will be made) adequately informed so as to be able to make intelligent and useful responses. It is also implicit that the party obliged to consult, while quite entitled to have working plan in mind, must keep its mind open and be ready to change and even start afresh. Beyond that, there are no universal requirements as to form. Any matter of oral or written interchange which allows adequate expression and consideration of views will suffice. Nor is there any universal requirement as to duration. In some situations adequate consultation could take place in one telephone call. In other contexts it might require years of formal meetings. Generalities are not helpful.'

While the Department may consider their obligations to consult less due to the non – statutory phase of the Great Barrier Island marine reserve proposal option4 consider any attempts at consultation should at least meet the requirements of the above legal definition. It is also very important to note that the statutory phase of the marine reserve establishment process does not include consultation with the wider public. For many, what consultation will occur has occurred. We remain firm in our opinion that the Department's efforts to inform the public of their opportunities to be consulted were inadequate.

‘Drop In' Meetings

At the 'Drop In' meetings the public were offered the opportunity to talk to staff on a one-on-one basis and have their opinions recorded. Where have those opinions been recorded and would the Board have access to the records? option4 would like to have a copy of those opinions for our records with any obvious personal information removed.

Marine Reserves

It was very encouraging to listen to the Conservator, Rob McCallum address the Hauraki Gulf Forum on September 17 th and acknowledge the concerns raised regarding the ad hoc nature of marine reserve creation, the lack of strategic approach to marine reserve proposals and concerns around public consultation. The fact that DoC has decided to take a leading role in talking to all of those agencies and the public about how we want biodiversity protected is a great step forward and option4 want to be part of that process. There is a lot more that can be gained by a cooperative approach than any process we have been involved with to date. We look forward to being actively involved and using our networks to engage with the public in a meaningful and consultative manner.

Thank you for your time today

Trish Rea