Address from Trish Rea, option4 spokesperson, to the Hauraki
Gulf Forum
Wednesday 17th September 2003
Conservation in Fisheries
Principle # 3 - A planning
right
Today, we thought it appropriate to briefly discuss and
explain what we mean when we talk about a "planning
right". The need for a planning right is the 3rd Principle
developed during the Soundings public consultation process
on Recreational fishing reform. The Principles have subsequently
been fully endorsed by the major representative groups who
seek to secure a strong right for the public who fish for
food under the Amateur Fishing Regulations. This public
includes Maori when not fishing for the purposes of their
marae and exercising their very powerful customary fishing
rights.
The planning right initially sought reads - "The ability
to devise plans to ensure future generations enjoy the same
or better quality of rights while preventing fish conserved
for recreational use being given to the commercial sector".
We strongly believe the non-commercial stakeholders need
the right and ability to conserve fish for future generations.
By this we mean "not catch them", i.e. leave fish
in the water in order to allow for and plan for inevitable
population growth and the probable growth in the popularity
of fishing for food. Certainly the high retail price of
our preferred inshore fish species will encourage more and
more people to provide for themselves at an affordable price.
The planning right we seek will see the fish conserved by
the public retained in the water and made available to future
generations, not allocated to the fishing industry as we
saw last year in the infamous Snapper 2 allocation decision.
We firmly believe that this right will also improve customary
fishing opportunities.
More recently we have realised that the public also need
a planning right to help in the management of inter tidal
shellfisheries. It is obvious that the current management
regime for public harvest of these shellfisheries is not
working, especially in the metropolitan Auckland area. We
see this mechanism as working well alongside the clearly
recognised and legislated customary Maori fisheries management
rights and mechanisms.
Much of the energy driving marine reserves at the moment
stems from the perceived inability of the public to contribute
to the management of fisheries. The removal of Section 86a
from the Fisheries Act saw the removal of the right of the
public to proactively contribute to the management of these
fisheries. Certainly, the changes to the amateur bag limit
regulations for shellfish have achieved little in the management
of these most precious fisheries, especially in metropolitan
Auckland. To succeed, this aspect of the planning right
to help manage the intertidal zone fisheries will require
high level buy in and support from the public and would,
of course, need to be implemented carefully in full consultation
with tangata whenua. In the absence of this ability, there
are many who see marine reserves as the only tool available.
Customary Maori management
rights and mechanisms
The planning right would, in our opinion, be very complimentary
to the Maori customary management rights and mechanisms
recognised in the Deed of Settlement 1992 and legislated
in the Fisheries Act. The emphasis of Maori customary management
mechanisms is on area. We believe the planning right we
envision has the potential to address entire fisheries as
well as contribute to area specific issues in the intertidal
zone in particular. Shifting the attitudes and expectations
of the public en masse in both area and fishery is surely
the holy grail of marine environment protection.
Uncertainty on the part
of the Department of Conservation
We now learn from the Department of Conservation that they
are "not certain that all mataitai and taiapure (or
examples of other tools) will qualify as adequately meeting
marine biodiversity protection objectives" We don't
share the Department of Conservation's uncertainty. The
New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy clearly states (action
3.6a) - "develop and implement a strategy for establishing
a network of areas that protect marine biodiversity, including
marine reserves, world heritage sites, and other coastal
and marine management tools such as mataitai and taiapure
areas, marine area closures, seasonal closures and area
closures to certain fishing methods."
The Department of Conservation go on to say "The proposed
approach is still being finalised, however it is likely
that assessments would be made on a case by case basis to
determine which examples of which tools adequately protect
marine biodiversity and will therefore "count"
towards the marine protected areas network." It would
be strange to think that some mataitai and taiapure may
now not "count" towards marine protection.
option4, NZRFC and NZBGFC, amongst others, are convinced
this planning right will go a long way to achieving marine
protection and the conservation of fish stocks. We are so
confident of this that we have spent the last three years
trying to convince the Ministry of Fisheries that it is
a very effective and equitable tool to include in the suite
of fisheries management mechanisms.
We all accept the population is growing and there is no
doubt this will lead to increased fishing pressure. If we
can lead the public into a system where their planning right
sees the next generation catered for, then not only will
our marine environment be more productive, it will be healthier
as well.
Ends.