17/09/03

Auckland City Council presentation to the Forum supporting a strategic approach to marine protection in the Hauraki Gulf .

Marine Protection within the Hauraki Gulf

On the land we have studied and mapped the natural and physical resources of our districts, including the topography, geology, and the various habitats that exist. We use this information to make informed decisions about land use management, determining what activities are appropriate and where.

As a result, areas such as our volcanic cones, wetlands and pohutakawa clad cliff lines have been protected because of their environmental or cultural heritage significance. Large areas of land have been set aside as reserves to provide for our social and recreational needs. And industrial, commercial and residential uses of land have been controlled to ensure they do not adversely impact on those natural features and habitats we consider to be worthy of protection.

By contrast, we have not comprehensively study or mapped our marine topography, geology or identified the various habitats that exist within the marine environment of the Gulf. However, this has not prevented us from making marine use decisions about the types of activities that can occur within the Gulf or where these should take place.

It is logical to presume that the approach taken to land use management was not adopted for the marine environment because of the difficulty in physically seeing what exists beneath the water or because we didn't have the same knowledge or understanding of marine ecosystems as we do for terrestrial ecosystems and terrestrial ecosystem management.

However, new technology now enables us to study and map the marine environment in the same manner as we have done for the land. Likewise, our knowledge and understanding of the marine environment, its ecosystems and biodiversity has significantly advanced. It is therefore not necessary, or appropriate, to continue to make marine use decisions based on limited information.

Auckland City Council therefore supports the proposal of the Department of Conservation to undertake a systematic approach to the identification and protection of marine biodiversity within the Hauraki Gulf .

As mentioned in the report by the Department of Conservation, the goal of this process is to identify what habitats we actually have in the Gulf, demonstrate a clear and systematic approach to the identification of significant or sensitive marine habitats, and then, to make this information available to the public so we can develop an overall plan for marine protection within the Gulf.

This is a large undertaking by DOC, with support from Mfish, but support and assistance from Forum members may make this process easier. The majority of Forum members may have some information on the marine environment within our areas, which may aid in the identification and assessment of marine habitats. We also have well established communication networks that could be used to raise public awareness about marine biodiversity and provide information on the work being undertaken by DOC and also to encourage people to get involved in the consultation stage of this process.

I anticipate that the outcome of this process will offer long-term benefits for the Hauraki Gulf in terms of:

• Protecting our significant marine habitats and maintaining biological diversity within the Gulf
• Ensuring better integrated management of our marine resources and how we allocate the use of marine space

and also

• Focusing community marine protection efforts to those sites identified through this process

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