Report from the Fisheries Economics Course

Held in Auckland 20 th & 21 st November 2003

Prepared by Trish Rea

for option4 and the NZ Big Game Fishing Council (NZBGFC).

  Venue: Auckland University , 1 Short St , Auckland .

Presenter: Basil Sharp

Subject: Fisheries Economics

Attendance: 10

MFish policy division Wellington (1), Sanford Ltd (1), Ngai Tahu Seafood (1), Endurance Fishing Ltd (2), Cawthron Institute (1), Fine Food Brokers

(2), Iwi rep (1), option4 (1).

Pre QMS

An overview of pre-European fisheries management was provided. William Firth has written a book suggesting a form of property rights existed in the pre – European system. The history of unsustainable fisheries management was discussed in more detail including subsidies, the impact on the fish stocks and foreign fishers within our coastal zone from the 1960's through to 1985. During the introduction of the QMS the government sought to push part-time fishers out of the system by setting a minimum income level from fisheries activity. All those who did not pass the threshold were not considered for the issuing of ITQ's. Some fishers surrendered their harvest and were compensated to leave the industry. The government paid out $42M in two tender rounds to buy back harvest. Recreational and Maori interests were put in the “ too hard basket” during the establishment of the QMS due to the difficulty in accommodating those interests in a commercial model.

Property Rights

Non – Market Values

Soundings

The three options in Soundings were reviewed along with option4's principles. The increasing, unconstrained recreational take was concerning to the commercial representatives as it is obviously in competition with their interests. Fisher prevalence figures presented by Basil were outdated, his information showed 400,000 fishers nationwide. We agreed that most of the effort is concentrated in the top half of the North Island .

option4

Industry were keen to know where option4 got the mandate to speak on behalf of the public considering the lack of fishers belonging to fishing clubs. It was explained that option4 do not have members but as a result of Soundings we have option4, NZRFC, NZGBFC and NZACA working together in talking with the public.

Allocation of Shares

Mention was made that there was no priority in the allocation process in regards to shares in the fishery. It was explained that the process involved in setting TACC's did in fact demonstrate preference to non – commercial interests. Neither the commercial representatives nor the MFish rep made any comment on this subject.

Bycatch

Bycatch is a concern for many commercial fishers. They felt the system restricted their ability to catch their quota or limited their profitability by not being able to purchase enough ACE to cover their bycatch species.

Aquaculture

Aquaculture is increasing along with competition for coastal space. Discussion focussed on the competing rights of ITQ holders, recreational and aquacultural harvesters. The complex nature of the current foreshore and seabed issue, the Oceans policy development and the impact of coastal farming in overseas countries were covered. Until some of the issues are decided at a national level Regional Councils will struggle to meet the increasing demand for coastal waters.

Summary

A very interesting two-day course. The opportunity to listen to the commercial fisher's perspective was of value. Information covered in the course was provided to all in attendance. With the focus on economics, overseas trade and tariffs it is not a course that would interest most recreational fishers. Some of the data presented was well out of date and would need to be updated to be of any real use for future reference.

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