L23- Area Management Tools and Customary Fisheries Notes on Fisheries Legislation

Administrative and Feedback Details

• Health and Communication Status: The lecturer is currently in recovery from an illness, noting that they had attempted to take "thirty nine" (presumably pseudoephedrine) and have not yet responded to all student emails due to their condition.

• Long Report Extensions: Many students received extensions for the long reports; consequently, these will not be returned until next year.

• Formatting Requirements: The lecturer emphasizes that any reference formatting style is acceptable provided it is used consistently throughout the document.

• Short Report Feedback:

  • Results for the short reports should be returned to students.

  • Some comments may be in red or handwritten (scribbled) across the documents, as the lecturer marked them during a commute to Dunedin.

  • The lecturer apologized for illegible writing caused by "potholes" affecting the handwriting during the drive.

  • Common feedback revolved around axes, units, figure legends, and the instruction not to include titles on graphs.

• Lab Report Performance: Most students are performing well, with common grades around $8\%$ to $10\%$. A grade below $50\%$ is generally an indicator of a failure to hand in the assignment.

Fisheries Management Foundations

• Recap of Previous Material: The previous lecture covered New Zealand's fisheries management through the lens of the Quota Management System (QMS) and Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ).

• The Race to Fish: QMS was introduced because a "race to fish" without limits is not conducive to a sustainable fishery.

• Non-ITQ vs. ITQ Systems: The lecturer noted the collapse of non-ITQ systems compared to the relative stability of ITQ systems, referencing a complex graph of axes used in the previous session.

• The Current Dual Lens: This session transitions from the commercial lens of fishing to the customary and indigenous (Maori) perspective, based on the Treaty of 1840. This involves different concepts of ownership, access, and property rights.

Indigenous Perspective and the Treaty Framework

• The Treaty of Waitangi (Article Two):

  • The focus is on Article Two: "Tenoranga Teretanga" (Tino Rangatiratanga), which refers to chieftainship and authority to maintain a partnership.

  • It safeguards wildlife management rights and guarantees chiefs and tribes full and exclusive possession of their lands, estates, fisheries, and properties.

  • The lecturer likens the Treaty relationship to a marriage or partnership (e.g., boyfriend/girlfriend) where communication and "no surprises" are essential.

• The Kermeneg Islands Example: A proposal to convert the Kermeneg Islands into a marine reserve caused friction (specifically for the lecturer as Maori and Austrian) because it was seen as a breach of the 1990s settlement agreement. It was announced at the UN without prior discussion with Treaty partners.

• Māori Commercial Significance: Historically, Māori fisheries were not merely for subsistence or ceremonial ("cultural voodoo") purposes. They were highly developed commercial commodities used in trade (e.g., greenstone from the West Coast, mutton birds, and kelp bags) reaching as far as Australia.

• The Great Depression Relevance ($1929-1935$): During the Depression, Māori communities received fewer government grants because the state assumed they could sustain themselves through hunting and fishing. This was highlighted as a "racialized policy."

• Cultural Values and Mana:

  • The ninth "tall tree" of Naitahu (the tribe) is "mohinga kai" (food or cultural values around food).

  • Providing a "feed" (Hakari) represents the "mana" of a community. If a community like Kaikoura cannot provide seafood for guests, it reflects poorly on their ability to manage their resources.

The Goals and Challenges of Area Management

• Definitions and Objectives: Area management can be defined by its specific use (recreational, commercial, active harbor) or by its protective goals (maintaining biodiversity, creating networks).

• Restoration: Involves building back areas affected by overfishing or environmental shifts, such as heat waves causing kelp decline. This may include "reseeding" an area.

• Maintenance and Monitoring: Using current regulations (e.g., the limit of $150$ cockles per person per day) to ensure stability.

• Case Specificity: Management depends on the unique issues of an area. For example, the loss of bull kelp in a harbor cannot be easily reversed if species are not heat-tolerant.

• Specific Estuary and Harbor Issues:

  • Sedimentation: Problems caused by catchment runoff, urbanization, and industry.

  • Pollution: Sewage overflows and failing infrastructure (e.g., failures in Wellington, Littleton Harbour, and the failing bioreactors in Christchurch).

  • Poaching: Illegal harvesting occurring when fisheries officers are absent.

  • Resource Management Act (RMA) vs. Fisheries Act: These two pieces of legislation often do not align. The Fisheries Act cannot always control land-use issues like sedimentation that smothers marine life (e.g., the slipway extension in Winui that killed a seaweed forest for two years due to clay runoff).

Biosecurity and Environmental Challenges

• Invasive Species:

  • Kallupa (Caulerpa): Found in the North Island, creating "monospecific stands" that cover substantial areas of the substratum and exclude other life.

  • Anderia (Undaria): A Japanese seaweed (Wakami) used in soups. It occupies a "Japanese wee niche" in New Zealand.

• Science vs. Politics: Millions of dollars were spent attempting to eradicate Anderia despite scientists knowing its bipartite life cycle—including a microscopic phase that can remain dormant for two years—made eradication impossible. The lecturer notes that politics often prioritizes "looking good" to the public over scientific reality.

The 2016 Kaikoura Earthquake Case Study

• Event and Impact: The $2016$ earthquake caused massive coastal uplift.

• Biological Consequences:

  • De Villa (bull kelp) and Powa (pāua/abalone) that were previously subtidal became permanently exposed above the water line.

  • Red coralline algae "burned off" and turned white due to calcification, resembling "seagulls sitting on the rocks for centuries."

• Response:

  • Volunteers and community members manually moved pāua from the stranded dry areas back to the low shore.

  • The Ministry of Fisheries initially banned the activity due to poaching concerns, but the lecturer (working with the Ruinanga) argued that the animals would die anyway.

  • This collective effort saved "hundreds of tons" of pāua.

Governance and Customary Roles

• Tangata Aki (Tangata Tiaki): Formally appointed under the Fisheries Act as Māori customary representatives. They have the legislative power to authorize fishing outside of standard recreational limits for specific events (e.g., a Tangi/funeral).

• Kaitiakia (Kaitiaki): General guardians or caretakers.

• Tangata Whenua: "People of the land."

• Ministry of Primary Industry (MPI): The governmental body managing fisheries.

• Other Stakeholders: Local bodies (ECAN/Regional Councils), City Councils, and lobby groups.

Detailed Analysis of Management Tools

• Taiapuri: Areas of local importance to iwi or hapū. These were established under the interim settlement in $1989$. They cover large areas but are difficult to implement and require committees with external members.

• Matai Tai (Mātaitai): Smaller management areas established under the $1992$ settlement. They are run by the local Marae and Tangatiaki. They do not require external committee members and focus on customary food gathering.

• Section 186A and 186B (Rahui): These are temporary closures.

  • 186A: North Island.

  • 186B: South Island.

  • Natural Rahui: While some Rahui have legal teeth under these sections, others are cultural (e.g., out of respect for a death/drowning). Historically, a chief might set a Rahui by breaking a twig or making a subtle sign to preserve the "pantry" for a feast.

Legislative History and the Breach of Treaty Rights

• 1877 Fisheries Protection Act: The first piece of marine protection legislation. Crucially, it stated that nothing in the act should repeal or affect the provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi.

• The 1986 Breach: When the QMS was introduced, the Crown assigned property rights to commercial fishers (effectively creating "insta-millionaires") without considering Māori ownership. This was a breach of Article Two.

• 1987 High Court Ruling: Justice Greig ruled that Māori had highly developed and controlled fisheries before $1840$, which were divided into zones controlled by hapū and tribes. These were affirmed as commercial rights, not just subsistence.

• Historical Assumptions: Previous legislation ($1860$ onwards) failed because it assumed Māori fishing was non-commercial and "so minor it didn't really matter."

The Settlement Process: 1989 and 1992

• Interim Settlement ($1989$):

  • Created the Māori Fisheries Commission.

  • Māori received $10\%$ of the quota for the original $29$ species.

  • $\$10\,\text{million}$ was provided to start Aotearoa Fisheries Limited.

  • This led to the purchase of Moana Pacific.

• Deed of Settlement ($1992$):

  • Commercial aspect: Included a $\$150\,\text{million}$ deal to buy a $50\%$ stake in Sea Lords (partnered with Briley Investments). Māori now hold a significant stake ($20-26\%$) in all New Zealand ITQ.

  • Non-commercial aspect: Codified the Mātaitai regulations, Tangatiaki authorizations, and 186A/B temporary closures.

Recent Developments: Co-Managed Marine Reserves

• Governor General Signing: As of yesterday/this morning, the Governor General signed off on five new marine reserves (one still under review/judicial review by the Rock Lobster group).

• Names and Locations: Part of the group "Te Ao Rua O Te Raka Houbia." Locations include Moraki and Otago coastal areas.

• Co-Management Model: This is the first time in New Zealand history that the Department of Conservation (DOC) and Mana Whenua will co-manage marine reserves through joint legislation.

Examination Guidelines

• Materials Allowed: Students may bring one A4 sheet of notes (both sides).

• Format: Notes can be typed, handwritten (lecturer prefers handwriting for "muscle memory"), drawn in hieroglyphs, or use small fonts.

• Content: The lecturer will provide "flavor" questions from past exams to assist with study. One of these questions may appear on the actual exam.

Questions & Discussion

• Question: Was the Kaikoura pāua rescue funded?

• Answer: No, it was entirely a volunteer act by people concerned about the environment. Because the roads were closed, people could only access certain parts of the coast from the south.

• Question: If it takes seven years for a species to mature, how does a two-year recovery (temporary closure) work?

• Answer: While two years is short for a full recovery, it still provides a measurable increase in population density for species like red spiny lobsters and pack horse lobsters. Its success also depends on community support and area size. The lecturer noted that one particular area had been under a Rahui for several years ($2021-2023$), which helped, but admitted that more time is usually needed.