The recent article by Andrea Vance on Stuff , ‘The way we protect the oceans is badly outdated. Will the Government change that?’ is timely, but needs further unpacking. For this is an important issue.

In it, she rightly claims “We are far behind the rest of the world and failing as kaitiaki. The UN wanted 10 per cent of the world’s oceans protected by this year. At best, just under six per cent meets that goal. But New Zealand has achieved less than 0.5 per cent.”

The need for greater marine protection is most pressing where pressure – from bot recreational and commercial fishing – is greatest and most visible, the Hauraki Gulf. But progress towards recovering ecosystems in this critical space is frustratingly slow.

A network of marine reserves must be established. And in the Hauraki Gulf (which is already a marine park, but with little real protection) these reserves should cover at least 30% of its area. Elsewhere in New Zealand waters, this should happen too, perhaps with a more modest goal to begin with.

The overwhelming majority of marine ecology scientists know this too. Here’s some direct language in a 2018 paper by Drs Sala and Giakoumi in the international ICES Journal of Marine Science (2018): No-take marine reserves are the most effective protected areas in the ocean:

"A new meta-analysis of previous studies shows that biomass of whole fish assemblages in marine reserves is, on average, 670% greater than in adjacent unprotected areas, and 343% greater than in partially-protected MPAs. Marine reserves also help restore the complexity of ecosystems through a chain of ecological effects (trophic cascades) once the abundance of large animals recovers sufficiently."

…and…

"No-take marine reserves are by far the most effective type of MPA. They restore the biomass and structure of fish assemblages, and restore ecosystems to a more complex and resilient state... In other words, they provide more than what they were initially designed for."

Or if we’d prefer a local expert to back us up, let us then defer to the doyen of New Zealand marine biologists, Dr Bill Ballantyne, who wrote in his seminal paper Fifty years on: Lessons from marine reserves in New Zealand, and principles for a worldwide network.

"The scientific benefits of marine reserves proved so numerous that it became clear that marine reserves are as important to science as clean apparatus is to chemistry, and for the same reason. They are the controls for the uncontrolled experiment that is happening due to fishing and other human activities." 

Image if, when the Covid-19 crisis came upon New Zealand, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her government said, ‘Well, perhaps we should start investigating what could be an effective solution.’ No - she went immediately to the most qualified scientists, including Dr Ashley Bloomfield, and took on board their advice.

The solution to the decline of our marine ecosystems is clear. A network of marine reserves. And just like the New Zealand Covid response, this has four principles:

1.      The reserves much each be of a viable size to hold resident populations (most of our coastal reserves are too small);

2.      The reserves should be connected. (by current patterns, or fish migratory routes, etc);

3.      The reserves should include all types of habitat (beaches too);

4.      The habitat types should be repeated (more of one reserve of each type).

The 1971 Marine Reserves Act, is outdated in that it provides no provision for consultation with mana whenua. But it has worked – 44 reserves have come into being under this act, though many have been passed while being objected to by Māori.

Many activists in the marine conservation space talk in terms of powerful, working partnerships with Māori. This would certainly be a good thing. There is much talk about a greater use of control methods such as rāhui

But so far, only three scientific papers have been published in New Zealand, looking at the efficacy of rāhui – and sadly they all report that the particular rāhui they studied were not effective. This may be because the rāhui system was devised when base ecosystems were more bountiful and resilient, and when human population pressure on resources was much less. Also, maybe because rāhui are often temporary, and aimed at a single species’ recovery (as those written about were). Certainly, both science and mātauranga Māori accept the primacy of overall ecosystems health. But, as Bill Ballantyne notes, they’d need the control areas of marine reserves or long-term, complete rāhui for comparative study.

But all this remains unproven. Marine reserves are.

The opinions of fishing folk have always been at the centre of discussions about what to do about the restoration of New Zealand’s coastal waters.

Some statistics to start with: recreational fishers make up 14% of the New Zealand population. If some are trout fishermen only, we’re talking about a small minority.

Recreational sea fishing in New Zealand has deep-seated rights in the content of the Treaty of Waitangi. That is why sea fishing for native species cannot be controlled by permit system – as fresh-water fishing for trout, or hunting is.

Where sea fishing is different to hunting, is that there are no open or closed seasons –as there are for trout and game animals.

Recreational sea fishers do not have a pro-active mechanism to re-stock the fish species they catch.

Legasea, the pre-eminent group representing recreational sea fishers, has launched a proposal called ‘Fish Rescue.’ In it, Legasea quite rightly points to destructive and wasteful commercial fishing practises, such as bottom trawling and the dumping of undersize, or non-quota catch. Legasea reckon this is a fault within the Quota Management System (QMS) that controls commercial fishing in New Zealand’s territorial waters. They also, and again quite rightly, criticise the ‘maximum allowable catch’ concept that underpins the QMS, which seeks to manage fish stocks at around 20% of the un-fished biomass, and expects fish populations to rebound each year. This is certainly reckless; a management system based around a 50% level (as Legasea suggests) would be much more sustainable.

Leagsea’s Fish Rescue proposal would require significant law changes by the New Zealand Parliament – and would strip Māori corporations of their fishing quota assets.

The Green Party’s ‘Thriving Oceans’ policy, launched just before the 2020 election, has as its top three priorities: Protecting at least 30% of Aotearoa’s oceans by 2030; reviewing the Quota Management System …in partnership with Māori; and banning the most harmful commercial fishing practices, such as bottom trawling and scallop dredging.

People in New Zealand have previously made the big, transformative, forward-thinking moves (like the women’s vote, the welfare state, ACC, the nuclear free stance). We should do this with our marine environment now.