Looking for More Marine Reserves

Forest and Bird, Issue 303, 1 February 2002, Page 24

Looking for More

Marine

Reserves

AND

JENNY

TONY ENDERBY.

is ‘percent. of our marine environment by-

2010 faces considerable challenges; according to

JENNY & TONY ENDERBY

» ince the Government made a ") commitment to protect 10 percent of New Zealand’s marine environment by 2010, two years have passed. Although there has been renewed activity on new and existing marine reserve applications, no new marine reserves have been created since Te Tapuwae O Rongokako Marine Reserve (by a previous Government) in November 1999. In the 30 years since the Marine Reserves Act became law, only 15 marine reserves have been created, encompassing point one of a percent, or just one thousandth of mainland New Zealand’s coastal sea. With the addition of the Kermadec Islands Marine Reserve, 1000 kilometres north of New Zealand, that figure climbs to near four percent. Add marine parks that have some protection and proposed marine reserves, and the figure is still nowhere near 10 percent. Yet we protect around 30 percent of mainland New Zealand in national parks and reserves. To achieve the target of 10 percent, an easy ‘way out’ is to establish ‘marine

protected areas, now the term used in the official Biodiversity Strategy. The Hauraki Gulf Marine Park has been described as such, similar to Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, but it’s not the same as full protection. Although described as a ‘marine protected area’, much of the Great Barrier Reef is protected only from oil drilling and mining. The small totallyprotected areas are (unlike New Zealand’s public marine reserves) restricted to scientists for study. In Australia, visitors who want to see and photograph unspoiled reefs have instead to share degraded reef systems with fishermen and prawn trawlers. Within the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park’s boundaries, only the existing small marine reserves and Tawharanui Marine Park (a regional council initiative) have total protection. From the perspective of protecting marine life, perhaps the time and effort put into the creation of the greater Hauraki Gulf Marine Park could have been better spent adding to its marine reserves. Although the Gulf has more marine reserves than other areas, it is also the

most heavily fished by recreational fishermen and shellfish gatherers. Shipping and cable lanes, where anchoring and fishing are prohibited, run through the Hauraki Gulf, and are clearly marked on marine charts. Have these areas benefited from this ‘pseudo-reserve status’ and has any work been done to see whether they are in any way different to areas outside the shipping lanes? New marine reserve proposals come under attack, often from recreational fishermen, yet they benefit from them in the long term. Opposition to Wellington’s proposed south coast marine reserve is similar to arguments voiced by opponents to the Cape Rodney to Okakari Point Marine Reserve, better known as Goat Island or Leigh, 30 years ago. Most of those opponents now support what they consider to be ‘their’ reserve. The Marine Reserves Act still allows fishing ‘at the Minister’s discretion’ within a marine reserve. Limited amateur fishing was permitted in the Poor Knights Islands Marine Reserve between 1981 and 1998, apart from two small totally

Changing the Laws on Marine Reserves

The Government’s original intention to create more marine reserves faces immediate challenges in deciding what a marine reserve actually is. Presently marine reserves are created for scientific purposes only. Marine reserve advocates look for a broader definition, to protect representative areas of our differing marine environments, as if they were national parks or reserves. The Government intends to introduce new legislation early this year to widen substantially the definition under which reserves can be created. Issues likely to be canvassed for the revision of the Act were examined by Forest & Bird in August 2000, (see ‘New Hope for Marine Reserves’ by Jo Mackay). Since the Government’s announcement of policy, some have tried to change the language of protection: the official Biodiversity Strategy talks not of creating more marine reserves but of undefined ‘marine protected areas’ which could have a much-lesser protective status. Also the intended areas under protection might not be measured around our coasts — the 10 percent of our coastline scenario — but placed anywhere in New Zealand’s huge Exclusive Economic Zone. Internationally, marine scientists are calling for 20 percent of the oceans to be protected as marine reserves by 2020. For fisheries and biodiversity reasons, some scientists have estimated an

even larger area than this may be required. — EDITOR

protected areas. The changes since full protection are astounding with an increase in fish life beyond what was expected. Snapper numbers at the Poor Knights tripled within the first year after the fishing ban and terakihi and pink maomao populations also increased. The research was carried out by Leigh-based Dr Trevor Willis using a baited underwater-video unit capable of filming down to 50 metres. His findings are backed up by scuba divers who rarely saw snapper at the Poor Knights, but now see them on every dive. The massive schools of trevally that could cover a hectare or more around the Poor Knights in the 1970s almost vanished just prior to the original reserve’s establishment. Today, more than 20 years later, trevally schools are beginning to return. Sadly, not all species re-establish as quickly as the snapper did at the Poor Knights. The changes within a totally protected marine reserve are complex and ongoing. In the Cape Rodney to Okakari Point Marine Reserve these changes are still happening. Many of the subtidal reefs around Goat Island were shown on the original maps of the reserve, drawn up in 1976-77, as ‘kina barrens.’ These areas were just bare rock where the kina or sea urchins had eaten all the algae. With the return of good numbers of snapper and crayfish, both of which feed on the kina, these ‘barrens’ have diminished in size or disappeared. Dr Russell Babcock of the Leigh Marine Laboratory, in a report published in Dive New Zealand, showed snapper nearly twice as large, and in densities 23 times greater in the reserve than outside. Crayfish were four times more abundant and 20 percent longer. Similar increases were recorded for other species such as red moki and blue cod. The ecklonia kelp is now far more dense — up to 50 percent more than outside the marine reserve. These kelp forests are important as food and refuge for many fish species and juveniles. Red moki, banded wrasse, kelpfish, marblefish, butterfish and sweep, all use the kelp as cover. Many of these species, along with silver drummer and parore, were not common in the reserve around the time of its creation. The inclusion of the Treaty of

Waitangi in marine reserve discussions has involved iwi in coastal protection. Te Tapuwae O Rongokako Marine Reserve near Gisborne was established in a joint effort between the Department of Conservation and Ngati Konohi. However, there are other mechanisms of limited protection available to Maori under the Fisheries Act. There is some confusion over these protective mechanisms — mataitai and taiapure reserves — which allow iwi customary caretakership. These reserves are different to marine reserves in that they are a fisheries tool under the Fisheries Act. There is a similarity, however, in that few have been created and the process required to set them up is complex. There are possibilities, however, that these customary tools could be used in conjunction with marine reserves. Why not border a marine reserve with a mataitai or taiapure — there would be a chance to monitor both areas? In the case of an iwi-sponsored marine reserve, rather than the loss of customary rights it could be looked at in terms of the iwi withholding their rights to gather food over that area. The benefits longterm to the surrounding waters would soon be evident, as has happened at Te Tapuwae O Rongokako. The marine reserves discussion document (released in 2000 to background proposals to review the Marine Reserves Act) mentioned places of geological or historical importance that could become marine reserves. Advocates for marine protection argue that if this means protecting a feature of a marine area but not the complete ecosystem then it should not be classified as a marine reserve. Other protection mechanisms are there for that kind of thing. Marine reserves can provide special and unexpected protection for sealife, however. There has been a recent flurry of activity to protect the North Island pod of Hector’s dolphins. Set nets and trawling within four nautical miles of the shore between Hokianga and New Plymouth has been banned by the Minister of Fisheries, Pete Hodgson. (This decision is being appealed by the fishing industry.) There is an opportunity here to establish marine reserves, representative of the habitats in the dolphin’s range, in addition to the fisheries protection. (See ‘The Other Wild West Coast’ this issue.) A marine mammal sanctuary could also be established.

The Pohatu Marine Reserve at Flea Bay, Banks Peninsula has protected the penguins as well as the marine life. The local white-flippered variant of the little blue penguin and the yellow-eyed penguin are thriving there. The combination of a marine reserve providing food and the predator-free area surrounding the bay, created by local farmers, has been successful. (See ‘Helping the Penguins, Forest ¢& Bird, February 1999) Marine birds and mammals can benefit from the protection of marine reserves, as well as their food source. Large numbers of sea birds feed on small fish in unprotected coastal waters. The proposed addition of several species of baitfish to the fisheries Quota Management System can only put more pressure on the birds, marine mammals and fish that rely on those baitfish schools for food. Other habitats, such as the 800 seamounts in New Zealand’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) also need protection. (See ‘Exploring our Underwater Mountains’), Jo Mackay, Forest and Bird May 2000.) Many of these seamounts have already been devastated to exploit the fish stocks that surround them. Little is known about the nontarget species that shared the seamount habitats — some of which may have vanished before they were even named. Destroying the habitat is hardly sound practice for sustained management of the fish stocks. The Tasmanian Seamount Marine Reserve was created to protect 20 percent of the seamounts south of Tasmania. The reserve, an area of 370 square kilometres, protects a region that has not been

trawled and is in pristine condition. The protection is from 500 metres depth to the seabed. A large number of species new to science covering eight genera have been discovered on the seamounts around southern Australia. (For more information on Tasmanian seamounts see WWW.€a.gOV.au) New Zealand must follow that lead and protect more of the undamaged seamounts in its EEZ. (The first recognition of our seamounts occurred late last year, when 19 seamounts covering 2.5 percent of the EEZ were protected.) Failure to protect more seamounts can only result in the loss of irreplaceable ecosystems. A look at a map of New Zealand’s marine reserves shows some massive gaps with no protection. Some schools visit marine reserves or cover them as part of Seaweek or Conservation Week, but often

it is up to teachers whether marine reserves are studied. There must be funding to show the benefits of protecting representative parts of marine ecosystems. Children are the future owners of our marine heritage and those who visit Goat Island go away asking why there aren’t more marine reserves. The target of 10 percent protection of New Zealand’s waters must be the goal of everyone with an interest in the marine world and should not be compromised to achieve political targets. New Zealand’s marine reserves currently protect everything within their boundaries and any change to that philosophy would be a step backwards.

Forest and Bird’s Shopping List of Marine Reserves

Forest and Bird has been actively involved in promoting marine reserves, largely at branch level and in many communities. Presently it has four applications with the Minister of Conservation — Te Matuku at Waiheke Island in the Hauraki Gulf, Wellington south coast, north Nelson, and Kaikoura. Discouragingly, the process of obtaining protection can extend beyond a decade, even when advocacy is in the hands of the Department of Conservation. Hopefully, changes to the Marine Reserves Act due shortly will speed up the process. Work is proceeding in conjunction with local branches in compiling a list of marine areas deserving complete protection. As part of this exercise, branch councillors at the Wanganui council meeting last November were invited to identify their favoured areas for protection. Marine reserves are now a major concern of the Society nationally, with such projects as a Fiordland marine park likely to be priority campaigns in the coming year. (See ‘Preserving Fiordland Underwater’, Forest & Bird, August 1999.) — EDITOR