• Save
Cath Wallace on NZ fisheries management
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Cath Wallace on NZ fisheries management

on

  • 913 views

Full details at http://www.victoria.ac.nz/chaplains/whatson/do-something-fish.html

Full details at http://www.victoria.ac.nz/chaplains/whatson/do-something-fish.html

A Human FM-sponsored DO SOMETHING! event at the VUW Anglican Chaplaincy.
www.dosomething.org.nz

Statistics

Views

Total Views
913
Views on SlideShare
913
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • New Zealand is an underwater continent.

Cath Wallace on NZ fisheries management Cath Wallace on NZ fisheries management Presentation Transcript

  • Do something then! The End of the Line: New Zealand Fisheries Quota Management experience & lessons. Catherine Wallace, Senior Lecturer School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington & ECO
  • Is NZ’s fisheries Management a Success?
    • What would success be?
    • Success for whom?
    • Proposition:
    • Fisheries management success should be judged by social goals, not primarily private goals.
    • But first, some background.
  • New Zealand Management Zone View slide
  • Marine Relevant law
    • Resource Management Act to 12 nautical miles – no environmental management regime from 12-200 nm. Does not control fishing allocation.
    • Conservation Act 1987
    • Wildlife Act 1954
    • Marine Mammals Protection Act – but fishing related mortality continues.
    • Marine Reserves Act 1971 – in revision to widen the grounds for marine reserves, new processes.
    • Oceans Policy- stalled preparation – legislative implications unclear.
    • Seabed and foreshore Act – ownership and control disputed.
    View slide
  • Conservation
    • Conservation Act 1987 established the Department of Conservation (DoC). Responsible for conservation advocacy, marine mammal protection, marine reserves, protected species, wildlife, biodiversity protection.
    • All marine mammals and almost all native animals protected.
    • DoC & customs responsible for prevention of Trade in Endangered Species under CITES convention.
  • Marine and Fisheries
    • Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone and EEZ Act 1978
    • Fisheries Act 1983 (mostly now repealed)
    • Fisheries Act 1996 & amendments.
    • Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Settlement Act) 1992
    • Aquaculture Reform process 2005 – 2010
  • New Zealand Management Area Coast -12 nm – Territorial Sea (TS) – NZ Sovereignty 12-24 nm – Contiguous Zone – border protection zone 12-200 nm Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) – resource rights and management obligations. Marine area to 200nm Exclusive Economic Zone is x15 the land area of NZ. Delineation of the continental shelf gives NZ soverign rights to resources on seabed area of x24 land area.
  • Fisheries Acts 1983 and 1996
    • Fisheries Management is principally governed by the Fisheries Act 1996. The Ministry of Fisheries administers it.
    • The Act sets the framework and detail of fisheries management.
    • Commercial fishing mostly in the Quota Management System.
    • Consultation restricted to national representatives of commercial, recreational, customary fishers; environmental representatives and reps of Maori with an environmental interest. 
    • No provision for public input.
  • Evolution of New Zealand’s Quota Management System (QMS)
    • 1983 – trial deepwater quota management,
    • Administrative exclusions of many small fishers from all fisheries.
    • 1986 - QMS introduced: Total Allowable Catch (TAC), Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) & Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ).
    • “ Grand-parented” quota & buy-backs.
    • Subsequent additions to QMS of other species
    • Rights in perpetuity to access absolute tonnage
      • Subject to sustainability constraints and other law.
    • ITQs converted to % share of TACC 1990
    • Evolution to Annual Catch Entitlements (ACE)
    • Quota owner associations formed mid 1990s
  • Treaty of Waitangi Settlement
    • Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Settlement) Act 1992 gave Maori 10% of then quota and $150 mil for half share of Sealords Ltd – which had quota too. It provided that when new species are added to the QMS, Maori are allocated 20%.
    • Allocation to Maori given to Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission.
    • Allocation between Maori in dispute until 2004.
  • Questions
    • Is a property rights regime a necessary or sufficient condition for the maintenance of fish stocks?
    • Has the New Zealand property rights based fisheries Quota Management System (QMS) been a success in terms of its management of fish stocks and impacts on the environment?
    • How does that inform choices for the future, for others and for other uses of property rights regimes?
  • Predictions from theory
    • The outcome of ITQs and quota owner associations does NOT remove the incentive to “mine” stocks.
    • High discount rates provide an incentive to “mine” the resource and invest the proceeds elsewhere.
    • The outcome will be that “mining” stocks will be done co-operatively and more efficiently from a financial point of view.
    • Incentives to shift costs to others and environmental harm will remain strong.
  • Property rights
    • New Zealand introduced the Quota Management System in 1983-86 in the belief that owning Individual Transferable Rights to access fish would improve efficiency and provide fishers with an incentive to:
      • Decrease competitive fishing
      • Reduce “capital stuffing”
      • Reduce fishing vessel capacity
      • Maintain fish stocks
      • Take more care of the host environment.
    • Hope that the solution to over-fishing fish stocks is the creation of property rights, overlooked some basic drivers – discount rates, slow growing fish, externalities..
  • Property rights & Institutions
    • Initial individual allocations were of an absolute tonnage
    • Since 1990 a % share of the TACC.
    • Evolution of institutions and rules has continued –
    • Property right has evolved into separable entitlements
      • eg Annual Catch Entitlement, ACE
    • Resource Rentals replaced by cost recovery.
    • Cost Recovery regime for commercial fisheries management and research - about 70-50% of the total costs of the Ministry of Fisheries –
    • Mechanism for huge degree of influence.
  • Quota Owner Associations
    • The Theory of Clubs and other organisational and institution theory lies behind the idea of quota owner associations.
    • Quota owners can form mutually binding contracts and rules to diminish competitive fishing, to limit over-capacity, to enhance compliance with quota owner generated rules .
    • BUT their management objectives are not the same as society at large.
      • Flaw in suggestions of industry management and research. Risks.
      • Demand for rapid economic returns inconsistent with biological rates.
  • Fisheries Act 1996 : Purpose s8 Utilisation while Ensuring Sustainability
    • S 8. Purpose---(1) The purpose of this Act is to provide for the utilisation of fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability .
    • BUT Utilisation is not clearly constrained despite this:
    • S 8(2)  “Ensuring sustainability means— a) Maintaining the potential of fisheries resources to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and b) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of fishing on the aquatic environment.
    • “ Utilisation” means conserving, using, enhancing, and developing fisheries resources to enable people to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being.
  • Fisheries Act 1996 Relevance of International Law
    • Title : an Act to reform and restate the law relating to fisheries resources and to recognise NZ’s international obligations relating to fishing
    • S 5. Application of international obligations and Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 -- This Act shall be interpreted, and all persons exercising or performing functions, duties, or powers conferred or imposed by or under it shall act, in a manner consistent with – (a) New Zealand’s international obligations relating to fishing
    • UNCLOS places an unqualified obligation on states to “protect and preserve the marine environment” (Art 192). Right to exploit (Arts 61, 193) subject to this.
    • Convention on Biodiversity + other international environmental and other obligations relating to fishing applies.
  • Fisheries
    • Consistency with international obligations and Treaty of Waitangi fisheries Settlement Act (s5)
    • Purpose of the Act Utilisation and Sustainability – no heirarchy.
    • Environmental Principles (s9) – but the environment & biodiversity has been significantly damaged by trawling and other fishing methods.
    • Ineffective variant on Precautionary Principle (s10) – Environment not the object of precaution.
    • Applies in the Territorial Sea, 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) , Southern Ocean and elsewhere.
    • National Plans of Action on sharks.
  • Fisheries Act 1996 Environmental Principles
    • 9   Environmental principles
    • All persons exercising or performing functions, duties, or powers under this Act, in relation to the utilisation of fisheries resources or ensuring sustainability, shall take into account the following environmental principles:
    • (a) Associated or dependent species should be maintained above a level that ensures their long-term viability:
    • (b) Biological diversity of the aquatic environment should be maintained:
    • Habitat of particular significance for fisheries management should be protected .
    • [ Note: Reasons for significance are not spelt out.]
    • BUT in fact Serious losses of fish stocks, destruction of sea-floor ecosystems, and serious losses of marine mammals, seabirds and invertebrates.
  • Fisheries Resources:
    • “ Fisheries resources” means any one or more stocks [1] or species of fish [2] , aquatic life [3] , or seaweed [4] :
    • [1] “Stock” means any fish, aquatic life or seaweed of one or more species that are treated as a unit for the purposes of fisheries management:
    • [2] “Fish” includes all species of finfish and shellfish, at any stage of their life history, whether living or dead:
  • Aquatic life, Seaweed
    • [3] “Aquatic life” -
    • (a) means any species of plant or animal life that, at any stage in its life history, must inhabit water, whether living or dead; and
    • (b) Includes seabirds (whether or not in the aquatic environment).
    • [4] “Seaweed” includes all kinds of algae and sea grasses that grown in New Zealand fisheries waters at any stage of their life history, whether living or dead:”
  • Fisheries Act 1996 Precautionary Principle
    • S 10 . Information principles ---All persons exercising or performing functions, duties, or powers under this Act, in relation to the utilisation of fisheries resources or ensuring sustainability, shall take into account the following information principles:
    • (a) Decisions should be based on the best available information:
    • (b) Decision makers should consider any uncertainty in the information available in any case:
    • (c) Decision makers should be cautious when information is uncertain, unreliable, or inadequate:
    • (d) The absence of, or any uncertainty in, any information should not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take any measure to achieve the purpose of this Act .
  • S 11 Sustainability measures---
    • S 11 Sustainability measures---
    • (1) The Minister may, from time to time, set or vary any sustainability measure for one or more stocks or areas, after taking into account---
    • Any effects of fishing on any stock and the aquatic environment;
    • (b) Any existing controls under this Act that apply to the stock or area concerned; and
    • The natural variability of the stock concerned.
    • (2)    Before setting or varying any sustainability measure under subsection (1) of this section, the Minister shall have regard to any provisions of -
    • (a) Any regional policy statement, regional plan, or proposed regional plan under the Resource Management Act 1991; and
    • (b) Any management strategy or management plan under the Conservation Act 1987 that apply to the coastal marine area and are considered by the Minister to be relevant.
  • Orange roughy – up to 150 years old - mature around 30 years
  • Fishing Impacts –
    • Trawl fisheries – especially bottom trawl –
      • Destroy habitat, seafloor communities.- Massive tonnages of gorgonian corals, hydroids, coraline organisms, etc crushed on seamounts, “black smokers” , sensitive soft & hard sediment environments.
      • Marine mammal, bird drownings and other deaths
    • Photo: Greenpeace
  • Scampi – 5-10 tonnes of bycatch per tonne of scampi Ling, skate, dories, hoki, javelin fish, sea perch and scampi
  • S 11 Sustainability measures--- Matters to take into account
    • (2A) Before setting or varying any sustainability measure under this Part or making any decision or recommendation under this Act to regulate or control fishing, the Minister must take into account -
    • (a)   Any conservation services or fisheries services; and
    • (b)   Any relevant fisheries plan approved under this Part; and
    • (c)   Any decisions not to require conservation services or fisheries services.
  • S 11 Sustainability measures--- what they are
    • (2A) continued:
    • (1) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1) of this section, sustainability measures may relate to -
    • (a) The catch limit (including a commercial catch limit) for any stock or, in the case of a quota management stock that is subject to section 13 or section 14 of this Act, any total allowable catch for that stock:
    • (b) The size, sex, or biological state of any fish, aquatic life, or seaweed of any stock that may be taken:
    • (c) The areas from which any fish, aquatic life, or seaweed of any stock may be taken:
    • (d) The fishing methods by which any fish, aquatic life, or seaweed of any stock may be taken or that may be used in any area:
    • (e) The fishing season for any stock, area, fishing method, or fishing vessels.
  • NZ Fisheries Act 1996: Total Allowable Catch -MSY
    • S 13(2)(a):   Total Allowable Catch
    • (2) “ The Minister shall set a total allowable catch that-
    • (a) M aintains the stock at or above a level that can produce the maximum sustainable yield, having regard to the interdependence of stocks. ”
    • S 2: MSY means “ the greatest yield that can be achieved over time while maintaining the stock ’ s productive capacity, having regard to the population dynamics of the stock and any environmental factors that influence the stock. ”
    • Nb: No more qualifying factors e.g. economic factors in determining the level of stocks, cf 1983 (but see relevant consideration: s 13(3) for way and rate of movement)
  • Total Allowable Catch -S 13 continued
    • 13 (2) “ The Minister shall set a total allowable catch that-
    • (b ) Enables the level of any stock whose current level is below that which can produce maximum sustainable yield to be altered-
    • (i)     In a way and at a rate that will result in the stock being restored to or above a level that can produce the maximum sustainable yield, having regard to the interdependence of stocks; and
    • (ii)    Within a period appropriate to the stock, having regard to the biological characteristics of the stock and any environmental conditions affecting the stock; or
    • (c) Enables the level of any stock whose current level is above that which can produce the maximum sustainable yield to be altered in a way and at a rate that will result in the stock moving towards or above a level that can produce the maximum sustainable yield, having regard to the interdependence of stocks.
  • Fisheries listed by the Ministry of Fisheries as having 40 – 60 % probability of being depleted.
    • Dredge oyster (Foveaux Strait)
    • OYU5
    • Orange Roughy:
      • ORH2A south, ORH2B, ORH3A - Mid East Coast, ORH3B East and South Chatham Rise
    • Rock lobster
    • CRA3 Gisborne 
  • Fisheries listed by the Ministry of Fisheries as having > 90 % probability of being depleted
    • Orange Roughy
    • ORH7A Challenger Plateau
    • Snapper
    • SNA8
    • Southern bluefin tuna
    • STN1 / Southern Hemisphere Stock
  • Fisheries listed by the Ministry of Fisheries as having > 60 % probability of being depleted
    • Black cardinalfish
    • CDL2, CDL3, CDL4
    • Orange Roughy
    • ORH1 Mercury-Colville, ORH3B Northwest Chatham Rise, ORH3B Puysegur, ORH7B West Coast South Island
    • Paua
    • PAU7
    • Rig
    • SPO7
    • Scallop
    • Bigeye tuna
    • Western & Central Pacific Ocean BIG1 CA7 Tasman Bay
  • Orange Roughy Quota Areas
  • Orange roughy fisheries
    • Chatham Rise (NE)
    • Chatham Rise (NW)
    • Mid East coast
    • Challenger
    • Cook Canyon
    • Puysegur
    • East Cape
    • Mercury-Colville
  • Source: Malcolm Clark, NIWA. 2003 data
  • State of Orange Roughy Stocks 2003: Bmsy is 30% of the original biomass, Bo
  • Considerations of way and rate of movement to Bmsy: S13(3)
    • 13(3) In considering the way in which and rate at which a stock is moved towards or above a level that can produce maximum sustainable yield under paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of subsection (2) of this section, the Minister shall have regard to such social, cultural, and economic factors as he or she considers relevant.
    • Nb: Does not mandate movement to further below Bmsy
  • Fishing Impacts –
    • Trawl fisheries – especially bottom trawl –
      • Destroy habitat, seafloor communities.- Massive tonnages of gorgonian corals, hydroids, coraline organisms, etc crushed on seamounts, “black smokers” , sensitive soft & hard sediment environments.
      • Marine mammal, bird drownings and other deaths
  • Seamounts targeted for orange roughy and oreos marked in red
  • Impact of bottom trawling: UN Gen Assembly resolutions on control of damaging fishing methods.
    • Photos: Greenpeace
  • Seamount corals Destroyed by bottom trawling
  • Benthic Protected Areas – proposed by the fishing industry to exclude trawling from 30% of the NZ EEZ. Accepted by Minister. “Bogus” Protection – biodiversity protection is markedly less than if areas randomly chosen – Leathwick, NIWA.
  • Hoki & Squid fisheries
    • Hoki fishery:
      • annually 700-1500 fur seals drowned
      • Hundreds of petrel and albatross drown.
    • Squid Fishery, Auckland islands – NZ sealions “threatened” species - drown and die from battering– Industry sued to be allowed to kill hundreds.
    • Albatross and Petrel populations in serious decline globally, much attributed to fishing impacts
  • Sea lion by-kill in squid fishery – 118 caught one year
  • Hoki fishery
    • The hoki fishery: represented by Hoki Fishery Management Company. East and West stocks.
    • 2001, TACC 250,000t annually from two stocks managed as one and fished during spawning.
    • 2001, against the advice of environmental organisations, was awarded Marine Stewardship Certification.
    • 2002 TACC reduced (inadequately) to 220,000 tonnes.
    • In 2003 TACC 180,00t - the industry could only catch 150,000 tonnes
    • 2004 TACC cut to 100,000 tonnes, a 60% reduction in just 4 years.
    • October 2007 TACC cut to 90,000 tonnes. Stock may be recovering?
    • Catch limits mostly have followed decline, not prevented decline.
  • Hoki stocks decline 60% quota cuts in 4 years
  • Consumer Preferences & certification – the MSC
    • Attempts to provide incentives for industry to improve environmental performance, overcome information asymmetry with consumer assurance schemes.
    • Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) - BUT
      • Incentive on players to devalue the currency;
      • Certification of fisheries with dubious environmental practices – eg hoki fishery, despite large stock and (lagged) catch limit declines; marine mammal and seabird deaths etc.
      • Environmental group appeals – but rules changed to make financial barriers to future appeals.
    • MFish considering trying to get entire NZ Fisheries certified – devalues the currency for certification holders.
  • Recent history
    • The fishing industry took the Minister of Fisheries to court over his decision to cut the orange roughy quota in the north from 1400 tonnes to 800 tonnes. Environmental organisations consider greater cuts were warranted.
    • This fishery involves management where operators have exceeded area limits and have been successfully prosecuted for mis-reporting.
    • The Minister decided he would not win the case and settled but in 2007 attempted to have the Fisheries Act s10 changed to clearly state the Precautionary Principle.
    • Strident industry opposition blocked this. The Bill failed.
    • In 2008 Parliament passed a bill reputedly drafted by the fishing industry lawyers to allow the Minister to adjust TAC and TACCs on extremely limited information. Attempts to have this only apply to precautionary reductions of TACC failed.
    • In Sept 2008 the fishing industry took legal action to block protection of the inshore Hector’s and Maui dolphins – the worlds smallest and rarest marine dolphin. An injunction followed against the exclusion of fishing from the range of these animals.
  • Property rights: NZ Experience, Summary
    • Property rights did not remove the incentives to “mine” a resource and to use the proceeds elsewhere.
    • Since associated sea-floor (benthic) species are often slow growing and of non-market value, there is no incentive for fishers to look after the host environment.
    • Property rights did diminish the “race to fish” and alleviate “capital stuffing” – more efficient harvesting.
    • There has been strong concentration of ownership of quota, a removal of small players, these replaced by larger, lower cost-per-unit vessels.
    • 90% of fish exported, about $1.2bn annual earnings.
  • The New Zealand Experience
    • The New Zealand experience with the QMS and ITQs is that quota ownership:
      • Has concentrated ownership of vessels in large companies, reduced over-capacity, enhanced financial benefits to fishers, especially “beneficiaries of first round grand-parented allocations.
      • Has seen decline of numbers of small-owner operators and the communities from where they fished.
      • Has not protected the medium-low productivity species – these have been “mined”, especially deep water species
      • Has not protected the environment;
      • Has enhanced the power of major commercial fishers.
  • Externalisation of costs, Special interest effects
    • Strong incentives to externalise costs – ie no incentive to harm environment less.
    • So need:
    • Need regulations and incentives to choose less damaging methods
    • The onus of proof should be on those causing harm.
    • Clarity over the obligation to protect the environment over continued use – change to the Purpose.
    • Clarity and priority over social benefit and rights.
    • Precautionary principle.
    • Ecosystem Based management.
    • Integrity of information is crucial; Implications for who does and commissions research.
    • Catch limit setting and enforcing.
  • NZ Fisheries management system evolution, issues and problems
    • Stock declines during QMS & industry-driven adaptive management.
    • “ High-grading” (disposal of lower value fish at sea) is incentivised.
    • Issue of ITQs as:
      • absolute tonnage puts fiscal burden on public authorities.
      • % share of TACC shifts risk, encourages resistance to lowering TACCs.
    • No Environmental or social Impact Assessment s.
    • Environmental standards in preparation but fragile?
    • Dangerous practice of managing as one stock several stocks or mixed species (eg two hoki stocks, oreo mixes).
    • Inclusion of stakeholders – but some are “more equal” than others. Cosy industry-ministry relations = capture. Exclusion of the public.
    • Non-integration of fisheries management by stock-focused management.
    • Fisheries management planning – stop start and scaled back.
    • Marine mammal deaths on-going – protection opposed by industry eg case re Hectors and Maui dolphins.
    • Opposition to precautionary principle in s10.
    • Lack of information used to maintain excessive TACCs, while opposing research funding to pay for it. Need: “No data? No fish!” rule.
  • NZ Fisheries management system evolution, issues and problems
    • Resource rentals replaced with cost recovery
      • Conceptually different –
      • Resource Rentals - payment to owner for scarce resource
      • Cost recovery – for management, research etc - approx 60% total Min Fish budget and eroding fast.
      • Cost recovery a potent instrument of industry influence on the Ministry of Fisheries and Department of Conservation
    • No support to non-extractive users or others’ participation.
    • Pressure for spatial management is being used as a basis for fishers taking spatial property rights.
    • Resistance to environmental research, protection measures, marine reserves. No incentives to reduce impacts on environment.
    • Groundwork being done to devolve fisheries management to industry.
  • Effects of QMS in NZ
    • ITQs in combination with “cost recovery” has distorted perceptions of the legitimacy of quota owners compared to recreational fishers, the environment, the other non-extractive values and uses of the environment.
    • Has allowed quota owners to invest un-captured resource rentals into influencing officials and politicians and so to have a disproportionate voice and to engineering the evolution of institutions to further enhance their power and control and to marginalise other interests.
  • NZ Experience continued
    • NZ Expanded capacity from inshore to deep water fishing, to distant water fleet.
    • As deepwater stocks in the EEZ have been fished, our over-capacity has migrated out of the EEZ to the Indian Ocean, the Tasman Sea, the Southern Ocean, the South Pacific and around South America and Southern Africa and elsewhere in the high seas.
    • High oil costs intermittently damp spatial expansion as stocks decline. One tonne fish requires half- one tonne fuel. Fast growing GHG emissions.
    • NZ companies threaten to reflag to other countries if NZ rules are strong – Sealords registered vessel in the Cook Islands.
  • NZ Experience continued
    • NZ Vessels do 90-95% of the bottom trawling in the South Pacific.
    • NZ, Australia and Chile initiated the negotiation of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries management organisation (SPRFMO) in response to UNGA 2006 Resolution in respect of damaging bottom-fishing methods.
    • Cook Islands and Vanuatu operate open registers for vessels – flags of convenience.
    • 2009 National-led government embarking on international fisheries access policy especially to the South Pacific.
    • New Zealand has done little to control damaging fishing methods in NZ managed areas.
  • Lessons from NZ Experience
    • Myth of “success” of NZ QMS – stock figures during QMS do not show success.
    • Financially rewards first round quota recipients.
    • Myth of environmental commitment of NZ fishing industry
      • Reality has been vociferous and ferocious opposition to environmental protection
        • Law suit against seamounts closures though only 19 of 800
        • Law suit to overturn protection of critically endangered Maui’s dolphins & many other law suits against environmental measures.
        • Advertisements equating seals with pests
        • Opposition to environmental protective measures & research.
      • Attempts to quell scientists who speak plainly about the implications of their research.
      • Environmental protection measures are slow to appear, compromised by industry influence.
  • Lessons
    • Quantity limits are very important: necessary, but not sufficient. Must be coupled with strong and enforced environmental standards;
    • Research, catch limits and controls must be set independently of fisher pressure.
    • Neither theory nor evidence support notion that property rights will necessarily engender protection of the environment or of fish stocks. If natural assets can be liquidated at a profit – they will be.
    • Institutional forms and who makes decisions on catch limits, how payment is made, levers of influence on players is crucial.
    • Inclusion of the public and support for non-commercial participation in decision making is crucial.
    • Devolution of fisheries management to industry interests will fail to protect the environment and fish stocks.
    • Regime of setting standards and then allowing industry to meet them is likely to be compromised by dispute over management objectives, capture of bureaucracy and/or ministers, distortions of decision making due to power and influence rather than social objectives.
  • So who is doing what about this?
    • Environmental groups like ECO, Greenpeace, F&B are taking action, giving “voice”, demanding change.
    • Citizens like you are helping them and speaking out.
    • Supermarket chains in the USA, UK, Canada are refusing to stock orange roughy, and other trawl caught fish & toothfish .
    • Consumers like us are asking retailers to stop stocking unsustainably caught fish.
    • The UN has demanded and resolved that damaging fishing methods must be controlled.
    • IUCN is calling for far more and better designed marine protected areas.
    • The Marine Stewardship Council is helping companies and countries to greenwash their fisheries.
    • So is the NZ government .
  • So what can we do?
    • What we can do:
    • Use the Best Fish Guide
    • Ask our supermarkets to stop stocking bottom trawled fish like orange roughy, ling, hoki.
    • Email your MP asking them to take action.
    • Support ECO or some other environmental group.
    • www.eco.org.nz
    • Do some research
    • Write and speak up.
    • Write a letter
    • Write a letter to the paper, to an MP.
    • Write an essay or a thesis
    • Hold a showing of End of the Line.
    • DON’T Get taken in by the MSC and NZ claims of success.