Public Policy in the Sea: Spatial Planning in the Hauraki Gulf (With a photo tour around the Hauraki Gulf) Raewyn Peart Policy Director Environmental Defence Society 1 www.eds.org.nz The Oceans Policy challenge: Physical issues 2 • Much larger area to manage than land (15 times larger) • Marine environment fluid and very interconnected: greater cumulative impacts • Ulitmate repository of what comes off the land • Environmental impacts less visible and harder to detect • But less scientific information available and much more expensive to obtain www.eds.org.nz The Oceans Policy challenge: Institutional issues 3 • A commons with some partial private property rights • Treaty settlements largely outstanding • Fragmented legislative and administrative framework • No clear funding model • Undeveloped statutory protection • Deep seated cultural views: reserves much more acceptable on land than in the sea www.eds.org.nz But important to get it right! • Significant marine activities reliant on ecosystem health: • Commercial fishing • Recreational fishing, diving etc • Aquaculture • Tourism • 4 Much of NZ’s biodiversity reservoir is in the sea: an estimated 80% of NZ’s total www.eds.org.nz Marine spatial planning could help with these challenges. But what it is? One of numerous definitions “An integrated planning framework that informs the spatial distribution of activities in and on the ocean in order to support current and future uses of ocean ecosystems and maintain the delivery of valuable ecosystem services for future generations in a way that meets ecological, economic, and social objectives.” Definition proposed by 21 scientists in Foley et al “Guiding ecological principles for marine spatial planning”, Marine Policy 2010 Marine Spatial Planning: Some of the claimed benefits • Enables an ecosystems approach to be applied to marine management • Provides a strategic, integrated and forward looking approach taking into account multiple objectives • Enables identification, conservation and/or restoration of important components of ecosystems Marine Spatial Planning might assist: more claimed benefits • Allocates space in a rational manner which minimises conflicts of interest and maximises synergies across sectors • Manages cumulative impacts over time and space • Provides greater certainty for marine users MSP well-established overseas: But what might it look like in New Zealand and what can it contribute? First MSP being developed in the Hauraki Gulf 2013-2015 8 www.eds.org.nz Seachange Project Structure Project Steering Group Mana Whenua and statutory agencies Independent Review Panel Independent Chair Plus Executive Facilitator Project Board Technical support 5 members Stakeholder Working Group 14 members chosen by sector groups 7 Roundtables Water quality and catchments, Fish stocks, Biodiversity and biosecurity, Infrastructure, Aquaculture, Accessible Gulf, Mātauranga Māori 9 Independent scientists As required www.eds.org.nz Role of Mana Whenua 10 • Project Steering Group: 50% Mana Whenua 50% statutory agencies • Stakeholder Working Group: 4 Mana Whenua members (out of 14) • Mātauranga Māori Roundtable: Mana Whenua members of PSG and SWG with specialist technical support • Plan Writing Team: 2 Mana Whenua technical support people • Slow start but now working well • Complicated by ongoing Treaty settlements www.eds.org.nz Public engagement • • • • 11 Hauraki 100+ meetings 25 Listening Posts ‘Love our Gulf’ message boards 2 web-based surveys www.eds.org.nz Very tight timeframe: Particularly for consensus processes • • • • • • December 2013: SWG first meets July 2014: Roundtables start meeting (7 months later) December 2014: Roundtables complete work (6 months later) February 2015: Formal handover of Roundtable work to SWG June 2015: Final plan to be delivered by SWG (5 months later) August 2015?: Plan adopted by the PSG Generally took 6 months for members of each group to start to trust each other. But Roundtables only operated for 6 months! Project structure and processes evolved throughout the process. This took more time as we were working out what to do and then trying to do it. 12 www.eds.org.nz What is the project trying to achieve? Purpose of the project in SWG Terms of Reference: “To develop a spatial plan that will achieve a Hauraki Gulf that is vibrant with life and healthy mauri, is increasingly productive and supports healthy and prosperous communities” Much more than just spatial allocation! Consensus model for decision-making: “Consensus for this purpose means that every member either supports or does not actively oppose (can live with) the decision” 13 www.eds.org.nz The key issue which emerged: Loss of habitat to support juvenile fish Based on snapper science: • Lots of eggs produced • Lots of food for adult snapper – which eat almost anything • But life cycle bottleneck at juvenile stage – lack of suitable juvenile habitat providing a good food source and refuge from predation Widescale historical loss of suitable habitat for juveniles due to: • Dredging and destruction of large scale mussel beds • Trawling of much of the Gulf – widescale destruction of horse mussel, coral and sponge beds • High levels of sediment blanketing estuaries, embayments and most of inner Gulf – loss of subtidal seagrass, bivalves etc 14 www.eds.org.nz Historical dense mussel beds: all gone Restoration will require reduction in sediment and active provision of hard substrate: Revive Our Gulf 15 www.eds.org.nz Most of Hauraki Gulf trawled at some stage and most outer area still trawled Bottom trawls 2011-2014 Blue: untrawled Green: low trawl nos Orange and red: high number of trawls eg Dark orange: 80-160 trawls in area during 3 year period If trawling stops recovery may still be slow and require active intervention 16 www.eds.org.nz Sediment discharge Major sources: • Waihou/Piako Rivers • Wairoa – estuary filled up • Mahurangi River Also much historical sediment from early land clearances being resuspended 17 www.eds.org.nz Another significant issue was loss of vulnerable reef species • Depletion accelerated over past 20 years or so • Accessible inter-tidal reefs being stripped • Offshore reef systems fished much more often • Largely function of: • Growing Auckland population • New ethnicities • Improved technology (larger recreational vessels and GPS chart plotters/fish finders) 18 www.eds.org.nz Content of Spatial Plan 19 • Will identify what it will take to reverse the degradation of the past 175 years during the next generation • Focus is on big Gulf-wide moves (strategies and actions) • Spatial element likely to include location of priority areas for action, areas requiring more fine-grained management, and provision for aquaculture and marine-related infrastructure • Will contain a package of statutory and nonstatutory measures www.eds.org.nz How will the Plan be implemented? Key question we’ve been grappling with: “If stakeholders develop a non-statutory Gulf-wide plan, and then hand implementation over to agencies which didn’t develop the plan, and which still operate within a fragmented institutional framework, will it work?” Concluded PROBABLY NOT. So the plan will potentially drive institutional change 20 www.eds.org.nz Institutional arrangements 1967- 1990: Hauraki Gulf Maritime Park Board (27 years) • Managed parks land and advocated for the protection of the Gulf • Pioneered island restoration and effective advocate 2000-present: Hauraki Gulf Forum (15 years) • Consists of representatives of statutory agencies and iwi • Provides opportunity for members to exchange information and ideas • Prepares SOE reports, public awareness, annual seminar etc • But lacks teeth to bring about real change 2015-future? • Hauraki Gulf Forum version 2? • Future roles of Mana Whenua, Stakeholders and Agencies 21 www.eds.org.nz Collaboration = Power shift? • Seachange: statutory agencies have stepped back and tasked SWG with preparing plan • SWG members briefed with the best science and now significantly upskilled on issues and solutions • Significant social capital built up between members • These skills and social capital important for the successful implementation of the plan • So SWG likely to continue in some form to oversee implementation Land and Water Forum: established in 2008 and in 2015 still developing national freshwater policy 22 www.eds.org.nz SEACHANGE: DRIVING A NEW APPROACH TO MARINE MANAGEMENT • STRATEGIC – Focus on big picture issues and what really matters to the area as a whole • INTEGRATED – Considers catchment issues, key marine activities such as fishing and marine protection at same time • COLLABORATIVE – Mana whenua and stakeholders working together and driving plan development • SOLUTIONS-FOCUSED – Focus on finding solutions not reiterating problems or blaming sectors • RESTORATION GOAL – Accepts as a given that ongoing degradation not an option. Identifies ways to restore mauri, ecological productivity, diversity and abundance of marine life 23 www.eds.org.nz Application to rest of NZ? • • • • • • Collaborative planning process not to be undertaken lightly Very resource intensive and personally very sapping (but exciting)! Best deployed where there are tricky, complex issues that other approaches can’t address A lot can be learned from the Seachange process to feed into future processes (EDS is planning a review) Rolling out wall-to-wall MSPs (as being done in the UK) probably waste of resources But some obvious candidate areas where there are significant conflicts/lost opportunities, eg: • Northland/Bay of Islands • Marlborough Sounds • Chatham Rise/EEZ 24 www.eds.org.nz 25 www.eds.org.nz
© Copyright 2024