Sustainability Decisions For Southern Rock Lobster
Concern at very low stock levels has driven a decision to reduce the commercial catch limit for southern rock lobster, Fisheries Minister Pete Hodgson said today.
The total allowable commercial catch for the CRA7 (Otago) quota area is being reduced from 111 to 89 tonnes, while the CRA8 (Southland) TACC is being reduced from 711 to 568 tonnes. The new limits take effect in the 2001-2002 fishing year, beginning 1 April.
"This will be a difficult adjustment for commercial cray fishers in the south," Mr Hodgson said. "However the stock must be allowed to recover for the sake of the longer term survival of the fishery and the industry."
“Cray stocks in the southern areas are now estimated at just 4 percent of their pre-fishing level, which is 23 percent of the desired level for sustainable fishing. The stocks have not shown the necessary signs of rebuilding that would allow fishing to continue at current levels.
"In this instance I have reduced only the commercial quota rather than the total catch, so the recreational and Maori customary allowances are unaffected," Mr Hodgson said. “Estimates of the non-commercial catch are very uncertain but it is clearly a small percentage of the total. New information on the non-commercial take will become available this year, which will enable this matter to be revisited in the future.”
Attached: Letter to fishery stakeholders on quota decisions
26 March 2001
Name
Position
Company
Address1
Address2
Address3
City
Dear
Stakeholder
ROCK LOBSTER MANAGEMENT DECISIONS FOR 2001-02
FISHING YEAR
Introduction
I have recently made
decisions on the management of rock lobster fisheries for
the 2001–02 fishing year. In making my final decisions, I
have taken into account advice from the Ministry of
Fisheries (MFish), the National Rock Lobster Management
Group (NRLMG) and submissions received from the fishing
industry, Mäori, and recreational and conservation
groups.
CRA 7 and CRA 8
Summary of my decision
I
have determined to reduce the Total Allowable Catch (TAC)
for CRA 7 from 131 tonnes to 109 tonnes. Within this TAC I
have decided to make an allowance for other sources of
mortality of 5 tonnes, make a recreational allowance of 5
tonnes, provide for a customary catch of 10 tonnes, and
reduce the Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) from 111
to 89 tonnes.
I have determined to reduce the TAC for CRA
8 from 798 tonnes to 655 tonnes. Within this TAC I have
decided to make an allowance for other sources of mortality
of 28 tonnes, make a recreational allowance of 29 tonnes,
provide for a customary catch of 30 tonnes, and reduce the
TACC from 711 to 568 tonnes.
Stock Assessment
The
decision rule for the NSS sub-stock (Southland (CRA8) and
Otago (CRA7)) has been invoked. The decision rule
prescribes a TAC reduction of 20% when the Catch Per Unit
Effort (CPUE) falls below the projected level required to
rebuild the fishery to BMSY by the year 2015–16.
I am
aware of industry concern over application of the NSS
decision rule in 2001. The 2000 stock assessment indicates
that the NSS substock is 4% of virgin biomass and 23% of
BMSY. The stock does not appear to have responded
significantly to the TACC reduction made in 1999.
Projections undertaken as part of the 2000 stock assessment
indicate that there is a strong likelihood that stock size
will increase significantly as a result of a 20% reduction
to the TACC. If catches were left at current levels the
assessment indicates there is a possibility that the stock
size could decline over the next five years. I am not
comfortable with the current status of the fishery. I want
to prevent, as much as I am able, further decline in the
stock and ensure that the stock will move toward BMSY at a
reasonable rate.
Socio-Economic impact
I have
carefully considered the information submitted by
stakeholders, as well information contained in the NRLMG
report, on the possible socio-economic impacts of a 20% TACC
reduction. I recognise that there may be socio-economic
impacts resulting from the reduction to the TACC in New
Zealand’s largest rock lobster fishery, which provides a
significant component of revenue for the Southland economy.
My principle motivation for rebuilding the stock is that it
will result in an improved contribution to the local
economy. Given the status of the stock, I believe that the
requirement to rebuild the stock from its current depleted
state outweighs the potential socio-economic impacts of the
reduction in the TACC.
Allocation decision
I have
decided to reduce the TACC by 20% rather than the TAC as
required by the decision rule. As a general principle I
support the view that all stakeholders should share in the
rebuild of a fishery. However, the level of removals by
other stakeholders is uncertain but best available
information suggests that it is very small relative to the
commercial catch. New information on the level of
recreational catch will be available later this year. As
the stock rebuilds we will need to carefully monitor
removals from the fishery to ensure that allowances within
the TAC are not exceeded. Accordingly I ask that the NRLMG
examine information on other allowances as new information
becomes available and provide recommendations to me as
warranted by the information.
I applaud the initiative
taken by Ngai Tahu to voluntarily reduce the level of
customary harvest from the fishery in response to the
depressed state of the stock. This sends a signal to other
users of the resource about accepting management
responsibility to ensure the stock rebuilds and I have asked
MFish to discuss with recreational fishers options that are
available to them to aid the rebuild.
Ngai Tahu have not
supplied any updated information on the actual level of
customary harvest from the customary regulations for use in
the TAC setting and stock assessment process. I have asked
MFish to discuss this matter with Ngai Tahu so that the
issue can be resolved for future stock assessments and for
making appropriate provision for customary harvest within
the TAC.
NSS decision rule
Scientific advice suggests
there is a strong possibility that the decision rule will be
triggered again in 2003. However the estimates of BMSY and
CPUE at BMSY from the 2000 stock assessment and the 1997
stock assessment model on which the decision rule is based
are different. I agree that the cumulative socio-economic
impact of the previous reduction made in 1999, the reduction
I intend to make on 1 April 2001, and the possible reduction
to the TACC on 1 April 2003, may be significant.
Accordingly, I believe it is reasonable for the NRLMG to
re-examine the rule to ensure that it is based on the best
available information and provides a reasonable balance
between rebuilding the stock and the socio-economic impact
of measures taken to achieve this rebuild. However, given
the importance of this fishery I am not willing to see the
rebuild timeframe extend much beyond 2015–16 on the basis of
current information.
As part of this work it would also
be useful to improve the level of information on the
socio-economic impacts of management action in the CRA 7 and
CRA 8 fisheries. The NRLMG proposes to investigate options
for gathering more information on these impacts. This
information will enable a better assessment to be made on
the potential socio-economic impacts of the current rate of
rebuild of the stock. Therefore, I would like this
information to be presented to me at the same time as the
NRLMG makes recommendations resulting from the review of the
NSS decision rule.
CRA 7 stock assessment model
I have
noted the submission from the Otago Rock Lobster Industry
Association on separate management for the CRA 7 fishery. I
am aware of the variation in fishery characteristics between
CRA 7 and CRA 8. However, there is some interrelationship
between the stocks and a strong likelihood that lobsters
from CRA 7 migrate into CRA 8. Given this relationship, I
am cautious about any shift from the combined management
regime that currently operates. However, I will consider
any proposal put forward by users in CRA 7. My
consideration will be subject to agreement being reached by
stakeholders and subject to the proposed management
regime/stock assessment model providing sufficient certainty
for me to be confident that my legislative obligations can
be met.
CRA 3
I have decided to roll over the CRA 3
management regime for the 2001–02 fishing year. I note that
there has been a slight decline in CPUE. However, the stock
assessment suggests that the CRA 3 fishery is above target
levels specified in legislation. I also note that a new
stock assessment will be completed in 2001. I intend to
reconsider the management regime for this stock for 2001
after consideration of the revised stock assessment and
views from tangata whenua, the CRA 3 User Group, and the
NRLMG.
As you will know I was unhappy at the process
undertaken to open the month of September to commercial
fishing in 2000. I understand there was a great deal of
discussion over this issue in relation to the 2001-02
fishing year during the meetings held in Gisborne. There
was some support for opening September at the beginning of
the fishing year and also some support for maintaining a
closure until a full review can be completed. I am not
opposed to allowing some flexibility if some unforeseen
circumstance (such as bad weather) prevents the majority of
commercial operators from fishing, provided that: the status
of the stock is not jeopardised; users can agree on the
proposed measure; and the proposal is developed within the
timeframe necessary to amend a regulation.
I believe that the decision on whether September should be open is best left up to the users of the CRA 3 fishery. However, I do not intend to allow the problems created by last years proposal to occur again. Accordingly, I will not consider any proposal to open September for this year unless it:
has the support from the majority of commercial
participants in the fishery;
has been subject to a
reasonable period of consultation with tangata whenua in the
CRA 3 area and other users of the resource; and
is
submitted to MFish before 30 June 2001.
I recognise that
the timeframe is problematical because fishers may not be
able to determine if weather patterns have restricted orwill
restrict fishing as they did in 2000. However, the process
for passage of regulations is such that this amount of time
must be allowed to ensure that all of the administrative
requirements are met.
The use of regulations to enforce
the closed seasons in CRA 3 creates a largely inflexible
management regime. A longer term review of the regime could
consider what alternative methods might be available to
enforce the closures but allow more flexibility, or even
whether the closures are necessary given the status of the
stock.
I would like to signal my appreciation to those in
the CRA 3 area that have been involved in the review of the
fishery, particularly those tangata whenua and
non-commercial stakeholders that have signalled a
willingness to participate in fisheries management
discussions. I am hopeful that with this continued
enthusiasm we can create a combined management group that
will once again be an example to other fisheries throughout
New Zealand. I look forward to receiving updates on how
things are progressing in the fishery, and the views
expressed by tangata whenua, commercial fishers and other
stakeholders on options for the 2002–03 fishing
year.
Framework for managing rock lobster fisheries
I
support the plan for management of rock lobster fisheries
proposed by the NRLMG. I acknowledge the work undertaken by
the NRLMG in developing the framework and encourage the
group to continue to develop it to ensure that it
effectively and efficiently meets the legislative
obligations under the Fisheries Act 1996.
Decision
rules
I strongly support the concept of a robust decision
rule framework because it provides users with some certainty
about future management action, while ensuring that the
obligations of the Fisheries Act are met with minimal
involvement from Government. Ideally, decision rules should
be formulated so that they not only ensure sustainability
objectives are met with a high level of certainty, but are
also robust and encompass the management objectives of all
stakeholders.
Decision rules are going to form an
important component of fisheries plans. The rock lobster
fishery has had decision rules of varying complexity
operating for a number of years. For this reason, the NSS
substock, which has the most developed rule, is looked at
both nationally and internationally as a model for use of
decision rules.
I recognise that for decision rules to
work effectively there must be buy-in from stakeholders
about the objectives of the rule and ongoing review to
ensure it remains effective as new information and
techniques for assessing stocks and developing rules become
available.
However, I am concerned about the way in
which commercial fishers approached issues concerning the
NSS decision rule. One of the key benefits of decision
rules is the ability to move away from ad hoc annual
decision making. There is significant risk to the integrity
of the decision rule process when a proposal to review the
rule is linked with consideration of management action in
the fishery for the upcoming year. Seeking to relitigate
the decision rule after it has been triggered undermines
Government confidence in the process and principals of
decision rules and sends the wrong signals to fishers in
other fisheries that may be looking to implement similar
management frameworks,. particularly when management action
in CRA 7 and CRA 8 was first signalled several years ago.
Nonetheless, I accept that there are issues with the NSS
decision rule that need to be resolved. For this reason I
request that the NRLMG develop terms of reference for a
review. I would like advice presented to me on any
revisions necessary to the rule as part of the NRLMG Annual
Report for 2001 so that a revised rule can be in place to
guide management decisions in 2003.
I would also like to
see some development occur on the decision rules that apply
to the NSN (CRA1 and CRA 2) and NSC (CRA 3, CRA 4 and CRA 5)
stocks. Some work has been undertaken on a decision rule
matrix that should enable development of rules that address
a wider range of objectives than those currently in place.
I would like to see steps to develop these rules occur in
2001 and be advised of the action undertaken in the NRLMG
report for 2001. In the interim, while these new rules are
developed, I agree that the current NSN and NSC decision
rules should be used as the basis for management decisions
for the 2002–03 fishing year.
Research Issues
I note
that industry continues to augment the available stock
assessment information with voluntary log book data and
tagging programs carried out under standards and
specifications designed by the Ministry. I commend these
initiatives and believe that they significantly improve the
understanding of stock status and biological characteristics
of rock lobster fisheries. I also note the useful role
undertaken by the NRLMG in the rock lobster research
planning process.
Uncertainty in estimates of total
removals
I agree that accurate quantification of removals
from a fishery is important for stock assessment purposes.
The ongoing implementation of the customary regulations will
enable more accurate information to be available on the
level of customary catch. I also note that a national
recreational diary survey was completed in September 2000.
This information will be available for use in management
decisions for 2002. MFish Compliance is reviewing the
methods used to develop estimates of illegal take in rock
lobster fisheries. The aim of the revised methodology is to
ensure that estimates are as objective as possible and that
the methods used are consistent between fisheries and
between years. I would like to see this revised methodology
in place for use in supplying illegal harvest estimates for
the 2001 stock assessment.
Compliance issues
I note
that user groups remain frustrated over the level of illegal
removals in rock lobster fisheries.
The Ministry's
compliance business expends a considerable proportion of its
resources on inshore fisheries, of which rock lobster is one
of the most important. Unfortunately, the incentives to
harvest rock lobster illegally are high, and are likely to
remain so in the medium term.
Our rock lobster fisheries
are important, but the compliance resources MFish can
dedicate to these fisheries are finite. MFish needs to
ensure that those resources are deployed wisely. I suggest
that the NRLMG and the Ministry work together this year to
determine the role and priority that amateur and commercial
rules play in achieving the management objectives for our
rock lobster fisheries. This type of work will provide the
cornerstone for developing compliance strategies for the
rock lobster fisheries.
With respect to black market and
poaching activities, I can assure you that the Ministry
views this work as a high priority, and will continue to
deploy resources in this area.
Role of the NRLMG
I
have considered the role of the NRLMG in future management
decisions, in particular how it will integrate with
fisheries plans as they are developed. While I support the
development of regional based fisheries management forums, I
believe that national bodies such as the NRLMG still have an
important role to play, particularly given the skills and
knowledge the group has built up since its inception. The
NRLMG is in a unique and important position to contribute to
the development of fisheries plans and the framework for
developing management advice. It is also well placed to
supply cross sector advice to user groups as they seek to
develop plans, and also to develop fall back management
regimes that can operate effectively in the absence of a
plan.
I have noted the concern expressed in submissions
regarding representation in the NRLMG. For the group to
function effectively it is important that each member
represents the views of their constituent groups and relays
discussions from the group back to their constituents. I am
still strongly of the view that matters relating to the rock
lobster fishery should be submitted to and discussed by the
NRLMG. The NRLMG will then provide advice to me, together
with MFish.
I note that the group intends to consider how
best it can integrate into the fisheries plans process
during 2001 and report to me as part of the 2001 Annual
Report. I look forward to viewing the group’s proposed
role.
The rock lobster fishery is one of the leading
fisheries in New Zealand for stakeholder participation in
management. The benefits to users that have resulted from
this participation are obvious in the status of most rock
lobster stocks. However, there are still issues that need
to be resolved. The development of regional fishery-based
user groups that are inclusive of all those with an interest
in the fishery is important to progress the management
structure. From a fisheries management perspective the
development of better decision rules that not only provide
stakeholders and Government with a level of certainty but
also better meet legislative and stakeholder objectives will
be an important step forward.
I am sure that with the
continued work of the NRLMG and participation of
stakeholders, the rock lobster management framework and
status of the stocks will continue to improve.
Yours
sincerely
Hon Pete Hodgson
Minister of
Fisheries