Oceans apart: How New Zealand's global promises don't match up on our own shores

Thursday, 9 March 2023

ANALYSIS: As diplomats entered a final 38-hour-sprint to nut out an historic agreement on ocean protection, the bold, red hull of the Anuanua Moana glided out of Avatiu harbour, and into the Pacific.

Blessed with a traditional salt cleansing ritual, hymn and prayer, the explorer vessel is on its first expedition, passing close to Aitutaki’s barrier reef and through turquoise waters of the southern Nga-Pu-Toru isles.

The Anuanua Moana is scouring the sea-floor for “golden apples” - what Cook Islands’ Prime Minister Mark Brown calls polymetallic nodules.

These potato-sized, blackened lumps contain deposits of valuable metals, essential for clean-energy technologies like electric car batteries.

* Marine protection progress 'dismal', risks falling short of targets - Green MP

* Government accused of backing the fishing industry over South Pacific conservation

Rarotonga’s lagoon and reefs have long been a draw for tourists. Now the Cook Islands hope seabed minerals exploration will bring new wealth.

Cook and his Government dream of the potential wealth from this untapped underwater treasure. It would pay for the island nation’s much-needed infrastructure, like schools and clean drinking water.

It might also help stem the flow of migrants heading to New Zealand’s orchards in search of better wages.

An international ‘red list’ contains 1,550 marine animals and plants that are assessed are at risk of extinction.

But for environmental campaigners, the granting of mining licences is the stuff of nightmares.

They argue extraction will cause “unprecedented environmental destruction” to the Pacific Ocean dredging up the seafloor, and then dumping unwanted matter back into the sea, smothering marine life with the sediment plume.

So, it was a blow to some to see the floating laboratory on its maiden voyage just as the world celebrated the conclusion of a major conservation deal.

And it perfectly illustrates the challenges of ocean stewardship – where countries pay lip-service to action in global waters, while choosing short-gain for special, well-connected interests over scientific advice and long-term sustainability in their own blue backyard.

There is no better example of this than New Zealand.

Fish swim near some bleached coral at Kisite Mpunguti Marine park, Kenya. For the first time, United Nations members have agreed on a unified treaty to protect biodiversity in the high seas – nearly half the planet’s surface.

Beyond borders – the deal to protect half the earth’s surface

Officially called the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) treaty, the new deal will protect the ‘high seas’ that lie beyond countries’ boundaries.

That’s two-thirds of the world's oceans – and they belong to everyone, a bit like space or the moon.

Up until now it has been a Wild West. Few legal protections existed to govern activity there, such as industrial-scale fishing or deep sea mining.

New Zealand has an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 4 million square kilometres – the fourth largest in the world. That’s the area that extends from 12 nautical miles off the coast (known as the territorial sea) to 200 nautical miles.

It took ten years, and a lot of false starts for UN member countries to strike compromise.

There were major sticking points over fishing rights, who is going to pay for conservation, and who should share in profits from marine genetic resources (like yet-to-be-discovered biological material from plants and animals that can be used in pharmaceuticals, industry and food).

But pressure mounted after COP15, a nature summit in Canada last year, agreed a target of protecting 30% of land and sea areas by 2030.

In the past, New Zealand was a world leader in oceans policy, pioneering a sustainable fisheries management system, pushing for a ban on commercial whaling and behind the creation of the first international marine sanctuary in the Ross Sea.

The document now makes that possible, by allowing the creation of international marine protected areas, where fishing and extraction can be restricted.

But the rub is that these commitments are global and apply only to international waters. That means that countries can sign on without necessarily committing to preserve more of the waters within their own jurisdictions.

So, countries like Cook Islands – which is not yet a UN member – are free to build a sea floor mining economy.

And member nations like New Zealand, can sign and ratify the treaty without creating a single new marine sanctuary.

Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta hailed the deal as “a huge win” and praised the team of Kiwi diplomats, officials, academics and environmental campaigners who worked “tirelessly” during the negotiations.

“Our connection to the ocean is a fundamental part of what makes us New Zealanders, as is the seriousness with which we take our kaitiaki responsibilities,” she said.

It’s only natural the Government wants to bathe in the glow of a deal that made positive, global headlines. But her public statements do not match up to the reality of what’s happening within New Zealand’s own watery boundaries.

Campaigners say a rule change on bottom-trawling is rooted in commercial interests. New Zealand is the only country trawling for orange roughy in the South Pacific.

“The treaty is a wake-up call,” says Eugenie Sage, a former conservation minister and Green Party spokesperson on oceans. “The performance of this government has been dismal and Aotearoa New Zealand is just so far behind what is happening internationally. This has been a decade's long story.”

Since taking office in 2017 – and promising to fulfil the 30x30 commitment – the Government has not created a single marine protected area or reserve.

The last came into being nearly a decade ago, surrounding the Antipodes, Bounty and Campbell Islands, and on the West Coast of the South Island, and Akaroa.

Progress has stalled on the proposed Rangitāhua/Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, which would get New Zealand halfway to the goal, protecting 15% of its waters, and a network on the coastlines of Otago and Canterbury.

Campaigners are deeply frustrated with talks to establish protection in the Hauraki Gulf, where scallop and crayfish fisheries have all but collapsed.

Proposals would allow sand mining and trawling corridors off the Auckland and Coromandel coast.

Only 54 Māui dolphins remain according to official figures.

Less than half a per cent (0.4%) of our oceans are protected – and nearly all of that is found around distant islands like the Subantarctic islands.

That’s despite almost half of the world’s whales and dolphins visiting or living in these waters. It is also a seabird mecca – of the world’s 360 species, 86 breed here.

Most damningly, late last year the United States placed a ban on the import of seafoods caught in Māui dolphin habitat, pending a court case. The species is critically endangered with only around 50 left.

Slow progress is due to a range of factors. Marine protection legislation is now 50 years old – and predates the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – the international rules by which most countries abide.

Māui dolphin and the New Zealand sea lion are on a countdown to extinction – so why do politicians drag their feet?

Replacement legislation has languished at select committee since 2002, despite repeated promises of reform by successive governments.

Another huge barrier is the 1992 Māori fisheries settlement – or Sealord deal – which guaranteed customary fishing rights and the delivery of commercial quota and assets to iwi.

It was hard-won, and the fishing sector is reluctant to cede any ground to proposals which include a ban on fishing activities, or would restrict the right of future generations to develop fisheries.

Prohibition would diminish rights guaranteed under the settlement and devalue the quota, they argue.

The new treaty will prove “crucial for addressing the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution”, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said.

Almost every marine protection proposal in the last thirty years has been diluted or stalled by lobbying from the fishing industry, who have frequently threatened legal action.

Plans to install cameras on commercial boats – to enhance transparency and reduce the accidental deaths of birds, seals and dolphins were vehemently opposed and repeatedly delayed.

A huge battle is now looming over the issue of bottom-trawling, which involves dragging heavy weighted nets across the sea floor.

Advocates have been pushing to ban the practice on biodiversity-rich seamounts and the sponge fields and cold-water coral communities that surround them.

Last year, the Government appointed an independent forum – which included conservation groups and industry figures – to look at how to manage the impact. That was to consider a ban on trawling seamounts.

The panel have reported back to Oceans and Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash – but could not agree. Nash will consider their recommendations.

Nash would also make no promise to progress marine protection legislation before October’s election.

“Ensuring that New Zealand's fish stocks are sustainable, and our marine environment is healthy are both high priorities of mine,” he says.

For marine conservationists, the Government’s decisions on bottom-trawling is a litmus test for their commitment to the 30x30 goal, and its willingness to take on the $1bn fishing industry.

Early signs aren’t good. Just two weeks before the high seas treaty negotiations in New York, New Zealand’s diplomats and fisheries officials were in Manta, Ecuador to thrash out rules and quota for fishing in the international waters of South Pacific.

For years, ocean conservationists have criticised the Government for lobbying for the deep-water fishing industry at this annual meeting of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO).

Before 15 member countries – including the United States and Europe who have recently taken a tough line on bottom trawling in vulnerable areas – New Zealand’s diplomats rejected arguments for full protection.

Their intervention – alongside the Cook Islands – meant that trawling was restricted in just 70% of these areas, known as VMEs or vulnerable marine areas. That leaves nearly third open to destruction, environmental groups argue – who also say the decision isn’t supported by science.

New Zealand remains the only country bottom trawling in these waters and last year sent a single vessel, that caught just 20 tonnes of orange roughy.

Asked if he would stop issuing permits for domestic vessels to trawl the high seas of the South Pacific, Nash said he has not considered the measure.