5. THE MANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESS
5.1 Fishery statistics
5.1.1 Methods used for collection of catch and effort data
Statistics on New Zealand's commercial fish catches have been compiled by the Ministry of Fisheries and its predecessors since 1936 from fishing return supplied by fishers and fish processors (Francis in press). Because fishing returns do not usually include fish that are discarded, the returns provide estimates of landings rather than catch. The landed state of the fish is also reported on returns and the Ministry of Fisheries then converts reported weights to whole weights by application of conversion factors.
Under the QMS, a number of returns must be completed for the Ministry of Fisheries by commercial permit and quota holders. A monthly Quota Management Report (QMR) must be completed by:
All inshore fishers must complete a Catch, Effort and Landing Return (CELR). This form has three sections:
The Trip data section shows the first and last days of each fishing trip, along with the landing date, vessel registration number and name and the point of landing. The Catch and effort data section, which is used for stock assessment purposes, provides details of catch location and amount of fishing effort. Vessels under 28m in overall length (excluding squid jigging and tuna longlining vessels) are required to enter the appropriate Statistical Area. All other vessels are required to enter the latitude and longitude at the start of the tow or set. The Catch Landing Data Section records actual landed weight by fish stock.
Trawl vessels over 28m in length are required to complete a Trawl Catch, Effort and Processing Return (TCEPR) on which each trawl tow is recorded separately and a Catch Landing Return (CLR), which is similar to the Catch Landing Data section of the CELR. TCEPRs and CLRs must be forwarded to the Ministry within 7 days of the completion of a trip.
Commercial fishing permit holders are restricted to selling fish to licensed wholesalers processors - Licensed Fish Receivers. The LFRs are also required to provide monthly reports on how much fish they receive from each permit holder and to provide purchase invoices when they purchase fish. These detailed reports enable the Ministry of Fisheries to monitor catches landed against quota.
5.1.2 Evaluation of the data collection process
Sources of error in landings statistics collected before October 1986 were discussed by King (1985, 1986), King et al. (1987) and Francis and Smith (1988). Major sources of error up to that time, and to a lesser extent since then, are described below.
Landings data underestimate actual catches because of (1) non-reporting of catch that is discarded at sea (e.g. undersized fish or unsaleable species) and (2) under-reporting of landed catch. These problems were greatest before 1983 when penalties for discarding and under-reporting and incentives for accurate reporting were small. In 1983, fishers became aware that landings reported in their returns would be used as a basis for the allocation of ITQs under the QMS. Some fishers then began reporting larger quantities of catch in order to establish catch histories. Since the QMS was introduced, penalties for mis-reporting of catch have become severe, and may include forfeiture of vessels, fishing equipment and quota as well as fines. As a result, data quality has improved dramatically since 1983. However, since 1996–97 fishers have had to pay a fee for any discarded fish and this may lead to an increase in unreported discards.
Shark species have not always been accurately identified for a variety of reasons. Before 1981, spiny dogfish, northern spiny dogfish and “unspecified dogfish” were lumped under rig landings and ghost sharks and various “unspecified sharks” were lumped under school shark landings (King 1985). However the quantities involved were probably small because markets for species other than school shark, rig and elephantfish had not developed at that time.
Inappropriate and inaccurate conversion factors were formerly used to convert processed weight to whole weight. Because shark flesh ammoniates rapidly after death, most fish are processed at sea soon after capture. This usually involves “dressing” (also called “trunking”) of sharks and chimaeras (removal of head, viscera, belly flaps, tail and fins) and removal of the wings from skates and rays. Before 1983, if the landed state was not reported on a fishing return, the landing was coded as whole weight and no conversion factor was applied. Because most sharks are landed dressed, landings would have been underestimated (King 1985, Francis and Smith 1988).
Conversion factors have also changed through time. In particular, studies in 1992–93 on a number of commercially important sharks (Johnston 1993, 1994) led to the application of improved factors in October 1993 and these have remained in effect to the present. Since at least 1980, the conversion factor for elephantfish has remained almost constant, but conversion factors for all other major shark species have varied considerably (Francis in press). Appropriate conversion factors have been applied to elephantfish since at least 1980, school shark since 1986, skates since 1987, and rig, spiny dogfish and ghost sharks since 1992 (Francis in press).
5.1.3 Data processing, storage and accessibility
The current Ministry of Fisheries' Catch and Effort system was purpose-designed to support the QMS. It was initially tested in the middle of 1995 and is now in full use. It consists of more than 12 GB of data and is growing at a rate of about 1.5 GB/yr. The Ministry of Fisheries IT environment is based on a multi-tier client/server architecture. Six IBM RS/6000 servers running AIX are the main server platforms. Other major systems use Digital Equipment Corporation Open VMS running on an Alpha system.
OmniCONNECT is used to provide access to data stored in the Sybase SQL Server version 10, and in RMS files on the Digital VMS systems. A migration to Sybase SQL Server version 11 is underway. An Open Server secure gateway makes this data available to the major research provider the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research.
The Sybase archiecture was originally selected for its openness and flexibility. Application development continues with PowerBuilder and Sybase within Ministry of Fisheries. The Catch and Effort system originally was built on PowerBuilder version 3. It will shortly be upgraded to version 5 and later to version 6.
5.2 Stock assessment
Comprehensive assessments of New Zealand's fish stocks began in 1985 in anticipation of the introduction of the QMS (Colman et al. 1985) and have continued annually to the present (Annala and Sullivan 1997). The intensity and quality of the assessments have been correlated with the size, value and importance of each fish stock. Because shark fisheries are relatively small in size and value, research has been minimal for most species, and the assessments have been correspondingly limited.
5.2.1 Measures of stock abundance
The exploitation rates of righ along the east and west costs of South Island (QMAs 3, 5 and 7) were estimated from a tagging programme crried out in 1982–84 (Francis 1989). The Petersen method was then used to estimate absolute biomass from the exploitation rates and mean catches over the same period (Francis 1988). Those biomass estimates are now out of data and are no longer used in stock assessments.
Catch per unit effort (CPUE) analyses have been carried out for rig set net fisheries in the main fish stocks for the periods 1976–77 to 1984–85 (Francis and Smith 1988), and 1991–92 to 1995–96 (Vignaux 1997). Results indicated that CPUE was declining in most stocks in the early period and stable or indeterminate in the later period. Since 1986, when conservative quotas were set for all rig fish stocks, set net fisheries in some stocks have become small and localised. Many set net fishers hold small quantities of quota, and catch their ITQs quickly. This means that recent estimates of CPUE in some stocks may not adequately represent stock abundance (Vignaux 1997).
Relative biomass estimates are available for rough and smooth skates from a number of trawl survey series conducted since 1991 (Francis 1997). In most QMAs, there were no clear trends in biomass. Off the east coast of the South Island (QMA 3), the biomass of both species combined declined significantly, but the decline was not uniform, being steepest between 1991 and 1992 with no change between 1992 and 1996. The biomass trends of the two species were inconsistent, possibly because of species identification errors before 1996 (Francis 1997).
Relative biomass estimates from trawl surveys are also available for spiny dogfish and ghost sharks (Hanchet and Ingerson 1997, Horn 1997), but large fluctuations in the estimates between years and seasons suggest that they were affected by variations in vertical or areal availability. Longer time series may eventually prove useful for monitoring the abundance of these species (Annala and Sullivan 1997).
CPUE indices for commercial trawl and set net landings of elephantfish over the period 1961–73 showed no trends, but an underlying downward trend may have been masked by the landing of increasing amounts of small elephantfish that had previously been dumped (Coakely 1971, 1973, Allen 1975, Sullivan 1981). Set net CPUE during the period 1979–84 declined in QMA 3 (McGregor et al. 1985). Unfortunately no CPUE data are available for the period 1974–78, during which elephantfish landings declined by 40%, and no comparison can be made between the earlier and later set net CPUE data because different indices were used.
No abundance estimates are available for school shark.
5.2.2 Biological advice review process
The Ministry of Fisheries runs an annual series of stock assessment meetings to review new information on stock structure, productivity, and abundance and to update the assessment of each fish stock. Each species assessment is carried out by one of 14 Fishery Assessment Working Groups. The Working Groups produce a report on each species and where significant new data, analyses, or interpretations, are included the assessment is referred to a full plenary session for further discussion. The final stock assessment results are published in the annual Plenary Report (Annala and Sullivan 1997).
All Working Group meetings and the Plenary Session are open to the public. Data are tabled and discussed in an open and transparent manner. All major stakeholders are represented at the meetings, including the fishing industry, recreational fishers, conservation organisations, Maori, scientists and managers. Some stakeholders, especially industry, employ their own scientific consultants who play an active role in developing the assessments. Draft Working Group reports are prepared before the meetings, and are modified by consensus during the meetings. Detailed assessments of species or stocks are published throughout the year (as Fisheries Assessment Research Documents) following critical review by Working Group members and by at least one scientific reviewer who is not a member of the Working Group. These FARDs provide the background technical detail that underpoins the Working Group and Plenary reports.
Annual assessments have been carried out for rig, school shark and elephantfish since 1985. Spiny dogfish, ghost sharks and skates were first assessed in 1997.
5.2.3 Biological management reference points
The Fisheries Act (1996) requires that fisheries be managed to produce the MSY. The MSY is estimated in terms of the Maximum Constant Yield (MCY) or the Current Annual Yield (CAY). MCY is the “maximum constant catch that is estimated to be sustainable, with an acceptable level of risk, at all probable future levels of biomass” (Annala and Sullivan 1997). CAY is the “one-year catch calculated by applying a reference fishing mortality, Fref, to an estimate of the fishable biomass present during the next fishing year. Fref is the level of (instantaneous) fishing mortality that, if applied every year, would, within an acceptable level of risk, maximise the average catch from the fishery” (Annala and Sullivan 1997). Thus MCY is a constant catch strategy, whereas CAY is a constant fishing mortality strategy. CAY varies annually in response to fluctuations in population biomass.
CAY cannot be estimated for any New Zealand shark stock because no estimates of current biomass are available. MCY can be calculated by five different methods (Annala and Sullivan 1997), each involving different data requirements. The method with the lowest data requirement calculates MCY from the average landings during a period over which there were no systematic changes in landings or effort:
MCY = cYav (1)
where Yav is the average yield (landings) and c is a natural variability factor, estimated from the natural mortality rate, that allows for anticipated fluctuations in biomass. The natural variability factor is inversely related to the natural mortality rate; e.g. species with high natural mortality are expected to experience greater variations in biomass due to recruitment variability, and have a low c value (Annala and Sullivan 1997).
MCY estimates have been made using equation (1) for some, or all, of the stocks of elephantfish, rig and school shark. No estimates of MCY are available for spiny dogfish, ghost sharks and skates because of insufficient data from which to estimate c, or the lack of a time period during which landings and effort were relatively constant. Simulation studies have shown that MCY for rig occurs at about 3–7% of virgin biomass, assuming that rig have a close relationship between population size and recruitment (i.e. low stock-recruit steepness) (Francis and Francis 1992). Therefore MCY could be calculated if an estimate of virgin biomass is available.
5.2.4 Sustainability of the resource
In the absence of estimates of current and virgin biomass it has been impossible to determine the exact status of New Zealand's shark stocks and where they are being fished in relation to MSY. However, for many of the larger stocks, the Fishery Assessment Working Group has estimated the stock status from trends in catch or relative abundance indices. Stocks occurring in QMAs in which the species is naturally rare are typically unable to be assessed because of lack of information. For some stocks, the Working Group has also taken into account anecdotal reports from fishers about their perceptions of stock abundance.
Based on these crude assessments, it is believed that the major South Island rig stocks have recovered substantially since 1986, when conservative TACCs were introduced. Recent rig catches in QMAs 3–8 are probably sustainable, but the status of rig stocks in QMAs 1, 2 and 9, and the sustainability of their catches, are unknown. Similarly, South Island elephantfish stocks (QMAs 3–7) are thought to have rebuilt since 1986, but it is not known whether recent catches, which exceeded the TACC in QMAs 3 and 4, are sustainable. No evidence is available to determine whether school shark stocks have rebuilt since the high catch levels up to 1986, and it is not known whether recent catches, which exceeded the TACC in most QMAs in 1995–96, are sustainable. Recent catches of ghost sharks and spiny dogfish are probably sustainable, at least in the short term. Skate catches are probably sustainable in QMAs 4–7, but in QMA 3, where the relative biomass declined significantly in the early 1990s and the competitive quota has been exceeded every year since at least 1989–90, it is unknown whether recent catches are sustainable (Annala and Sullivan 1997).
5.3 Provision of resource management advice
Fisheries management under the QMS involves a long-term approach, with annual adjustments occurring in the following areas:
The long term approach of the QMS has reduced the possibility and extent of political influence. It has, however, led to an extensive consultation process which takes the stock assessment advice from the Government's stock assessment research providers, and leads to the decisions of the Minister of Fisheries on TACs and TACCs. This process also considers the relevant social, cultural and economic factors that the Minister “shall have regard to” in reaching his decisions.
This consultation process has the following steps:
Receipt by the Ministry of Fisheries of stock assessment advice from research providers
Preparation by the Ministry of TAC/sustainability proposals into an Initial Position Paper
Distribution of Initial Position Paper to all stakeholder groups. The paper outlines the Ministry's initial position on those fisheries identified for TAC, TACC, and management review.
A series of stakeholder consultative meetings with sector groups either collectively of separately
Stakeholder submissions to the Minister
Ministry of Fisheries advice to Minister on proposals, and stakeholder comment on these
Ministry of Fisheries meets all stakeholder groups and “debates” the issues raised, and
Ministerial decision and imposition of revised each limits and other management measures.
This process has been in place in its current from since the early 1990s and has been an effective means of consulting on what are inevitably contentious issues. The Minister is required to make decisions that affect the livelihood of commercial fishers and the viability of commercial enterprises in the fishing industry, while at the same time ensuring that levels of utilisation are sustainable. More comment is made on the results of this process in Section 5.4.
5.4 Discussion
5.4.1 The manager's perspective
The stock assessment process has been developed and refined over the last decade to produce a process that operates effectively. From the Ministry of Fisheries' perspective, a number of significant changes have taken place in the last year. The Ministry's Annual Report for 1996–97 stated:
“A rolling strategic framework and directions for fisheries research document was developed and distributed to stakeholders for comment. This document sets the directions for fisheries research contracted by the Ministry of Fisheries for the next 5–10 years.
Proposals for 1997/98 research projects were developed after an extensive consultation and priority setting process with stakeholders at the regional and national levels. The end result of this process was a total of 60 research projects that were input into the formal consultation on the Nature and Extent of Fisheries Services. Following extensive consultation with stakeholders, final advice papers on the review of sustainability, including adjustments to the Total Allowable Catch, and catch limits…were submitted to the Minister.
Full contestability of fisheries research services is set to commence on 1 October 1997. Research standards and specifications were developed for both the contestable research projects and the stock assessment process. Registrations of interest were invited, tenderers pre-qualified and tenders sought from those pre-qualified organisations. Tenders closed in March 1997.
Standards and specifications were developed for the evaluation of the tenders for contestable research projects and implemented in the April 1997 tender evaluation process.”
5.4.2 User's perspective
The user's perspective is best evident from the following extract from New Zealand Fishing Industry Board (1994–1996):
“Information on stock sizes and yields are considered in a network of Fishery Assessment Working Groups which are convened by the Ministry of Fisheries and include representatives of all of the interest groups and fishery users. Members of the seafood industry attend these Working Groups to present data on their fisheries and to comment on the interpretation of information from the fishery as analyses and stock assessments proceed. The New Zealand Fishing Industry Board has made a strong commitment to supporting the stock assessment process and the participation in it by the seafood industry in recent years.
In entering this activity the seafood industry's aim is to support the proper collection and interpretation of data on fisheries, to contribute new information and expertise to the analyses, to actively review the stock assessment analyses performed by NIWA scientists and to perform its own independent analyses where appropriate. Through these activities, the NZFIB is better equipped to advise members of the industry and to be an advocate on their behalf. Importantly, this equips the NZFIB to fulfil its statutory duty, which is to offer independent advice to the Minister of Fisheries in respect of fishery management and TACC issues.
The NZFIB employs in-house expert stock assessment scientists and also retains expert consultants from time to time, drawn from centres of international expertise in fishery science. Additionally, the NZFIB employs a number of technical staff to assist in the collection of fishery data. This supplements the information available from NIWA and the Ministry of Fisheries covering catch, effort and fishery surveys. Examples of this last activity are seen in the rock lobster fisheries and a number of fin-fisheries where data is collected through log book programmes and from catch sampling on board fishing vessels. The data is collected by NZFIB staff and analysed for presentation in Fishery Assessment Working Groups.”
5.4.3 Evaluation of the management process
It is clear that the general consensus on overall management of commercial fisheries, including shark fisheries, is positive. The process is highly consultative though not without tensions among the parties. While a sustainable resource is the aim of Government and all stakeholders, the emphasis of each group differs. In most cases the debate is constructive and results in decisions being made and measures put in place that are satisfactory to all parties.
There are however exceptions to this where stakeholders have felt it necessary to challenge Ministerial decisions in the High Court. In these cases, the Minister and his Ministry advisers are required to defend the management decisions and the reasons for them. Two examples illustrate the process:
In 1994, Greenpeace challenged the decision of the Minister of Fisheries to reduce the TACC for orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) progressively over a number of years in order to rebuild to MSY. They argued that the Minister had not taken sufficient account of environmental factors, nor interpreted the stock assessment advice appropriately.
In 1995 and 1996, commercial fishing interests challenged the decision of the Minister to reduce the snapper (Pagrus auratus) TACC over a timeframe that the industry considered too short and which did not take into account the economic factors as they affected the fishing industry as a result of such a reduction
These two cases demonstrate the strength of feeling generated by these types of managements decisions, and in a positive light demonstrate the operation of the checks and balances applying in the management process in New Zealand. To date, there have been no similar court cases involving shark fisheries.
6. FISHERY MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS
6.1 The regulations
Only school shark, rig and elephantfish are currently managed under the QMS, although it is expected that ghost sharks will be added in October 1998. Fisheries managers recognised that there was an incentive for fishers to transfer excess fishing effort to non-QMS species following the start of the QMS and responded by introducing a range of measures to prevent over-exploitation of those species. A moratorium was placed on issuing new fishing permits (except for tuna longlining) in October 1992, and existing permits that had not been used during 1990–92 were revoked. More importantly, many non-QMS species were declared prohibited target species in specific QMAs (Table 6), although fishers were allowed to take unlimited quantities as bycatch of other target fisheries. Other non-QMS species could be targeted subject to conditions being imposed on fishing permits (Table 6), such as the setting of total quotas or the closure of certain areas. Of the shark species and QMAs that have been classified in this group, only spiny dogfish and skates have been permitted as target species, subject to total quotas. The remaining species in the specified QMAs have not yet been permitted, and so they are effectively banned as target species. Species that are not specifically listed in Table 6, such as great white, basking and mako sharks, are also banned as target species.
| Species | QMAs in which regulation applies | |
|---|---|---|
| Prohibited as target species | May be targeted subject to conditions | |
| Spiny dogfish | 4 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 |
| Rough & smooth skates | 1, 4, 9 | 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 |
| Ghost sharks | 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 | 3, 4, 7 |
| Seal shark | 1, 5, 6, 9 | 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 |
| Blue shark | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 | 2, 8 |
| Northern spiny dogfish | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 | 7, 8 |
| Bronze whaler | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 | 2, 7, 8 |
| Shovelnose dogfish | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 | 2, 7, 8 |
| Thresher shark | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 | 2, 7 |
| Broadnose sevengill shark | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 | 2, 7, 8 |
| Stingrays | 1, 4, 9 | 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 |
| Sixgill shark | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 | 2, 7, 8 |
| All other species | All | |
For species which may be targeted in some QMAs subject to conditions (last column), target fishing has been permitted in the underlined QMAs subject to total (competitive) quotas; for the remaining QMAs targetfishing is not currently permitted.
Bag limits apply to recreational fishers for some species in some regions. In northern and central New Zealand, there is a daily mixed-species bag limit of 20 fish. It covers a range of teleosts plus school shark, rig and elephantfish. In southern New Zealand, the daily bag limit is 30 and it includes individual species limits for spiny dogfish, school shark, rig, elephantfish, skates, and blue, bronze whaler, hammerhead, mako, porbeagle, sevengill, thresher and great white sharks (MAF Fisheries 1993).
There are no closed seasons or shark size limits. Effort limitation consists of restrictions on the amount of set net and longline that can be deployed by commercial and recreational fishers (see Section 4.2.2).
6.2 Regulations and the communication process
Total competitive quotas have been instituted for spiny dogfish in QMAs 3,5 and 6, and “skates and rays” (mainly rough and smooth skates) in QMA 3. However, the quota for skates has not been enforced, so skates are essentially unmanaged. The remaining shark species are not managed by output controls, nor do they have any specific input controls (but see Section 4.2.2).
Penalties for non-compliance or avoidance are severe, including forfeiture of quota and property upon conviction, and exclusion from the fishing industry. Test cases in the New Zealand courts have upheld the fisheries legislation and for the most part compliance levels are high. It would be fair to say however that shark fisheries, and all other inshore species that are not yet managed under the QMS, are not as effectively managed as all stakeholders would like. While the moratorium on issuing new permits has been in place for five years, moves are only now being made to bring another of the shark species (ghost shark) into the QMS. As a result, the appropriateness of a number of input control measures imposed by Regulations is debatable, but they have not been reviewed pending the move of further species into the QMS.
The development of competitive catch limits has not been pursued by the Ministry as a priority. With limited resources available for enforcement, the Ministry has concentrated on the principal target species (teleosts, shellfish and crustaceans), high value and high volume stocks, and commercial fraud. The Ministry has relied on an educational approach to the fishing industry and recreational fishers and has achieved considerable success with “self policing” of these types of fisheries. The Ministry takes the position that the penalties for non-compliance are severe and that if there is any evidence of non compliance with input controls, they will take appropriate prosecution action.
7. THE LAW AND ENFORCEMENT
7.1 Legal status
Legal powers to manage and enforce the TACCs and other regulations are provided in the Fisheries Act 1996 and associated regulations. Appendix 1 contains extracts from the Fisheries Act 1996, which outline the wide range of matters covered by the Act and specifically the provisions governing access, record-keeping and reporting, powers of Fishery Officers, offences and penalties.
7.2 Enforcement problems
Shark fisheries as a whole have few enforcement problems. Because sharks are often taken as bycatch, the problem of illegal targeting has not arisen to any extent. Targeted shark species are covered by the QMS. Because sharks are not considered important in the overall context of the New Zealand commercial fishery the level of enforcement activity has been low (see Section 6.2). The attitude taken by the enforcement managers in the Ministry is to concentrate valuable resources where the greatest impact on sustainability of fish stocks occurs; thus shark species do not attract much enforcement attention.
There is some evidence that finning of sharks has led to the discard of carcasses, but this is not regarded as a problem requiring enforcement attention at present. Attention is being paid to ensuring the accurate recording and reporting of the taking of sharks for the purposes of utilisation of the fins and this will be watched closely over the next year. The Government has moved recently to clarify these reporting requirements in revised Regulations, which came into force on 5 December 1997.
Where catches are taken in excess of quota holdings the permit holder may purchase further quota, lease further quota, or land catches against another's quota holdings. To provide for instances where catches exceed quota holdings, a number of options and defences are available. In any year quota owners can carry forward quota to the next year, providing it is not more than 10% of their holdings for that fish stock. Conversely they may take catches up to 10% more than their quota holdings, the additional amount of catch being deducted from their subsequent year's catch entitlement.
7.3 Surveillance
Fisheries enforcement (surveillance, investigation, and prosecution of offences), in New Zealand is carried out by Fishery Officers employed by the Ministry of Fisheries at a cost, for the most recent financial year (July 1996–June 1997), of $NZ15.6m. This is approximately 1% of the estimated overall value of production from the New Zealand commercial fishery of $NZ1500 million. Surveillance is undertaken by means of random supervision of landing points, catch record monitoring, and inspections and audits of Licensed Fish Receivers. Fishing vessels over 28m in length are required to carry Automatic Location Communicators as part of a Vessel Monitoring System. This enables continuous satellite monitoring of the locations of these vessels. The surveillance costs for inshore finfish fisheries, including shark fisheries, are recorded by the Ministry of Fisheries as $NZ3.2m. No figures are available for shark fisheries specifically, as no surveillance activities target them. The lack of enforcement emphasis reflects the low value of sharks, and the lack of targeting by industry.
7.4 The legal process
The legal basis for enforcement of fisheries regulations is provided in the Fisheries Act, which defines the offences and penalties for convicted persons. The determination of culpability is made by the courts. The role of the Ministry is only to investigate alleged offences and bring prosecutions before the courts. The penalty for all offences under current law is a monetary fine. In addition, there is provision for forfeiture of catch, fishing gear, fishing vessel, and ITQ on conviction for a range of offences prescribed in the Act (Appendix 1).
8. MANAGEMENT SUCCESS
8.1 Profitability of the fishery
No economic analysis is available of shark fisheries. The estimated primary value of shark catches is given in Table 3. The total value for the 1995 calendar year was estimated to be $NZ11.0 million, or 2.6% of the total value of commercial finfish species.
8.2 Issues of equity and efficiency
As outlined earlier, the involvement of stakeholders in the annual process of stock assessment, TAC setting, and cost recovery, is extensive. It brings together the range of views from the Ministry, research providers, commercial and recreational fishing interests, traditional Maori interests, and environmental viewpoints. The views of some participants on the efficacy of these processes are reported in Section 5.4. Questions relating to the social welfare implications of the fishery management objectives and policies are not considered as part of this process. The policies that led to the introduction of the QMS in 1986, and its continuation today, were is designed to ensure that fisheries are managed sustainably; social welfare issues are dealt with by other Government policies.
9. MANAGEMENT COSTS
Management costs for shark fisheries are not reported by the Ministry of Fisheries as separate identifiable items. The costs of fisheries management include policy advice, enforcement and prosecution, contract management, fisheries management services, and stock assessment research contracted for the purpose of setting TACs.
Part 14 of the Fisheries Act 1996 allows the Government to recover from the commercial fishing industry a substantial part of the Government's costs of managing fisheries. The various categories of services that are to be paid for by the Government or the industry are defined in the Act and apply until July 1998, at which time they will be subject to possible amendment. The annual cost recovery process is undertaken by the Ministry of Fisheries in consultation with stakeholders. The Fisheries Act also established the concept of “Approved Parties” for organisations seeking to participate in the cost recovery consultation process. These Approved Parties are groups that the Minister of Fisheries considers have an interest in management and conservation of New Zealand fisheries.
There is a two-stage consultation process for cost recovery as follows:
Consultation involving all approved parties on the nature and extent of fisheries services to be provided by the Government for the coming financial year and the proposed cost of these services.
Further consultation with industry representatives to determine how the costs are to be shared by industry sectors and the levy rate necessary to recover these costs.
Since the introduction of cost recovery the fishing industry has been concerned, as the major contributor to the revenue of the Ministry of Fisheries, to ensure that it has meaningful input into the type and quantity of the required services and the way in which they are provided. This has been a somewhat controversial process with the industry not currently satisfied that the process and the resultant charges are appropriately applied. The process is evolving however, with some of the required services being made available for contestable delivery and there is a possibility that some services will be devolved to the industry in future.
The Ministry of Fisheries considers that the current cost recovery regime has achieved some of its objectives, but that it has some problems that still need resolution. Mr. R. Dormer, Manager of Finance for the Ministry, advises:
“Whilst the existing fisheries cost recovery regime has provided a stimulus for members of the fishing industry to consider mechanisms for reducing costs and more effectively delivering services, it has also been a source of considerable tension between the industry and the Government. It is quite clear that there is no shared understanding between the Government, the commercial fishing industry and other fisheries stakeholders as to the basis on which the Crown seeks to recover a proportion of its costs associated with fisheries management from the commercial fishing industry.
Industry stakeholders in particular are frustrated with the cost recovery consultation process which they believe, although extensive, provides them with little opportunity to directly influence and manage their exposure to the cost burdens subsequently imposed upon them. Thus fishers are charged for costs incurred as a result of the Minister of Fisheries' decisions on the services required to manage fisheries and subsequent decisions in respect of from where those services should be purchased. The formation of representative groups by commercial stakeholders is leading to increasing expectations that such groups should be able to directly purchase or provide at least some fisheries management services.
Although the regime was introduced at a time of relatively stable fish prices and a lower value New Zealand dollar, movements in these over the last two years have placed many industry participants in a position of needing to significantly cut costs to survive. The cost recovery regime has become a prime focus for opportunities to achieve this cost reduction. It should also be acknowledged that refinements in the logic and mechanisms by which the costs of fisheries management are allocated and charged have, in an attempt to “sheet costs home” to those that cause them, placed a significantly increased burden on smaller inshore fishers.
It follows that there are continuing and substantive disagreements over the process of allocating percentage shares of outputs and activities between the Crown and industry, particularly in respect of the treatment of the joint costs of outputs such as operational policy advice or the detection of poaching and black market offences. Industry representatives have further maintained that they do not require and, therefore, should not pay for, certain activities despite the fact that they may be required by the Ministry and Minister to discharge their statutory functions.
At a macro level, disagreements over the cost recovery regime have strained Ministry of Fisheries relationships with commercial stakeholders to the extent that progress on a number of issues, including implementation of the Fisheries Act 1996, has been frustrated. In occupying a significant portion of the Ministry's time there is also a danger that the disagreements over cost recovery will drive the department to be increasingly defensive and inward looking.”
10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank CSIRO Publishing, publisher of Marine and Freshwater Research, for permission to reproduce figures, tables and text from that paper. We are also grateful to the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries for access to and permission to use commercial landings data. We thank the many Ministry of Fisheries staff and NIWA colleagues who provided information and insights on shark fisheries, and New Zealand's fisheries management system. S. Hanchet, E. Bradford, L. Paul and J. Stevens made useful comments on an earlier draft of this report.
11. LITERATURE CITED
Allen, R. L. 1975. The catch sampling programme, 1966–77. Fisheries Research Division Information Leaflet 7.9 pp.
Annala, J. H. and K. J. Sullivan (Eds). 1997. Report from the Fishery Assessment Plenary, May 1997: stock assessments and yield estimates. Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington. 381 pp.
Bonfil, R. 1994. Overview of world elasmobranch fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 341. 119 pp.
Bradford, E. 1996. Marine recreational fishing survey in the Ministry of Fisheries North region, 1993– 94. New Zealand Fisheries Data Report 80. 84 pp.
Bradford, E. 1997. Estimated recreational catches from Ministry of Fisheries North Region marine recreational fishing surveys, 1993–94. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/7. 16 pp.
Coakley, A. 1971. The biological and commercial aspects of the elephant fish. I. The commercial fishery. New Zealand Marine Department Fisheries Technical Report 76. 25 pp.
Coakley, A. 1973. A study in the conservation of elephant fish (Callorynchus milii, Bory) in New Zealand. New Zealand Marine Department Fisheries Technical Report 126. 22 pp.
Colenso, W. 1892. Vestiges: reminiscences: memorabilia of works, deeds, and sayings of the ancient Maoris. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 24: 445–67.
Colman, J. A., J. L. McKoy and G.G. Baird (Eds). 1985. Background papers for the 1985 Total Allowable Catch recommendations. Fisheries Research Division, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington. 259 pp.
Cox, G. and M. Francis 1997. Sharks and rays of New Zealand. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch. 68 pp.
Francis, M.P. 1985. Rig. In: Background papers for the 1985 Total Allowable Catch recommendations. (Eds J. A. Colman, J. L. McKoy and G.G. Baird.) pp. 145–69. Fisheries Research Division, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington.
Francis, M. P. 1988. Rig. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 88/24. 19 pp.
Francis, M.P. 1989. Exploitation rates of rig (Mustelus lenticulatus) around the South Island of New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 23: 239–45.
Francis, M.P. 1997. A summary of biology and commercial landings and a stock assessment of rough and smooth skates (Raja nasuta and R. innominata). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/5. 27 pp.
Francis, M.P. 1998: New Zealand shark fisheries: development, size and management. Marine and freshwater research 49(7): 579–591.
Francis, M.P. and R.I.C.C. Francis 1992. Growth, mortality, and yield estimates for rig (Mustelus lenticulatus). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 92/5. 32 pp.
Francis, M.P. and D.W. Smith 1988. The New Zealand rig fishery: catch statistics and composition, 1974–85. New Zealand Fisheries Technical Report 7.30 pp.
Gorman, T.B.S. 1963. Biological and economic aspects of the elephant fish Callorhynchus milii Bory in Pegasus Bay and the Canterbury Bight. New Zealand Marine Department Fisheries Technical Report 8.54 pp.
Graham, D.H. 1956. A treasury of New Zealand fishes. Second edition. Reed, Wellington. 424 pp.
Hamilton, A. 1908. Fishing and sea-foods of the ancient Maori. Dominion Museum Bulletin 2. 73 pp.
Hanchet, S.M. 1986. The distribution and abundance, reproduction, growth and life history characteristics of the spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias Linnaeus) in New Zealand. Ph.D. thesis, University of Otago, Dunedin. 314 pp.
Hanchet, S.M. and J.K.V. Ingerson 1997. A summary of biology and commercial landings, and a stock assessment of spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/6. 46 pp.
Hayes, E. 1996. New Zealand overview. In: The world trade in sharks: a compendium of TRAFFIC's regional studies. pp. 751–90. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge.
Horn, P.L. 1997. Biology and commercial landings and a stock assessment of ghost sharks (Hydrolagus spp.) in New Zealand waters. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/3. 36 pp.
Hurst, R.J., N.W. Bagley, G.A. McGregor and M.P. Francis in prep. Movements of the New Zealand school shark, Galeorhinus galeus, from tag returns. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research.
Johnston, R.G. 1993. Report from the Conversion Factors Working Group and Steering Committee 1992. MAF Fisheries Greta Point Internal Report 201. 171 pp.
Johnston, R.G. 1994. Report from the Conversion Factors Working Group and Steering Committee 1993. MAF Fisheries Greta Point Internal Report 220. 172 pp.
Keene, F. 1963. O te raki. Maori legends of the north. Paul's Book Arcade, Auckland. 196 pp.
King, M.R. 1985. Fish and shellfish landings by domestic fishermen, 1974–82. Fisheries Research Division Occasional Publication: Data Series 20. 96 pp.
King, M.R. 1986. Catch statistics for foreign and domestic commercial fishing in New Zealand waters, January-December, 1983. Fisheries Research Division Occasional Publication: Data Series 21. 150 pp.
King, M.R., D.M. Jones, K.A. Fisher and B.M. Sanders 1987. Catch statistics for foreign and domestic commercial fishing in New Zealand waters, January-December 1984. New Zealand Fisheries Data Report 30. 153 pp.
Mabbett, H. 1977. The rock and the sky. The story of Rodney County. Wilson and Horton, Auckland.
MAF Fisheries 1993. Changes to commercial and amateur fishing regulations. Seafood New Zealand 1(3): 37–9.
Massey, B.R. 1989. The fishery for rig, Mustelus lenticulatus, in Pegasus Bay, New Zealand, 1982–83. New Zealand Fisheries Technical Report 8. 19 pp.
Matthews, R.H. 1910. Reminiscences of Maori life fifty years ago. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 43: 598–605.
McClatchie, S. and P. Lester 1994. Stock assessment of the elephantfish (Callorhinchus milii). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 94/6. 17 pp.
McGregor, G.A., R.W. Voller and A. Coakley 1985. Elephant fish. In: Background papers for the 1985 Total Allowable Catch recommendations. (Eds J.A. Colman, J.L. McKoy and G.G. Baird). pp. 66–73. Fisheries Research Division, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington.
Ministry of Fisheries 1996. Changing Course - Towards Fisheries 2010. Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington.
New Zealand Big Game Fishing Council 1978–1996. New Zealand record big game fishes. New Zealand Big Game Fishing Council.
New Zealand Fishing Industry Board 1994–1996. The New Zealand seafood industry economic review.
New Zealand Fishing Industry Board, Wellington.
Paul, L.J. 1988. School shark. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 88/27. 32 pp.
Ross, A. and K. Bailey 1986. The foreign longline catch of marlins, swordfish, and mako shark in the New Zealand EEZ for 1984. Catch 13 (4–5): 12–6.
Saul, P. and J. Holdsworth 1992. Cooperative gamefish tagging in New Zealand waters, 1975–90. New Zealand Fisheries Technical Report 33. 24 pp.
Seabrook-Davison, M., L.J. Paul and R.J. Hurst 1985. School shark. In: Background papers for the 1985 Total Allowable Catch recommendations. (Eds J.A. Colman, J. L. McKoy and G.G. Baird.) pp. 170–82. Fisheries Research Division, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington.
Strickland, R.R. 1990. Nga tini a Tangaroa, a Maori-English, English-Maori dictionary of fish names. New Zealand Fisheries Occasional Publication 5. 64 pp.
Sullivan, K.J. 1981. Trends in the Canterbury Bight trawl fishery from 1963 to 1976. Fisheries Research Division Occasional Publication 24. 15 pp.
Summers, G. 1987. Squalene - a potential shark by-product. Catch 14(9): 29.
Taylor, R. 1855. Te ika a Maui. Wertheim and McIntosh, London. 490 pp.
Teirney, L.D., A.R. Kilner, R.B. Millar, E. Braford and J.D. Bell 1997. Estimation of recreational harvests from 1991–92 to 1993–94. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/15 43 pp.
Vignaux, M. 1997. CPUE analyses for fishstocks in the Adaptive Management Programme. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document 97/24. 68 pp.
