These marine animals are all absolutely protected species under the Wildlife Act. All have died because of poor industry regulation and failed legislative protection mechanisms that favour business as usual over the protection of these birds and marine animals.
They are not the only marine animals at threat.
We have half the world's whales and dolphins present in our waters, including the rare southern right whale and endemic dolphin species. NZ sea lions are found only in our southern waters, as is the more wide-ranging New Zealand fur seal or kekeno. We're known as the seabird capital of the world, with a third of the 84 seabird species breeding here being found only here, and half the world's albatross species circle our waters.
The critically endangered Maui dolphin numbers just 111. Only 36 fairy tern individuals hang on to survival. Up to 10,000 albatross and petrels drown on tuna long lines each year in New Zealand waters. In the last breeding season, 600 NZ sea lion females failed to return and a third less pups were born.
There are many reasons for the plight of marine animals. Only a massive global effort can reduce climate change impacts on them. Reducing waste and contaminants going into the sea is also an ongoing problem we can deal with locally. With some populations declining, and the eyes of our export markets watching, this is a crucial time to boost biodiversity protection and ensure a sustainable future for our ocean.
The international journal Conservation Biology published a comprehensive review of more than 24,000 scientific publications related to conservation in the Oceanic region. This report was compiled by 14 scientists.
In that report the lead author, Professor Richard Kingsford of the University of New South Wales, described the Pacific region as having the notorious distinction of possibly the worst extinction record on earth. He went on to say that species are being threatened by habitat loss and degradation, invasive species, climate change, overexploitation, pollution and wildlife disease.
Today we see the National Government allow those threats to continue unabated. I note that despite making calls, I was not contacted by the Minister of Conservation about my bill - it was the Minister of Fisheries who advised me of the National Governments decision to vote against marine animal protection. The conservation of key, vulnerable marine wildlife is clearly not in the hands of the Minister of Conservation.
This poses serious problems for the supposed BlueGreen group within the National Party. They clearly have no influence over their government. As a group of environmentalists within National they are obviously impotent. And I am truly sorry about that. I have meet members of the National Party who are Bluegreen members and I know that they are passionate and committed to achieving real environmental and conservation gains. But they operate within a party that will use them and their genuine concern as greenwash.
National will no doubt make the false argument of environment vs economy. This demonstrates an extraordinary economic deficit in their thinking, though a common one from governments.
One comment from the lead author of the Conservation report was that " The biggest problem seems to be that the policy challenges are just not being taken up by governments. Conservation policies are just seen as a problem for the economy,".
But that is clearly not the case, especially in the protection of marine animals. Marine tourism is estimated to generate more than $100 million a year to New Zealand. The fishing industry is under increasing pressure from our markets to reduce its environmental impact - the New Zealand brand itself is at risk.
Last week the Upmarket grocery chain Waitrose refused to stock New Zealand hoki because the "destructive" method of bottom trawling did not fit with its sustainable suppliers programme. The hoki fishery is New Zealand's largest deep water fishery with $151 million in exports last year.
If we are to sustain our economy in difficult times we must invest now in measures to protect the resources on which it is based. The economic argument for greater conservation measures is clear - even the less than engaged Minister of Conservation thinks so, when he said
"Biodiversity has positive economic value and removing or degrading it, threatens the ecosystem it supports and the ecosystem services that flow from that. Tourism focused on marine mammal experiences, for example, must be monitored and controlled to ensure the animals are protected and the business opportunity endures.
Even the Prime Minister waxed lyrical about it saying,
"Our environment is a huge part of our brand… The Government will work to protect the resources that tourism providers rely on - clean air, clean water, and unique landscapes."
Well maybe, but clean air without sea birds and albatross, clean water without marine mammals and Maui dophins and landscapes without the little blue penguin and the fairy tern - in short a nice clean environment devoid of unique NZ marine species on whom that brand is dependent.
My bill provides one option for how to reform our legislative tools to provide greater protection for marine animals such as those who photos I have shown. It is quite technical in that it alters three Acts (Marine Mammals, Fisheries and Wildlife), to strengthen definitions, set clear objectives and principles for protection, and require proper monitoring. It alters both the legal tests in the Acts (in so far as marine animals are concerned) and the relative powers of the Ministers of Conservation and Fisheries in developing population management plans.
The direct interactions of marine animals with human activity on the sea, like fishing, mining, and tourism, can be managed directly through legislative instruments. The Marine Mammals Protection Act 1974 is designed to do that, but unfortunately it hasn't, and is subservient to the Fisheries Act. The powerful tool of population management plans in the MMPA has yet to be used. Too much power lies with the Fisheries Minister and a Fisheries Act that is biased towards utilisation.
This is the position that National clearly favours, to the detriment of our $100 million marine tourism industry, to the detriment of access to the global markets and to the detriment of vulnerable NZ marine species whose are at real risk of extinction under the National government.
Kevin Hague speaks to this Bill
Metiria replies to the speeches from other parties on this Bill
Subscribe to email newsletters
