2 APRIL

NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE

1097

Kai Tikanga O Ngai Tahu Committee, the Fisheries Policy Development and Management Methods Committee and the Ngai Tahu Conservation Board Member for the Otago Conservation Board.

• Mr Simon Gilmour on behalf of Southern Clams supported the formation of a Taiapure on the coast but questioned the effect the management committee of the Taiapure would have on commercial fishing operations.

There were also written submissions in support from The Dunedin City Council and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society.

5. Submissions in Opposition

The following persons made submissions in opposition to the proposal:

• Stewart John McKay, a Karitane resident represented by Counsel Trevor Shields.
• Mr John Vickers, a Karitane resident.
• The New Zealand Fishing Industry Board was represented by Roger Barker at the hearing and the tribunal also received written submissions from D. R. Sykes the technical support co-ordinator for the New Zealand Fishing Industry Board.

6. The Applicants Case

The applicants case was opened by David Ellison and Richard Parata who spoke in general terms about the objectives of the proposal and their desire that the area within the proposed Taiapure be protected and enhanced so that all members of the community could benefit from it. They also saw the Taiapure as a way for local people to have an input into the sustainable management of their fisheries resource.

It was in their view a “win-win” proposal from which the whole community could benefit.

Matt Ellison spoke about the important areas contained within the proposed Taiapure area. Where people lived, where they fished and the type of fish and shellfish that was gathered.

Following the submissions of the applicants, support was received from the Department of Conservation which supported the sustainable management proposal and considered the proposal valuable for the protection of habitats and the survival of species.

It is also important to note that support to the proposal came from commercial fishermen in the form of the Karitane Fishermen’s Association whose spokesman Mac Chapman stated that they saw the Taiapure proposal as a buffer between a complete marine reserve and exploitation under customary fishing rights. Mr Chapman spoke of the uncertainty created by the lack of definition of estuarine and littoral coastal waters in the legislature. He had been involved in setting the boundaries of the area and explained the necessity within the proposal for defined boundaries to be made and hence the reason for the “point to point” definition of the proposed Taiapure area. In his view, the area which has been proposed could not from a commercial fishermen’s point of view affect the areas that they were concerned with.

There was further evidence concerning the area of the proposed Taiapure from Terry Board, a member of the Otakou Runanga, a member of the Fisheries Policy Development and Management Methods Committee for Ngai Tahu and also Ngai Tahu’s conservation board member for the Otago Conservation Board. Mr Broad was also critical of the use of the terms “littoral and estuarine” in the Act saying that they were scientific terms and created uncertainty when attempting to use them to define a geographical area. In his words the terms have got “fuzzy limits” to them.

Further support to the proposal came from Mr Warren Lewis, the president of the Otago Recreational Marine Fishers. He considered that the Taiapure was an important way to restock the shellfish of the area and it allowed recreational fishermen and Maori to work together in the management of in-shore fisheries. He pointed out that locally his organisation represented between 1800–2000 persons.

There was also conditional support from Simon Gilmour of South Clams who agreed with the concept of the Taiapure but was concerned at the impact the Taiapure Management Committee would have on commercial fishers.

On the proposed management structure, submissions were received of the willingness for the committee to comprise members of Kati Huirapa Runanga ki Puketeraki, representatives from Karitane Fishermen’s Association, Otago Recreational Marine Fisher’s Association and also members of the local community and environmental groups. The proposal stressed that the Taiapure would not affect the exercise of current quota holders rights, and that commercial fishers were to be included in the management committee.

7. The Objectors Case

The objectors case essentially came from Mr Stewart McKay and Mr John Vickers, both residents of Karitane in the area immediately adjacent to the proposed Taiapure.

Mr Stewart McKay was represented by Counsel Trevor Shields who in his submission stated that the Taiapure proposal in general terms is in substantial non-compliance with the statutory requirements of the Act and therefore a recommendation should be made to the Minister that no action be taken as a result of the objections and submissions made. The matters raised by Mr Shields in his submission will be dealt with in more detail later in this report.

Mr McKay on his own behalf refers to his time living at Karitane and to a question which was sent out to every household from Purakanui to Waikouaiti to gauge peoples response to the proposed Taiapure. From the 86 percent return of the questionnaire there was a 94.7 percent expression of opposition to the Taiapure. The applicants were very critical of this questionnaire.

Mr Vickers also a local resident did not see the necessity for the Taiapure to be implemented.

The tribunal also received written submissions in opposition from the New Zealand Fishing Industry Board and although the board was represented at the hearing, the submissions were not presented at the hearing.

In essence, the written submissions of D. R. Sykes, technical support co-ordinator for the New Zealand Fishing Industry Board relate to the area applied for being too large and accordingly outside the jurisdiction for the Minister to recommend that such an area be a local fishery. The New Zealand Fishing Industry Board are also concerned with the conflicting statements of intent in regard to commercial harvesting activity within the proposed Taiapure boundaries. These submissions will be referred to in more detail later in this report.

8. The Law

The legislation relating to Taiapure-Local Fisheries is contained in Part IX of the Fisheries Act 1996.

The object of this part of the Act relating to Taiapure-Local Fisheries is contained in section 174 which states:

174. “The object of sections 175 to 185 of this Act is to