4866

NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE, No. 194

18 NOVEMBER 2005

their views made sense. We were therefore minded to accommodate those views as
far as possible, consistent with the equally valid concerns and aspirations of the
applicant rūnaka.

(b)

A marine reserve would more reliably produce important environmental outcomes

The land adjacent to Dan Rogers contains two of the three remnant breeding
populations of the environmentally “endangered”⁴⁶ white-flippered penguin. This
species is endemic to Banks Peninsula. The proposed marine reserve is the entry and
exit point for breeding birds. Because a marine reserve is a no-go zone for fishers, it
would afford better protection than a taiāpure for this species: there would be no set
netting, and the feeding grounds immediately adjacent to the breeding areas would be
replenished.

It was also argued that a marine reserve would more effectively ensure the ongoing
protection of marine diversity in the Harbour. Although there is another marine
reserve in the vicinity – at Pōhatu, just outside the Harbour entrance – a reserve at
Dan Rogers would protect another kind of marine environment, and ensure the
preservation of an area within the harbour.

(c)

Taiāpure are first and foremost a management tool for customary fisheries

The success of taiāpure as a conservation measure is unknown at this point, as no
relevant studies of existing taiāpure have been undertaken. While taiāpure may deliver
good conservation outcomes, equally they may not. Although rāhui may be declared
over parts of a taiāpure to prevent fishing for short or even long periods, the “no-take”
premise of marine reserves will better ensure the long-term protection of the marine
environment in a small but important portion of Akaroa Harbour. Essentially, a
taiāpure is a management tool for use, whereas a marine reserve is a tool
for preservation and protection. If the Harbour’s marine environment requires
preservation and protection (and we were assured that it does), then a marine reserve
is the better and more reliable tool to use.

Taiāpure are managed by committee. Because it is proposed that the committee for
this taiāpure will have on it representatives of the recreational fishing lobby, as well
as commercial fishing interests, it was suggested that it may be difficult in practice
for the committee to deliver on a purely conservationist agenda for any area of
appreciable size, or for any lengthy period.

(d)

A marine reserve and taiāpure both operating within the Harbour will be
complementary

A marine reserve is a no-take zone for fishers, and although not designed as a
fisheries enhancement tool, in fact it is likely that a marine reserve would enhance
fish stocks in areas immediately adjacent to the reserve, and possibly even throughout
the harbour. A “spill-over” effect, where enhanced fish stocks within the reserve give
rise to bigger catches of larger fish by fishers in its vicinity, is a phenomenon that has
been observed wherever reserves have been studied.

The notion that a taiāpure and a contiguous marine reserve could operate as effective
and complementary management tools for the marine environment was not really
challenged by any of the submitters. Mike Cuddihy, of the Department of
Conservation, stressed to us that a taiāpure will always have inherent in it an element

⁴⁶ On the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) scale, an “endangered”
species is closer to extinction than a “vulnerable” species, but less threatened than a “critically endangered”
species.