SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER EEL HABITAT AND FISHERIES Progress Report Office of the PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSIONER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT Te Kaitiaki Taiao a Te Whare P_remata P.O. Box 10-241 Wellington December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER EEL HABITAT AND FISHERIES 1 2.1 Traditional eel fishery 1 2.2 Commercial eel fishery 3 2.3 Recreational eel fishery 5 2.4 Management of eel habitat 5 2.5 Legislative review 7 3 PUBLIC AUTHORITY EEL FISHERY MANAGEMENT REGIMES IN OTHER COUNTRIES WITH ANGUILLA SPECIES 7 4 OTHER MATTERS 8 4.1 Migration of sufficient fecund females 8 4.2 Pond culture 8 5 SUMMARY 9 Tables Table 1: Statutory responsibilities for management of freshwater eel habitat and eel fishery 2
SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER EEL HABITAT AND FISHERIES PROGRESS REPORT 22 December 1994 1 INTRODUCTION This report arose in response to public concern about the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries. The administrative and legal structures and processes for the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries was examined with the aim to identify any shortcomings. A brief survey was also conducted on public authority eel fishery management regimes in other countries with Anguilla species to identify any useful models for New Zealand. There are some current developments which could affect the future management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries and it was considered timely to highlight the issues to be resolved. Agency progress in resolving these issues satisfactorily will continue to be monitored. 2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER EEL HABITAT AND FISHERIES Table 1 outlines the current statutory responsibilities for the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries in New Zealand. These responsibilities are discussed below. 2.1 Traditional eel fishery Eels are an extremely important traditional food for Maori (not all iwi were sea fishers, but all had access to eels). In many areas iwi now find them hard to get, in their opinion largely because of commercial exploitation. Eels are a significant fishery issue with iwi, with many arguing that tangata whenua should control eel harvest in their area. Before eels can be put into the Quota Management System (QMS), the issue of "traditional harvest" must be resolved. Under the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992, the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries must provide for Maori non-commercial traditional and customary fishing rights and interests. It must also provide for Maori participation in management and conservation of New Zealand's fisheries.
2 TABLE 1: STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER EEL HABITAT AND EEL FISHERY Department of Conservation Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Regional Councils Preservation of all indigenous freshwater fisheries Protection of freshwater fish habitats s.6(ab) Conservation Act 1987 ss.4,5 National Parks Act 1980 s.3 Reserves Act 1977 Protection of recreational freshwater fisheries Protection of traditional fisheries Provision for Maori according to principles of Treaty of Waitangi ss. 4, 6(ab), 26ZH Conservation Act 1987 Preparation of Management Plans for freshwater fisheries and Conservation Management Strategies for areas managed by DOC ss. 17D, 17J Conservation Act 1987 Promotion of conservation of freshwater fish and their habitats s. 6 (b)-(f) Conservation Act 1987 Regulation of freshwater fisheries and fish passes ss. 17(1)(f), 48, 48A Conservation Act 1987 Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983 Prohibition of discharge of contaminants, into conservation area water bodies, that affect freshwater fish and their food (where not covered by water consents and other approvals). s. 39 Conservation Act 1987 Regulation of eels transfer (eg elvers upstream) to sites where do not already exist or to DOC estate s.26zm (3) Conservation Act 1987 Management of commercial eel fishery ss. 63, 89(1) Fisheries Act 1983 Fisheries (Commercial Fishing) Regulations 1986 Prescription of quota with loose sustainability provisions for species subject to quota fishing (eels not subject to quota, but no legal impediment and has been proposed) s.89(1)g Fisheries Act 1983 Regulation of non-commercial eel fishery - recreational - traditional (including harvest for hui and tangi) ss.89 (1),(1C),(3)(b),3A,3B Fisheries Act 1983 Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 1986 Reserving Maori eel fishing areas - Lake Horowhenua, Hokio Stream Fisheries (Central Area Commercial Fishing) Regulations 1986 - Lake Forsyth Fisheries (Southeast Area Amateur Fishing) Regulations 1986 - Power to declare mataitai areas s. 89(1C)(b) Fisheries Act 1983 Regulation of freshwater fish farming s. 91 Fisheries Act 1983 Freshwater Fish Farming Regulations 1983 Regulation of eel restocking or transfer between islands s.26zm (2) Conservation Act 1987 Provision for Maori non-commercial traditional fishing Provision for Maori participation in management and Protection of life-supporting capacity of water and ecosystems; Protection of significant habitats of indigenous fauna ss. 5-7 Resource Management Act 1991 Restriction of - use of coastal marine area - certain uses of beds of lakes and rivers - change or obstruction of natural water flow - discharge of contaminants or water into water ss. 12,13,14,15 Resource Management Act 1991 All land in the region is subject to National Policy Statements, NZ Coastal Policy Statement and general law.
conservation of New Zealand's fisheries Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 3
The Minister of Fisheries intends to resolve the issue of whether the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 ought to cover freshwater fisheries (iwi claim that in negotiations they never agreed to this, but the final drafting of the statute includes all fish). If the Act does cover eels, then eels go into the QMS, iwi get 20% of the TACC, and some "mataitai" (traditional harvest reserves) may be negotiated. If the Act doesn't apply, Waitangi Tribunal claims may pertain, and the forthcoming report on the Whanganui River may set some precedent. Consultation with iwi for development of mataitai regulations now excludes explicit consideration of eels, but it is felt that generic procedures could still apply.. Regulation 27 of the Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 1986 provide for customary harvest in relation to hui and tangi. There are several sites reserved exclusively for iwi harvesting. The Department of Conservation is required under section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 to interpret and administer the Act so as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Given the cultural significance of eels to Maori, the Department of Conservation has acknowledged its responsibility to assist in rehabilitating the eel resource to a state acceptable to iwi, where the present condition has been habitat deterioration or over-fishing. 2.2 Commercial eel fishery The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is responsible for the management of the commercial eel fishery. It provides commercial fishers with permits and allocates stocks. It is responsible for determining sustainability of the resource and ensuring compliance with the harvesting laws. Freshwater eels (shortfinned and longfinned) have been identified by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries as among the top 12 priority species for inclusion in the Quota Management System (QMS). There are, however, some six to ten species ahead of eels in the queue, and it will be at least 18 months to two years before this can be finalised. Data on eels is insufficient to develop a Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) based on recruitment and growth rates, so it will be based on historical commercial catch. After a big increase and crash since the 1970s, the catch rate has levelled off over about the last ten years. However, all of our catch data is within the lifetime of one adult eel so we don't really know what is happening long-term. There are no plans to gather better data; every catchment has different growth rates, collection of recruitment and adult spawning data would be expensive, and we have no "before commercial exploitation" data for the baseline. Similar to Orange Roughy, eels are a long-lived species (shortfinned females typically take 20 years to reach sexual maturity; longfinned females 53 years) but unlike the other species put into the QMS the eels must have access upstream as young and to the sea as adults to ensure replenishment of stocks. Because eels are subject to fishing pressure over many years before
they reach maturity, many may not survive to breed. Dams and weirs block migration, and wetland drainage has reduced habitat. Anecdotal evidence suggests both spawning runs and elver returns in at least some areas are much reduced on earlier years and the average size of captured eels has significantly reduced. The parents of shortfinned young entering New Zealand streams may be from both New Zealand and elsewhere (Australia, South Pacific) but longfinned eels are endemic and if New Zealand doesn't protect recruitment no one else will. However, the relationship between adult numbers and recruitment rates is unknown. Apart from restricting the number and general harvest area of fishers, minimum sizes, and net specifications as "interim" measures, there is no control over the commercial harvest of eels, and enforcement of these few controls is a very low priority with MAF. None of these controls protect breeding adults or ensure recruitment of young. Unless specific "input" or other controls are developed, when eels go into the QMS all that will be controlled is the total tonnage taken commercially. Pilot negotiations currently underway with MAF, Ngai Tahu and commercial fishers will address means of protecting traditional access to eels, but may or may not address mechanisms to protect eel recruitment. It is not clear whether any eel biologists are to be involved in working with iwi to develop these programmes. A similar pilot scheme is being sought by MAF for the Tainui area. The process for setting the TACC presently involves industry and scientists, but iwi are not really resourced to participate or get their own scientific advice within their cultural context, and are not routinely kept fully informed of proceedings. Introduction of eels into the QMS may not be very satisfactory if the stock areas are large which they almost certainly will be until knowledge of local stocks and fishing yields is improved. Some rivers will be fished much more heavily than others within a stock area. These are most likely to be the rivers most favoured by Maori and recreational fishers. Also, the eel fishery is likely to remain to one side in the QMS process, a system designed and run primarily for the commercial marine fisheries. A reasonable option, therefore, may be for iwi to manage eels, either within QMS or otherwise. If commercial fishing is kept out of mataitai areas, and upstream and downstream migration access is kept open, sustainable eel fishery areas may be created. However, there is no guarantee whether or where mataitai will be established, and whether there will be sufficient resources and powers (available to iwi or others) to provide adequate protection. Interaction between MAF Policy and Fisheries Biologists It appears that unless the consultation process between MAF Policy and fisheries biologists is formalised, it will be ad hoc and inadequate. It is important to ensure that the MAF Policy decision-makers receive sufficient advice from the eel biologists before setting up any new management regime for eels and also when assessing eels as a QMS species.
2.3 Recreational eel fishery The protection of the recreational eel fishery is the responsibility of the Department of Conservation. This function is given effect through its promotion of conservation of freshwater fish habitats throughout the country. However, the management of the recreational eel fishery is split between the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Department of Conservation (see Table 1). The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries administers the Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 1986 while the Department of Conservation administers the Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is also responsible for compliance with the recreational harvesting regulations. Eel fishery management cf. whitebait fishery management Whitebait, like eels, are native freshwater species with a marine migratory phase. Under s.62(2)(a) Fisheries Act, all whitebait fishing is treated as recreational fishing and is administered by DOC under the Whitebait Fishing Regulations 1991 and the Fisheries (West Coast Whitebait Fishing) Regulations 1985. Whitebait can be taken for "any purpose" (including sale) but fishing methods and times are regulated. This contrasts with the commercial eel fishery being managed by MAF and the regulation of the non-commercial eel fishery being shared between MAF and DOC. 2.4 Management of eel habitat Department of Conservation's responsibilities The Department of Conservation is responsible for the protection of freshwater habitats. This function is being implemented through the drafting of Conservation Management Strategies (CMS) for areas under DOC's jurisdiction which will identify areas where it is inappropriate for eel permits to be given. Under statute the Department of Conservation has the responsibility for protecting native freshwater fish habitat and can protect habitat within DOC-controlled lands, but not access to and from the sea or habitat over the rest of the country. They can act as advocates in commenting on plans and consents under the Resource Management Act, but may not be notified of all relevant plan changes or applications if the regional council is not aware of implications for native freshwater species. Local Authority Responsibilities Local authorities have statutory responsibilities that impinge on the eel resource. In particular,
the Resource Management Act promotes sound water and catchment management that can influence eel habitat and productivity.
As discussed in our Whakaki Lagoon report (March 1993), loss of seasonally flooding wetland has probably been the most serious detriment to eel habitat. Both private action and Crown subsidy have encouraged this in the past. Wetland drainage continues at a smaller scale today under permitted use or consent under the Resource Management Act. Regional Councils have the power to grant consents for impeding natural water flow. It appears that it varies from Council to Council how much they understand and routinely provide for the habitat needs of eels in preparing plans or granting such consents. Management Problems Arising from DOC/MAF/Regional Council split The shared responsibilities for the management of eels and eel habitat will only work if there is adequate interaction between the agencies concerned. At the regional level this interaction must take place between the regional council, DOC Conservancy and the MAF district office. It appears from a limited survey that this ranges from no interaction at all concerning the management of eels and eel habitat to full sharing of information between DOC and MAF fisheries databases and Regional Council monitoring results. Provision of eel passes around dams and weirs The Minister of Conservation now has the power to require fish passes in new dam construction, but most of our hydroelectric dams have already been built (by the Crown) without them. With the dams now owned by a State-owned Enterprise, there are no provisions for the Crown to correct this damage to eel habitat retrospectively, but the Minister of Fisheries has tried getting ECNZ to agree to voluntary action. Fish passes are required both upstream (returning young) and downstream (migrating breeding stock). So far we only have a few upstream passes; for example, at Lake Waikare in the Waikato. At Lake Manapouri the young can now get in, but the adults get killed in the penstocks trying to get out. Most of the lake areas in parks and reserves have access to and from the sea blocked. Eels in lakes are largely long-finned eels (New Zealand the only source of breeding adults). Capture and transfer of migrating elvers that come up against and would otherwise die on barriers (eg Karapiro Dam) has been initiated on a small scale, on the initiative of the commercial fishers seeking to enhance stock upstream. The permits are given by MAF for within-catchment transfer, by DOC for cross-catchment transfer.
2.5 Legislative review Fisheries Bill The Fisheries Bill was introduced on 6 December 1994 and does not specifically cover the eel fishery. The legislation dealing with the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries should be reviewed to determine whether: - the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries should be under one agency - upper size limits for commercially harvested eels of each species should be set - more areas should be designated to be free from commercial eel fishing, including migratory access to and from the sea. 3 PUBLIC AUTHORITY EEL FISHERY MANAGEMENT REGIMES IN OTHER COUNTRIES WITH ANGUILLA SPECIES Overseas eel management trends were investigated, in case some useful models could be found. The findings were not encouraging. The trend in Europe and Japan (principal eel fishing areas overseas) is for "significant decline" in catches of both adult eels and glass eels and increasing dependence on pond culture without emphasis on management controls to protect the two migratory phases and ensure adequate recruitment. Some countries have "input" management controls like New Zealand: net restrictions, minimum size limits, entry of fishers into industry. Countries running out of enough wild-caught glass eels or elvers to stock their ponds (particularly Japan) just import from elsewhere. The overseas research effort is principally on pond culture (mostly physiology and disease but also attempting to get them to breed in captivity) rather than management of wild stocks. The Europeans have also had long-standing problems with dams blocking migratory access for elvers, a subsequent decline in the eel fishery, and creation of eel ladders or elver transfer programmes to successfully reinstate the eel populations upstream. Apparently there has also been some work overseas on access of migrating adults back downstream too (NZ has only a few elver passes going upstream). There is some suggestion that the decline in the European and American eel stocks (which share a common breeding ground in the Sargasso Sea) can be correlated with a northward migration of the Gulf Stream; this factor may combine with fishing pressure and physical disruption of habitat. This does not explain the Japanese decline.
The commercial eel fishery in Australia is not as well developed as in New Zealand and has unique problems such as by-catch of platypus in the fyke nets. 4 OTHER MATTERS 4.1 Migration of sufficient fecund females Female eels are older and larger than males on migration. The larger they are the more fecund they are and have better fat reserves to successfully survive the long sea migration. In Lake Ellesmere heavy fishing pressure and habitat decline have coincided with a decrease in size of eels caught, migrating adults caught and in the proportion of males migrating to sea (92%). If this trend is repeated nationwide, the impact in the long term may be significant. 4.2 Pond culture This is well developed overseas, and with declining catches of wild eels may now be economic for New Zealand (it wasn't when tried in the early 1970s). Electricity Corporation of New Zealand (ECNZ) has recently contracted the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) to look at the economics and technical feasibility of using thermal effluent from power stations (and presumably elvers rescued from an ECNZ dam) to support pond culture. Results are about a year off. It must be remembered that pond culture is not a substitute for sustainable management of wild eel stocks; they don't breed in captivity, and the ponds must be stocked with wild-caught glass eels or elvers. However, it could be a substitute for commercial exploitation (eg: reserve wild stocks for traditional harvest and to protect migratory phases).
5 SUMMARY Sustainable management of a commercial eel fishery is hampered by lack of biological data. Eel habitat management is split between agencies with limited powers over most eel habitat (Department of Conservation) and limited understanding of eel biology (regional and district councils). There do not appear to be any useful models for public authority eel fishery management regimes in other countries with Anguilla species. Resolution of traditional harvest rights issues with iwi must precede changes to the present management regime, and pilot negotiations are underway. Steps required (a) Determine whether the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 ought to cover freshwater fisheries (MAF) (b) (c) Complete pilot study negotiations between MAF, Ngai Tahu and commercial fishers,and possibly also with Tainui (MAF) Review the legislation dealing with the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries to determine whether: - the management of freshwater eel habitat and fisheries should be under one agency - upper size limits for commercially harvested eels of each species should be set - more areas should be designated to be free from commercial eel fishing, including migratory access to and from the sea. (d) (e) (f) (g) Resource iwi and eel biologists' collaboration on management methods and setting TACC (MAF) Proactively protect eel habitat (Regional Councils) Develop eel passes around dams and weirs for both up-stream and down-stream passage (ECNZ/MAF/DOC) and organise catchment transfers (MAF/DOC/eel processing companies) Support research at the regional level to determine different growth rates and collect recruitment and adult spawning data (DOC/MAF)