View
217
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
The Challenge and Strength of Rock Lobster Governance in New Zealand
Tracy Yandle
Emory University
tyandle@emory.edu
Tracy
Thank You’s
New Zealand Rock Lobster Industry Council Daryl Sykes (NZ RLIC)Helen Regan (NZ RLIC)University Research Committee (Emory University)
OverviewFishery DescriptionHistory of Rock Lobster Management
Regulatory SummaryKey Events in Developing Co-ManagementWhy Co-Management Developed
Organization of Rock Lobster Co-Management
Effects of Rock Lobster Co-ManagementLessonsChallenges
Fishery Description
Small vessels (potting) fishing into large processing & export companies
3rd largest seafood exportITQ management supplemented with
co-management
History: Rock Lobster Regulatory Summary
Years Event
1937-1980 Permitted Fishing & Input Controls
1977-1979 Moratorium on of new permits
1980 –1990 Controlled Fishery
1986 QMS introduced into finfish & paua (abalone)
1991 Introduction of rock lobster into QMS
1996 Formation of CRAMACs and NZ RLIC, formation of SeaFIC
1999 Legislation passes allowing fishery management plans/co-management
History: Catch & CPUE
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1945
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1980
-198
1
1982
-198
3
1984
-198
5
1986
-198
7
1988
-198
9
1990
-199
1
1992
-199
3
1994
-199
5
1996
-199
7
1998
-199
9
2000
-200
1
Cat
ch (
ton
nes
)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
CP
UE
(kg
/po
tlif
t)
Catch
CPUE
1977-1980 --Permit Moratorium
Pre-1977-Permitted Fishing & Input Controls
1980-1990 Controlled Fishery Licences
1991 - ITQs Introduced
1996 -- NZRLIC & regional orgs formed
1999 - Legislation allow s co-management
1937 - Introduction of Permited Fishing
History: Developing Rock Lobster Co-Management
Years Event
Historical Background
1980s Debate over ITQ management
1991 Rock Lobster enters ITQ management
1991 Natl Rock Lobster Steering Group
1992-now Natl Rock Lobster Management Group
1993-5 Supplemental Enforcement Initiative
1993 CRA 3 Harvest Strategy
1994 Cost Recover Begins
Mid 1990s-now Data Gathering Initiatives
1996 Formation of NZ RLIC
1999 Legal Recognition of Co-Management
Why Did Co-Management Develop?
Social CapitalTradition of involvement in fisheryInvolvement institutionalized through government’s
and fishers’ actions
Property RightsITQs expanding perception property rightsProvided incentive to take on management
responsibilities
Organization of Rock Lobster Co-Management (1)
9 CRAMACs regional organizationsHeart of rock lobster co-managementCharacteristics vary by region
Membership & voting rulesPressure & interactions from other interestsActivities
Develop own projects and cooperate with NZ RLIC projects
Organization of Rock Lobster Co-Management (2)
Rock Lobster Industry Council (NZ RLIC) CRAMACs appoint representatives to NZ RLIC board Voting and contribution proportionate to regional TACC Funded through levy Provides representation, technical assistance, & coordination to
CRAMACs Research provider to Ministry of Fisheries
New Zealand Seafood Industry Council (SeaFIC) Stakeholder groups (e.g., NZ RLIC) are shareholders Provides generic advice and advocacy for seafood industry Employs research scientists who contract with NZ RLIC for
stock assessment research
Effects of Co-Management
OutputsCatch is downCPUE is upStock is sustainable (given uncertainty)BUT – what is effect of ITQ vs co-management???
Management ProcessIncreased participation by fishers and industryDocumented at national and regional levelsParticipation in rule-making increases compliance &
robustness of regime
Lessons
Development of co-management was long-term process
Social capital AND property rights vitalLong-term policies encouraging these
characteristics may be more useful than quick regulatory change in a vacuum
Challenges
Separation of catching rights from ownership rights
Need to define ALL extractors’ rightsBoth issues threaten incentives to
participate in co-management
Questions?
Recommended