Ken Shirley: Neutral footing needed for venture into marine farming

Ken Shirley

Opinion

Both commercial and recreational fishing are key components of the economy and lifestyle. Regrettably, we all know that fish stocks are depleted and becoming scarcer, reflecting the increased fishing effort and sophisticated technology used to hunt them down.

Ancient man formed small groups of nomadic hunters capturing animals and foraging for grains and berries. Some 4000 years ago, the agricultural revolution saw a progressive conversion to permanent cultivation and animal husbandry. In turn, this enabled large villages and townships to be sustained and we had the dawn of civilisation.

When we look at our marine resources, we are still acting like those ancient hunters and gatherers, chasing wild stocks. This is acceptable for recreational fishing, where the objective is the thrill and enjoyment of the hunt, just as it is for pig hunting or deer stalking.

But when we turn to large-scale commercial fishing, the future must involve a much greater emphasis on marine farming.

Fishing industry sources claim that aquaculture could be earning more than $2 billion by 2020, yet we are bumbling along with an infant industry lacking the levels of investment required.

Green-lipped mussel and salmon ranching have proven successful, along with oysters and scallop re-seeding. Compared with Chile and elsewhere, however, our aquacultural development has been minuscule, and we must ask ourselves why.

In New Zealand, successive governments have struggled to put in place a satisfactory licensing and permit regime for marine farming. We have had convoluted and inconsistent approval processes with a plethora of conflicting management agencies.

Regional councils, the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries have all been dabbling under the umbrella of the Resource Management Act. Because it all got too hard, the Government, influenced by the Greens, slapped a two-year moratorium on all aquaculture approvals. This moratorium was extended for a further year and is expected to expire shortly.

The Government's response has been to cobble together an appallingly inadequate piece of legislation, the Aquaculture Reform Bill, with the intention of ramming it through under urgency in the last parliamentary week before Christmas.

All forms of successful farming are based on clearly defined property rights and security of tenure. There is no incentive to raise a mortgage, invest time and capital, and withstand the elements to produce a crop for harvest if you cannot benefit from the fruits of your labour.

Zimbabwe, under Robert Mugabe, is learning that lesson the hard way, just as all other forms of state-sponsored collectivised farming have failed throughout the years.

Unfortunately, the Government thinks it knows better. For some mysterious reason it believes that Maori should, as of right, be granted 20 per cent of all aquacultural licences, and that existing marine farmers should provide the space within the authorised aquacultural marine areas.

This is a recipe for ongoing disputes and litigation between iwi over rohe boundaries. It will also result in fragmented and disparate parcels. Apart from these concerns, why should existing marine farmers have to diminish their property right to meet the Government's agenda?

Imagine the outcry if land-based farmers were told they had to give up 20 per cent of their farm because the government of the day thought it was a good idea to give it to iwi groups. The cynical could be excused for concluding that the Government's only motivation is political appeasement for its disastrous foreshore and seabed legislation.

In 1992 we had a full and final Treaty of Waitangi settlement of all commercial fishing claims by Maori. All statutory definitions of fishing include all forms of aquaculture and marine farming. Today Maori are dominant in the commercial fishing industry, having received assets worth $1 billion. There is no outstanding treaty obligation to fulfil in commercial fishing.

We have had a good outcome with the Maori fisheries settlement, but we should stick with the 1992 full and final settlement. Maori interests can stump up along with all other New Zealanders on a neutral footing to invest in this exciting new industry. We do not want apartheid aquaculture.

* Ken Shirley is an Act MP and former Minister of Fisheries.