The High Court has found the Department of Conservation DoC acted unlawfully for decades by failing to implement its own legislation.
The High Court ruled the Department of Conservation (DoC) acted unlawfully by not implementing its legislation to protect marine species.
Matt Hall of the Environmental Law Initiative says more protected species were killed due to DoC’s “hands off approach”.
Justice Cheryl Gwyn found DoC relied on fisheries laws instead of its own, leading to non-investigation and non-prosecution.
The High Court has found the Department of Conservation (DoC) acted unlawfully for decades by failing to implement its own legislation to protect threatened marine species.
Matthew Hall is the director of research and legal at the Environmental Law Initiative.
Photo / Supplied
Matt Hall of the Environmental Law Initiative – the non-governmental organisation that took the case against DoC – believes more protected species have been killed as a result of the agency’s “hands-off approach” and “narrow” interpretation of the law.
Tāiko (black petrel) are the most at-risk seabird species from commercial fishing. Photo / Ōtorohanga Kiwi House
The most significant finding in the 112-page ruling is that DoC unlawfully failed to set limits on the number of protected species that could be caught by commercial fishing vessels – even though it had the ability to do this.
Having a limit on the number of protected species killed when mistakenly caught by fishing vessels – known as bycatch – would ordinarily trigger the immediate closure of a fishing area.
For example, in Hawaii no more than 16 leatherback turtles can be caught in the longline fishery per year. If numbers exceed this, the fishing ground is shut.
“More individual protected species have probably been caught than would have been had limits been set. I think serious questions need to be asked about such systemic failings and why they have occurred,” Hall told the Herald.
Hector's dolphins in Akaroa Harbour in the South Island.
He said many species including the wandering albatross, black petrel and Hector’s and Māui dolphins would benefit from such protections.
The Herald asked DoC about whether it would make any changes following the ruling, but the agency was unable to say.
“The decision is being carefully considered, no decision has been made on next steps, and DoC remains committed to the conservation of our threatened marine wildlife,” said DoC’s deputy director-general of biodiversity heritage and visitors, Stephanie Rowe.
The High Court’s Justice Cheryl Gwyn also found DoC had an unlawful policy where it relied on fisheries laws – rather than its own – to determine the adequacy of bycatch reports from commercial fishers.
Hall said there was a “big gap” between the reporting by fishers under the Fisheries Act, and that under conservation legislation, the Wildlife Act and Marine Mammals Protection Act.
“We fleshed out quite a large claim alleging various systemic failings with the management and reporting of protecting species bycatch over about two decades in New Zealand.”
Because DoC wasn’t following its own rules, Justice Gwyn subsequently determined it had an unlawful policy of non-investigation and non-prosecution under the Wildlife and Marine Mammals Protection Acts.
Hall said that since the case was launched DoC had been “backfilling” to try to move the reporting regime closer to what the law requires.
He acknowledged DoC had limited resources but hoped the ruling would encourage the agency to use its own legislative tools and take action to address a “serious issue” that’s important to all New Zealanders.
Michael Morrah is a senior investigative reporter/team leader at the Herald. He won the best coverage of a major news event at the 2024 Voyager NZ Media Awards and has twice been named reporter of the year. He has been a broadcast journalist for 20 years and joined the Herald’svideo team in July 2024.
