Community based marine management in practice – the West Coast example Rebecca McLeod Feb 09

No Comments

The South Island’s West Coast Marine Protection Forum looks set to be the first region to put a marine protected area (MPA) proposal to the Government under the new(ish) MPA Policy and Implementation Plan, with the group recently wrapping up an extensive consultation process. The proposal that was put out for public comment outlined four main sites and five smaller areas for a range of protection measures including marine reserves and fisheries act protected areas, contained within the area from just north of Karamea to just south of Haast. More than 1100 submissions were received, signaling that New Zealanders really care about this relatively remote part of the country.

The proposed network of marine protected areas that was put out for consultation last year

The proposed network of marine protected areas that was put out for public consultation last year

The process has been a lengthy one with the forum, which includes a wide range of stakeholders (fishers, iwi, environmental groups, tourism etc.), being established five years ago. The MPA Policy and Implementation Plan encourages a community-based approach to marine management, and was established following the successful introduction of the Fiordland Marine Management Area by the stakeholder group The Guardians of Fiordland in 2005. The Labour-led Government obviously believed that this community-led initiative was more likely to result in successful MPA introductions than the traditional “top down” approach where the Department of Conservation (DoC) proposed sites for future reserves and often faced intense public opposition.

Whilst I am very supportive of the new approach, I have in the past voiced concerns about the degree to which scientific knowledge of the marine environment will be considered during the decision making process. I was initially quite alarmed to see that the West Coast Forum did not contain any marine scientists. However, a trawl through the minutes of the forum meetings revealed that members did indeed seek advice and briefings from scientists including those from DoC, the Ministry of Fisheries and NIWA. Scientists nationwide were also given the opportunity to comment during the public consultation process. The West Coast forum was established prior to the new policy, and so future regional groups will be required to have at least one scientist on each committee.

Being a remote and wild stretch of coast, it is perhaps not surprising that the level of scientific knowledge and understanding about marine life and ecosystem functioning in this region is not as high as other parts of the country. In days gone, opponents used such knowledge gaps to argue against marine protection. The new system is based on habitat classification, as it is widely accepted that species assemblages are largely predicted by physical features of habitat such as substratum type (sand, reef etc.) and water depth. Such information is relatively easy to obtain, and a spread of MPAs among different habitat types makes protection more inclusive, and provides for species that migrate among different habitat types during their life cycle. The proposal on the West Coast therefore includes, among other habitats, estuaries, coastal and offshore reefs and sand flats.

The West Coast process is far from settled – now that the submissions have been analyzed, the proposal will be modified accordingly prior to being submitted to Minter’s of Fisheries and Conservation for consideration. The members of this forum deserve credit for putting in the years of hard work, debate and consultation. Unfortunately, on a national level we are far from 10% by 2010, but at least things are moving in the right direction.

Science in danger of being diluted in marine reserve decisions Rebecca McLeod Feb 02

3 Comments

In light of recent marine protection developments on the South Island’s West Coast, I have reposted a piece I wrote for the Science Media Centre back in 2008. I will write more soon about the West Coast – I am still trying to figure out the extent to which scientific information guided the decision making process there.

I recently went to a talk by Kim Hill entitled “Is science something we should fear?”

Being a scientist, I thought Kim was joking. Why would the public not value and embrace the knowledge and lessons learned by people that in essence, spend their time trying to better understand and improve the world? It started me thinking about the role that scientists should have in guiding decisions about how we manage our environment, in particular our coastal marine areas.

New Zealand has an excellent reputation for marine conservation, due to initiatives including our quota management system and the growing numbers of marine reserves. The Government is currently developing a framework that will essentially allow locals to decide how they want marine protection measures to proceed around their coasts.

This move is occurring partly in response to very vocal opposition to proposed marine reserves in some parts of the country. The idea is that by involving the community in the decision process, people will have a vested interest in the outcomes, resulting in a higher level of support for the introduced protection measures.

The framework for these local groups will be similar to that of the Fiordland Marine Guardians; a group of “stakeholders” (e.g. fishers, tangata whenua, tourism operators etc.), who proposed a series of conservation measures to be established in the fjords. Following many years of discussion, negotiation, and compromise, the Guardians presented a proposal to Parliament in 2003, and in 2005 the Fiordland Marine Management Act was established. The protection measures include 10 marine reserves, reductions in recreational quota, and restrictions on commercial fishing areas, anchoring etc. These decisions were guided by the expert opinion and knowledge of a marine ecologist from Otago University.

In February 2008 the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries released an implementation strategy for this new regional approach to marine management. The document outlines how a forum of up to 14 stakeholders will be appointed in each of the defined regions in NZ. These stakeholders will encompass tangata whenua, commercial fishers, recreational users, conservation groups, tourism operators, aquaculture industry, minerals industry… and scientists.

It will be the task of each forum to reach a consensus on areas to be proposed for marine protection, and make recommendations of what the protection measures should involve. Each of the stakeholders will have equal status in discussions and decision-making. This is the part that concerns me.

Processes that occur in the marine environment and marine ecosystems are inherently complex and can vary significantly over small distances, and also over time. The effectiveness of protection measures are likely to be dependent upon what they consist of, where they are placed, and how big an area they cover.

For example, in the fjords it appears that the new marine reserves are differing in their ability to “recover”. In Doubtful Sound, we have found that changes in crayfish numbers can be related to the amount of food that is available at each location. Near the output of the Manapouri hydroelectric power station, where increased freshwater has led to a decline in mussels and other clams (crayfish food), crayfish are not recovering.

In contrast, in other marine reserves where there is plenty of crayfish food, crayfish numbers are rapidly increasing. This is just one of many examples that demonstrate the success of a marine protected area (MPA) can vary significantly depending on its location, shape and size.

Whilst it is incredibly important to have the support of the local community for MPAs, it is equally, if not more important to get the characteristics of the MPA correct in the first place. Otherwise, it is possible that no amount of protection will lead to “recovery” of the marine ecosystem. To increase the likelihood of designing an MPA that is going to be effective, management recommendations put forward by the regional forums need to critically evaluate all reliable knowledge and data pertaining to the marine environment in question.

And keep in mind that this information will not necessarily come solely from scientists. The extensive local knowledge of other interested parties such as fishers and tangata whenua has a large role to play here too. My point is that debate and negotiation from all interested parties should be based upon the best available knowledge, and where available, data.

To provide advice about how to design effective MPAs, scientists need answers to questions such as: What lives there? How fast do things grow and how much do they move around? Where does the food come from that is supporting the community? Where do the young come from? Are there any ongoing impacts?

It is paramount that decisions regarding the placement and degree of MPAs are based upon such fundamental ecological knowledge, and you would be surprised just how little is known about these processes on a small scale around our coasts. So, to support management recommendations and decisions that will have a high likelihood of success, it is essential that the Government funds fundamental ecological research in our coastal seas.

Earlier I said that I was concerned about scientists being considered as stakeholders in these regional forums. These concerns are due to the fact that when it comes to deciding upon management recommendations, scientists will effectively have one 14th of the vote.

I am concerned that such a small influence will lead to expert scientific advice getting diluted. Ask any scientist that has witnessed or been involved in the process of the creation of an MPA: “was it big enough?” And they will invariably say “NO!” Because more often than not during the consultation and negotiation process, the size of the desirable MPA gets whittled down to a fraction of it’s former self.

The question to these scientists then becomes: “Do you think it will still work?” And that is where many scientists will have doubts. I strongly believe that whilst public consultation is very valuable and necessary, scientific knowledge and advice must not be diluted when it comes to making decisions about the future of marine management in New Zealand.

We are entering exciting times with respect to the marine environment. One hopes that in years to come, all New Zealanders will be able to take a short trip to their local marine reserve, and explore an intact and healthy marine ecosystem.

For this vision to become a reality, scientists need to get involved in their local communities and communicate science effectively, so that the public will begin to appreciate that science is definitely something to value, not fear.

Otago Harbour in a red frenzy Rebecca McLeod Jan 18

3 Comments

Otago Harbour has been bursting with life this summer due to a population explosion of crab larvae, called Munida gregaria. The shoaling animals have attracted thousands of seabirds to the harbour since November, and the feeding frenzy looks set to continue for a few more months. The assault on Munida is not only aerial – fishes, seals and sealions are also following the shoals from beneath. Outgoing tides are leaving Munida stranded on the shore, again offering an easy feast for birds such as red-billed and southern black-backed gulls, pied oystercatchers and spotted shags. Human residents of the harbour may not be quite as excited however as the stranded Munida are creating a stench like no other and the birds are painting the town red. Literally.

As these "post larvae" mature they go from swimming a the surface to sitting on the seafloor

As these "post larvae" mature they go from swimming at the surface to sitting on the seafloor. Photo courtesy of Tomas Bird and the New Zealand Marine Studies Centre

Munida larvae are common off the coast of Otago in spring and early summer, and this summer have moved into the harbour en masse where they will mature and settle to the sea floor. There they may live for 2-3 years, possibly migrating to deeper offshore habitats – that is if they are not feasted upon first.

This summer’s Munida explosion is likely to bring hundreds of tonnes of food into Otago Harbour. And this is by no means unusual. Records from the Portobello Marine Laboratory, going back to the 1950’s show that large Munida aggregations in the harbour used to occur most years, although were quite variable and did not appear once every four or five years. However, this is the first time since 1999 that there has been a significant Munida event in the harbour. The cause of this long absence is up for debate.

The New Zealand Marine Studies Centre at Portobello currently has thousands of Munida on display. Get in quick though – they are sharing their tank with some rather hungry fish…

The display at the New Zealand Marine Studies Centre, Dunedin. Photo courtesy of Tomas Bird.

The display at the New Zealand Marine Studies Centre, Dunedin. Photo courtesy of Tomas Bird.

Australian media on a mission to make scientists look dodgy Rebecca McLeod Dec 21

7 Comments

Yesterday 895,000 Australians (and this one Kiwi) woke up to the headline “HOPES FADE IN COPENHAGEN, RISE ON THE REEF” in a national newspaper. As one who is always up for a bit of optimism I began reading… but by the second line my hopes were somewhat dashed: “Scientists ‘crying wolf’ over coral”.

This front page story reported the views of one (I repeat ONE) scientist, Peter Ridd, a physicist from James Cook University, who believes that ecologists and biologists studying the Great Barrier Reef are guilty of exaggerating threats to the reef, such as increased sedimentation, crown of thorns starfish, pollution, and temperature-induced damage called bleaching. Ridd argues that the reef is still in ‘good health’ despite public attention being drawn to these individual threats over recent years, thus affecting the credibility of marine scientists, particularly with respect to current concerns about the susceptibility of coral reefs to climate change.

It seems to me that The Australian has gone out of its way to turn this scientific debate, which is essentially one marine scientist disagreeing with a score of others, into another example of how ‘dodgy scientists’ are conspiring to delude the public into thinking that climate change is a real phenomenon.

A more in depth article further inside the newspaper “How the reef became blue again” does quite a good job of describing recent research findings by scientists at the Australian Institute of Marine Science, regarding the ability of corals to recover from bleaching events caused by increases in water temperature. However, you have to dig really deep to get to what I think is the part that is deserving of the headline:

“Ocean acidification is another matter, however. This lesser-known product of climate change is a greater danger to the reef by Ridd’s assessment. It happens as the ocean absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere, altering its pH value. Although surface sea temperatures are rising fastest in tropical regions, the threat of acidification comes from the higher latitudes, where the colder water takes in CO2 more easily.

The theory is that when atmospheric CO2 reaches between 480ppm and 500ppm, the warmer water lapping coral reefs will cease to be a barrier to acidification: even a small change is thought to spell trouble for calcifying organisms such as corals, making it more difficult for them to make the skeleton structures that in turn build reefs.”

If you would like to find out more about this incredibly scary phenomenon, I posted a rather thought-provoking film on it a couple of months ago. Even Peter Ridd thinks that ocean acidification is the single greatest threat to the Great Barrier Reef – but only those few of the 895,000 that got close to the end of the 2 page article would be aware of this!

Are the public so supersaturated with climate change stories that the media are having to infer scientific controversy to get the attention of the public? Quite possibly. How sad.

A+ for Australian Marine Scientists Rebecca McLeod Dec 04

No Comments

The Marine Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Report Card Australia 2009 has just been released. Hiding behind the long-winded name is an excellent resource – a website-based state-of-knowledge of how climate change is likely to affect Australia’s marine life, with expert opinions from more than 70 marine scientists across the country.

Whilst the majority of the information presented on the website is available in various scientific papers, having it all combined on a common site, and in plain English is a real leap forward in making marine issues accessible to the public. Through many many many many (you get the drift) hours of careful research, scientists from a large range of disciplines have come to conclude that climate change has, is and will continue to affect marine life.

And these implications seem to reach every kind of marine environment there is – from the open ocean to coastal reefs to estuaries. Particularly concerning are stresses upon species that provide a home for marine animals – for example, kelp forests, among which a multitude of fish and invertebrate species live, are very sensitive to changes in seawater temperature, and so are predicted to disappear from southern Australia if seawater temperatures continue to rise.

Kelp forests are predicted to disappear from Tasmania should the sea temperature continue to rise

Kelp forests are predicted to disappear from Tasmania should the sea temperature continue to rise

Meanwhile in more tropical regions, such as the Great Barrier Reef, corals are suffering from multiple climate change related issues. Increased water temperature can stress corals, causing death of the individual anemone-like creatures that come together to form a coral colony. This occurrence is known as “bleaching”, and is becoming increasingly common and severe. A more recently-discovered phenomenon – ocean acidification – has the potential to devastate corals and other organisms that have skeletons made of calcium carbonate. It isn’t pleasant to think about, but if the corals disappear, so too will all of those who live on and amongst them.

Of course, with environmental science, and science in general, it is difficult to “prove” things beyond all doubt. To reflect such uncertainty, the observations, predictions and forecasts are rated with high, medium or low confidence, and I think that this is a really worthwhile addition to the site. Also included are sections on things that aren’t yet known, and require further research.

This site does make for some scary reading, and I wonder whether a section along the lines of “what you can do”, or “alternative pathways” section might lessen the blow. But then, it could be argued that individual efforts from the public would not be enough to stop the processes that are already in motion – what is needed are global-scale changes introduced by world leaders.

In the meantime, marine scientists will keep working to document our rapidly changing marine environments…

How resilient are coral reefs to tsunamis? Rebecca McLeod Nov 24

No Comments

The September 29th tsunami waves left widespread destruction across the Pacific nations of Samoa, American Samoa and Tonga, evidenced by devastated villages, and multiple fatalities and injuries. But what about the natural environment? Was there paralleled damage under the sea, on the coral reefs that fringe these islands? Not only is this question of interest from an ecological perspective, but also from a social perspective: communities rely heavily upon these reefs for food, tourism and social wellbeing. As these communities begin to rebuild, and eventually encourage tourists to come back, the state of the coral reefs could be a factor in a tourism market that relies heavily on water-based activities.

The potential for damage to coral reefs following major storm surges and tsunamis is two-fold: the initial force of the waves hitting the reef, and the subsequent delivery of huge amounts of sediment and debris onto the reef as the wave retreats and during rainfall in the following weeks.

Using field tests, scientists at the ARC Centre for Excellence in Coral Reef Studies have demonstrated that the shape of the coral influences how vulnerable it is to damage by large waves. For example, table-topped corals (those with a broad top and attached to the reef by a stalk) are more prone to being overturned by a large wave than those that are mounded or branched. Location matters too, with corals on the front and crest of the reef where the waves break being more prone to damage by large waves than those situated on the top and back sides of the reef.

Arguably the greatest tsunami-associated threat to corals is posed by sediment and debris that is carried from the land as the waves retreat. Sediment can smother and even bury corals, leading to suffocation of the coral polyps. Extensive mechanical damage and scouring can result from debris such as building materials, machinery and cars getting pounded onto the reef.

Initial surveys of coral reefs along the west coast of Thailand following the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004 recorded mass destruction of corals. However, despite these initial concerns, repeat surveys in the following months found that the damage, although severe in small patches, was generally not as bad as first feared. This anomaly was due to much of the coral initially recorded as dead having in fact recovered. On the Island of Banda Aceh at the northern tip of Sumatara, scientists were in a unique position of being able to make before and after comparisons of reef health, as they had surveyed the reefs prior to the tsunami. The research team, led by Dr Andrew Baird at the ARC Centre for Excellence in Coral Reef Studies reported a remarkable resilience of coral communities to the tsunami waves. The damage observed was considerably less than that caused by destructive fishing practices (e.g. dynamite fishing) and coral harvesting, and was also considered to be significantly less than that resulting from hurricanes, due to differences in the distribution of wave energy in the water column.

I am not aware of any similar surveys being carried out in areas affected by the most recent tsunami (if you know of any please tell me!), but these experiences from the 2004 tsunami seem to suggest that the long-term impacts of the tsunami waves on coral reefs may not be all that bad. It seems plausible that those reefs in good health prior to the tsunami may experience a faster recovery than those already suffering from bleaching, grazing crown of thorns starfish, or destructive fishing practises.

One step closer to harvesting kelp Rebecca McLeod Nov 09

2 Comments

On Friday the Fisheries Minister Phil Heatley announced that giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) will be introduced to the Quota Management System (QMS). This decision marks the first step of a process to “manage” the species, which forms extensive forests around much of New Zealand’s coastline. The second step will involve the setting of a Total Allowable Catch limit for the species. I posted a few weeks ago about the scientific arguments against kelp harvesting (“Is it wise to ‘mow’ our kelp forests?”), where kelp specialists Drs Chris Hepburn and Nick Shears gave their responses to the proposal to enter kelp into the QMS.

The Ministry received 26 submissions from stakeholders, most representing large organizations such as the NZ Marine Sciences Society (270+ scientists), the NZ Recreational Fishing Council and multiple iwi. In very general terms, the submissions from those in the fishing industry supported the introduction of the species to the QMS. And the majority of submissions from scientists, environmental and other groups were in agreement with them – perhaps not a huge surprise given that the alternative to QMS introduction was the creation of an open-access fishery! Where these two sides differed in opinion was in size of the future Total Allowable Catch. Industry argued for “a sustainable level”. Nearly everyone else argued that with a complete lack of scientific information, the only guaranteed sustainable level is zero. And the masses raise a very valid point – after all, the overall objective of the QMS is to help ensure the sustainable utilisation of fisheries resources…

Could kelp harvesters like this soon be working along our coasts? Image: http://w3.shorecrest.org

Could kelp harvesters like this soon be working along our coasts? Image: http://w3.shorecrest.org

The Ministry will begin a process of stakeholder consultation early next year before setting Total Allowable Catch limits for attached giant kelp in fisheries management areas 3 (East Coast of the South Island) and 4 (extending out to the Chatham Islands). It will be a very interesting process to observe – given the lack of biomass estimates, location-specific growth rates and knowledge about the ability of kelp to recover from canopy removal, it is difficult to imagine just how the Ministry will go about calculating a “sustainable level of harvest”.

Solved: the problem of the cross-dressing frogs Rebecca McLeod Nov 03

4 Comments

The global plight of amphibians received a lot of attention last year – the official Year of the Frog. Just in case you missed it, amphibians are currently undergoing a worldwide extinction crisis, with 32% of all species threatened with extinction. The reasons for this sorry state of affairs are believed to be many – loss of habitat, increased incidence of disease, competitive exclusion from introduced species, climate change, increased UV radiation, pollution, predation, and overexploitation.

But I don’t want this to be yet another story documenting the alarming state of our global ecosystem. Recently I attended a very inspiring seminar given by Jen Germano – and it gave me hope that innovative approaches to conservation might just lead to some species recovering to healthy levels. Germano is a doctoral student at Otago University who is about to submit her PhD thesis under the supervision of Drs Phil Bishop and Alison Cree, and in collaboration with Landcare Research scientist Dr Frank Molinia.

A Maud Island frog (Leiopelma pakeka)

A Maud Island frog (Leiopelma pakeka)

Germano has spent the past 5 years focusing on ways to improve the success of conservation efforts for New Zealand native frogs (genus Leiopelma). New Zealand currently has 4 species of native frog – all classified as endangered – and 3 species that are believed to be extinct. Our frogs are from an archaic lineage and have a few traits that set them apart from those inhabiting other parts of the globe. Most notably, New Zealand native frogs do not have external eardrums, and therefore do not croak, instead communicating with chemical signals. There is also no easy way to tell males and females apart – there are no colour, size, or other morphological differences between sexes (hence the crass but attention-grabbing headline!), and this has posed problems for those trying to save them.

Jen Germano with some Maud Island froglets (babies)

Jen Germano with some Maud Island froglets (babies)

A proactive approach is being taken to frog conservation in this country, and many organizations are involved with efforts to breed and translocate frogs, to encourage sustainable populations. With other endangered species captive breeding populations have provided a form of “insurance”, but one major problem has arisen for NZ frogs – whilst our zoos have put a great deal of effort into starting captive frog colonies, they haven’t been able to successful breed any of the native frogs. This setback led Germano to develop a method for telling apart males and females based on hormone levels in their urine. The method is relatively non-invasive, and has allowed Germano and her colleagues to sex Maud Island frogs with 94% certainty. The ability to identify the sex of our native frogs is a big leap forward for captive breeding and translocation programs, as now they will be able to provide even sex ratios, which will hopefully lead to higher breeding success. Germano has been passing on her skills to staff at Auckland Zoo and Orana Park, where captive breeding programs are underway.

Germano explains that until recently, very little was known about the basic life history of our native frog species. “While I was working on frog translocations for my Masters project, I saw many of the problems that other scientists were facing when working with these frogs and it was obvious that there were huge gaps in the knowledge that we had for the basic biology of our endemic species and in the information that managers and scientists needed to conserve them.” A large part of Germano’s thesis involved determining the breeding season of Maud Island frogs – and surprisingly she found it is likely to occur in mid winter. Germano has also discovered that Maud Island frogs have incredibly low sperm counts, which may also help to explain why their numbers are so low.

With her PhD thesis soon to be submitted, Germano will be heading to Memphis Zoo in the USA to begin a position as a postdoctoral researcher in amphibian reproductive biology. But she can leave with the satisfaction of knowing that the Maud Island frogs and those working to save them in a much better position than when she began her studies.

The largest remaining population of native frogs in NZ exists on Maud Island, a predator-free island in the Marlborough Sounds.

The largest remaining population of native frogs in NZ exists on Maud Island, a predator-free island in the Marlborough Sounds.

Orokonui Ecosanctuary to open Rebecca McLeod Oct 29

5 Comments

After more than 20 years of dreaming, planning and pure hard work the Orokonui Ecosanctuary will be officially opened this Friday. The 307 hectare block of land is situated near Waitati in the Blueskin Bay catchment, just a short drive from Dunedin. The opening marks the completion of the Visitor and Education Centre – a fine demonstration of eco-building. Much of the timber was milled from exotic pines that once resided within the sanctuary, the building is positioned to capture and retain sun and warmth, shipping containers have been recycled into administration areas, and waste water is treated onsite.

I was lucky enough to get a guided tour around the sanctuary a couple of weeks ago, and was incredibly impressed. There are few examples of remnant forest on the East Coast of the South Island, but here is one of them – towering broadleaves, podocarps and kanuka – these forest types are within close proximity of each other. A 2 million dollar, 10 km long pest exclusion fence was completed in 2007, and an ongoing eradication program since then has seen exotic mammals including possums, rats and stoats reduced to undetectable levels. And so enter the stars! Kaka, saddlebacks and jeweled geckos introduced since the completion of the fence have been flourishing, as have resident tomtit, brown creeper and  rifleman. The hope is that, in years to come Kiwi, Kakariki and Tuatara will be established within the sanctuary. It should only be a matter of time until Otago has a southern equivalent of the Karori Wildlife Sanctuary! I highly recommend going on a tour of this incredible place – the guides are so passionate and knowledgeable, and will no doubt have more to show us as the forest ecosystem recovers in years to come.

This viewing platform was constructed from exotic wood that was milled from within the sanctuary

This viewing platform was constructed from exotic wood that was milled from within the sanctuary

10% by 2010? Yeah Right! Rebecca McLeod Oct 20

1 Comment

In 2005 an ambitious goal was set by the then Ministers of Conservation and Fisheries – 10% of the marine environment around New Zealand would be under some form of protection by 2010. This announcement was met with much celebration by marine scientists and environmentalists throughout the country and the wheels were set in motion to take a regional approach to marine protection. Going off the recent success of the implementation of a network of marine reserves in Fiordland, the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries put together a structure under which local groups of stakeholders would propose networks of marine protected areas in their region. These networks would encompass a variety of habitat types (such as estuarine, offshore reefs, soft sediment etc.) and protection measures (marine reserves, zones with specific fishing restrictions etc.). But despite this initial flurry of activity, the Government has been unnervingly quiet on this issue of late. I am aware of two regional proposals – for the sub-Antarctic Islands, and for the West Coast of the South Island – that are currently at the public consultation stage, but yet to be put forward to the Government. Whilst the fact that these proposals are undergoing consultation is evidence that things are happening at a regional level, I am skeptical that the final proposals will move through parliamentary channels in a timely manner. As we race towards 2010, I am left with considerable doubt as to the ability, or will, of the Government to meet the target of 10% by 2010.

« Older Entries