APPENDIX 1 – STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

82. In forming the management options, the following statutory considerations have been taken into account:
    1. Section 8 of the Act describes the purpose of the Act as being to provide for the utilisation of fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability, and defines the meanings of utilisation and sustainability. The management options presented seek to achieve the purpose of the Act. The different options provide for different levels of utilisation through the setting of catch limits and allowances. The options ensure sustainability under the respective catch limits via different fine-scale management and monitoring measures that address risk as appropriate to the different levels of catch, and take into account the respective utilisation benefits.
       
       
    2. Section 13(2) requires that the Minister sets a TAC that maintains the stock at or above a biomass level that can produce the MSY (denoted as B _MSY), or moves it towards or above such a level, having regard to the interdependence of stocks. A formal assessment of the current status of the ORH 1 stock relative to B _MSY is not available. That was a primary driver for undertaking the AMP (designed so that more information to inform an assessment could be obtained in a cost-effective way). At the start of the current AMP for ORH 1 (five years ago), scientific advice was that it was likely that the stock was above the B_MSY level. That supported setting a higher TAC that would, on the balance of probabilities, satisfy the s 13(2) requirements. While it is not known if the stock remains above B_MSY, it is thought that fishing at the highest proposed TAC/TACC option for one more year is not likely to pose a high sustainability risk to the stock.
       
       
       The proposed TAC options are also based on -
       
       
       1. Section 13(2) considerations that, where a stock is below B_MSY (s 13(2)(b), the TAC be set to move the stock towards or above the B_MSY level within an appropriate period, having regard to the biological characteristics of the stock and any environmental conditions affecting the stock. Section 13(2)(c) requires similar action in the case of the stock being below the B _MSY. It cannot be determined at this time whether or not the stock is below B _MSY, and no specific environmental conditions affecting the ORH 1 stock have been identified. However, it is known that orange roughy are very long-lived and late maturing, which are biological characteristics that render them slow to recover from over-fishing. There is no information to suggest the interdependence of stocks should affect the level of the TACs set for ORH 1 at this time (as required to be considered under s 13(2)(c)). The fishery is relatively clean, and bycatch proportions are low given that the fishery targets aggregations of orange roughy.
          
          
    3. Section 13(3) requires the Minister to have regard to such social, cultural, and economic factors as he considers being relevant when determining the way and rate at which to move the stock biomass toward or above the B _MSY level. The current status of the ORH 1 stock is not known. The AMP programme was designed to provide information to inform stock assessment, while ensuring sustainability. Retaining the current TAC for a further year would enable greater utilisation benefits, at least in the short term, as well as providing more opportunities for cost-effective data gathering. Reducing the TAC under the other options would constrain data gathering and utilisation, as well as reduce revenues from the fishery considerably. Socio-economic effects could be anticipated should vessel and processing operations be affected under reduced catch levels, although such effects have not been quantified.
       
       
    4. Section 11(1)(c) requires the Minister to take into account the natural variability of the stock when setting or varying any sustainability measure. Orange roughy are not known to be highly variable.
       
       
    5. Sections 9(a) and (b) require the Minister to take into account that associated or dependent species be maintained at or above a level that ensures their long-term viability, and that the biological diversity of the aquatic environment should be maintained. The specific nature and extent of effects of ORH 1 fishing on any stock and the environment generally are not known. While some bycatch of non-harvested species is known, it is inadequate to determine the impact that fishing for ORH 1 might be having. Bycatch of corals has been raised as an issue in orange roughy fisheries in New Zealand and this is addressed in the area closures within ORH 1 discussed below, and in the development of additional benthic protected areas. No specific concerns have been raised at this time on issues which would affect setting the TAC for ORH 1.
       
       
    6. Section 9(c) requires that habitat of particular importance for fisheries management should be protected. No such habitats relevant or specific to ORH 1 are known currently. However, New Zealand has closed 19 seamounts to trawling and, six of these closed seamounts are located within ORH 1, and more may be closed through the benthic protected areas strategy being developed. These closures will protect areas of vulnerable habitat which might be important for fisheries management.
       
       
    7. Sections 5(a) and (b) require the Act to be interpreted consistently with New Zealand’s international obligations with respect to fishing and with the provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992. International obligations include UNCLOS and the Fish Stocks agreement as well as regional fishery management agreements, the obligations of which have been incorporated into the Fisheries Act 1996 provisions. MFish considers that issues relating to international obligations and the Settlement Act are adequately addressed in the management options proposed.
       
       
    8. Section 11(1)(b) requires any existing controls under the Act to be taken into account. For ORH 1, the measures that apply currently are a TAC, TACC and an allowance for incidental fishing-related mortality. No other controls under the Act apply specifically to ORH 1.
       
       
    9. Section 11(2A)(b) requires the Minister to take into account any relevant fisheries plan approved under the Act. No plan has been approved for ORH 1, nor is MFish aware of a plan being developed for ORH 1 at this time.
       
       
    10. Sections 11(2A)(a) and (c) require that before setting or varying any sustainability measure, the Minister must take into account any conservation or fisheries service, or any decision not to require such services. MFish does not consider that existing or proposed services materially affect the proposals for the ORH 1 stock. No decision has been made to require or not require a service in this fishery at this time.
        
        
    11. Sections 11(2)(a) and (b) require the Minister to have regard to any provisions in any policy statement or plan under the Resource Management Act 1991, or any management strategy or plan under the Conservation Act 1987, that are relevant to the setting of any sustainability measure for the ORH 1 stock. MFish is not aware of any such provisions that should be taken into account for ORH 1 at this time.
        
        
    12. Section 11(2)(c) requires the Minister to have regard to ss 7 and 8 of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000. While the ORH 1 quota management area encompasses the waters of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park, the distribution of orange roughy and the fishery for it do not intersect with the Park boundaries.
        
        
    13. Section 21 requires the Minister to allow for non-commercial Maori and recreational fishing interests, and other sources of fishing-related mortality when setting or varying the TACC. The nature of the ORH 1 fishery and the interests of recreational and customary fishers have been considered in proposing the TACCs. Section 21 also requires that any mätaitai reserve or closure/restriction under s 186A to facilitate customary fishing be taken into account. There are mätaitai reserves and s 186A measures in ORH 1 generally, but none intersect with the ORH 1 fishery. No area has been closed or fishing method restricted (that affects the fishery within ORH 1) under the customary fishing provisions of the Act. Section 21 also requires that any regulations to prohibit fishing made under s 311 be taken into account when setting allowances for recreational interests. No restrictions under s 311 have been placed on fishing in any area within ORH 1
        
        
    14. Section 10 of the Act sets out the information principles, which require that decisions be based on the best available information, taking into account any uncertainty in that information, and applying caution when information is uncertain, unreliable, or inadequate. In accordance with s 10, the absence of information should not be used as a reason to postpone, or fail to take, any measure to achieve the purpose of the Act, including providing for utilisation at levels considered to be sustainable. MFish considers that the information used to support these proposals (the available catch data, the opinion of the stock assessment working group for deepwater fisheries and MFish scientists, and the known biological characteristics of orange roughy) is the best available information on the status of the ORH 1 stock. Given that the status of the ORH 1 stock relative to B _MSY is uncertain, the options proposed each balance the risks to utilisation and sustainability in different ways. All options are considered to be sustainable, at least in the short term, but the long term sustainability of the proposed catch levels is not known.