NZ Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum and Advisory Group

Report

Royal Albatross Centre, 11 and 13 June 2019

2019 Sea Lion Forum

Introduction This report summarises notes from a workshop of the Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum held 9:00am to 5:30pm on Tuesday June 11 2019 at Taiaroa Head Royal Albatross Centre, Otago.

Contents These notes contain the following:

A Attendees B Purpose and Agenda C Context and Update D Sea Lions and Te Ao Māori E 2019 / 2020 Research Proposals for Review and Endorsement F Mapping the current situation: Ōtākou, Murihiku and Rakiura G 2020 / 21 Research Proposals for Discussion and Development H Conclusions and Next Steps

Appendix One –Development of Proposed 2020/ 2021 Projects Appendix Two - Additional 2020/2021 Projects Appendix Three – Flipchart Photos

Note: Please also refer to the following links to the presentations during the hui: • NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum June 2019.pptx https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/nz-sea-lion-tmp-forum- presentation-june-2019.pdf • Te Ao Māori.pptx https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/sea-lions-and-te-ao-maori- presentation-june-2019.pdf

And these documents circulated prior to the Forum: • 2019-20 Sea lion projects - DOC-5956011.docx (updated following Forum recommendations) • 2020-21 proposals_working_docm_ForumAG - DOC-5963327.docx (to engage with stakeholders for its update in coming working groups) • March 2019 NZSL TMP CSP Technical working group meeting report https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/csp-technical-working- group-meeting-report-march-2019.pdf

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 2 A Workshop Attendees

Workshop Tamar Wells, Monique Holmes (Te Ohu Kaimoana), Albert Rebergen Attendees (Dunedin City Council), Mark Jackson, (Community, Beachcare), Derek Morrison (Adventure Media Group / Box of Light), Janet Ledingham (NZ Sea Lion Trust, Aramoana, Dunedin Forest and Bird), Adrian Hall (Aramoana Trust Conservation), Katrina Goddard (Forest and Bird), Jordana Whyte, Amelia Saxby, Bryony Alden (NZ Sea Lion Trust), Amanda Nally (NZSLT Southland), Richard Wells (Deep Water Group), Tom Clark (Fisheries Inshore NZ), Greg Lydon (Fisheries NZ), John Whitehead (Southland Conservation Board), Robyn Shanks, Paul Pope ( Community Board), Sam Neill ( Land Owner and Regional Councillor, Otago Regional Council), Phred Dobbins (DOC Rakiura / Stewart Island), Andrew Eastwood, Marcus Simons, Jim Fyfe (DOC Dunedin, Ōtākou), Charles (Charlie) Barrett, Ros Cole (DOC Catlins, Murihiku), Enrique Pardo, Helena Dodge (DOC National Office)

Presenters: Rauhina Scott-Fyfe, Mātauranga Māori Project Rata Dyer Rodgers, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu

Apologies: Kirsten Rodgers, Tony Preston (DOC Murihiku), Mike Hopkins (DOC Ōtākou), Tiffany Bock (Fisheries NZ), Sarah Wilson (TRONT), Gail Thompson (Ngāi Tahu), Auckland Zoo rep.

Independent Facilitator: Michelle Rush, Participatory Techniques Ltd.

B Workshop Purpose and Agenda

Purposes The purposes were: • To present a summary of the results of the past year’s NZ Sea Lion Threat Management Plan work to the Sea Lion Stakeholder Forum; • To seek Forum endorsement of priority projects for the 2019/2020 financial year; • To discuss, develop and prioritise projects for the 2020 / 2021 financial year for Rakiura, Murihiku and Ōtākou; and • To provide participants an opportunity to view and experience some of the actions under way on a field trip to sea lion habitat, and to network and share expertise with others involved in sea lion management and protection.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 3 Agenda The agenda is detailed in the table below.

Time Agenda Item 10:00 Karakia, Mihi Whakatau, Welcome, Introductions, Purpose and Programme 10:15 Morning Tea 10:30 Taking Stock – Progress on the Threat Management Plan 11:00 Sea Lions / Rāpoka and Te Āo Māori 11:45 Sea Lion / Rāpoka TMP Research Proposals 2019/20 12:00 Updating the Current Situation – Te Waipounamu and Rakiura 1:00 Lunch 2:00 Research Focus Areas 2020 / 21: Coastal Users, Infrastructure and Developments, Private Land Activities, Fisheries and Aquaculture 3:30 Afternoon Tea 3:45 Recommendations 5:15 Workshop Evaluation & Next Steps 5:30 Karakia and close

C Context and Update

Context The role of the Forum, and where it contributes to overall work on sea lion management in NZ was outlined. (Terms of Reference: https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/nzsl-forum-advisory-group- terms-of-reference.pdf)

Workshop outcomes, including priority focus areas identified by the Forum for Rakiura, Ōtākou and Murihiku are reported to the Advisory Group (later in the week).

They are put alongside what the Advisory Group comes up with in respect of sea lion priorities for the offshore islands.

A recommended overall package for the 2020 /21 year is then made by the Advisory Group to the TMP Partners. Once confirmed, DOC management and business planning for this work then starts.

The background and implications of the recent change in sea lion threat status were discussed.

Update on Participants were reminded of the 2018/2019 TMP projects currently Current underway, and/or nearing completion. Projects An interactive activity on these took place (Speed Dating), to enable participants to catch up on the results.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 4

The written updates for each of these projects can be found in the Technical Working Group report circulated to participants prior to the Forum: March 2019 NZSL TMP CSP Technical working group meeting report

D Sea Lions and Te Ao Māori

Te Ao Māori Rauhina Scott-Fyfe, Researcher for the Mātauranga Māori Project, and and sea lions – Rata Dyer Rodgers, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, gave a presentation on Messages for some initial findings of the Mātauranga Māori project, specifically the your Mahi relationship of Ngāi Tahu with Rāpoka.

See Rauhina’s presentation https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/sea-lions-and-te-ao-maori- presentation-june-2019.pdf

Following the presentation, participants took part in a structured discussion.

The aim was to reflect on and build an understanding of what this meant for participants’ work with sea lions. The messages identified listed below. (Bold indicates an agreed key message)

• Important to look to the past for knowledge, lessons and context to carry the work forward.

• Important to work closely together to reduce misunderstandings, and make sure we’re working to the same goals.

• Important that cultural narratives are shared appropriately – this capability needs to be built so that it can be shared and this needs to be resourced – shared across silos.

• While mana whenua is defined as ownership, its action is defined as responsibility / kaitiakitanga.

• Important to mutually acknowledge and respect all people’s connection / care of sea lions.

• We need to continue to live – but enable other things to live with us – balance between use and protection – TRONT personifies this –.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 5 E 2019 / 2020 Research Proposals for Endorsement

2019 / 2020 The table below sets out the proposed 2019/2020 TMP projects Research presented for Forum review and endorsement. Proposals for Endorsement For full details of these projects, see the report 2019-20 Sea lion projects - DOC-5956011.docx

Location 2019/2020 Project Workstream

Campbell Island Pup count, tagging Evaluation Operation Endurance Direct mitigation Davis Point mitigation Direct mitigation Auckland Pup count, tagging, microchipping, extended season Evaluation Islands Necropsies at Enderby Is and analysis of samples Targeted research Dundas re-sighting, extended season Evaluation Ōtākou Pup count, tagging, microchipping Evaluation Murihiku Pup count, tagging, microchipping Evaluation Rakiura Pup count, tagging, microchipping Evaluation Others / all areas Mātauranga project All Liaison Officer Engagement SQU6T Operational Plan review Direct mitigation Cryptic mortality in fisheries Direct mitigation Update Campbell Island NZSL Population Targeted Sustainability Threshold (PST) estimation research

Comments on Participants briefly reviewed and discussed the projects proposed for 2019/2020 2019/2020. The following were the key points made: Research Proposals • The tasks for the liaison officer need to be defined; • The National Engagement Strategy needs to get up and running this year (with the liaison officer involved); • Steps need to be taken to ensure that there is involvement with the upcoming review of the Otago regional coastal plan;

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 6 • Engagement with the aquaculture industry in Rakiura is important; and • The issues with flipper tags and microchip convenience need to be resolved and new ones selected. New flipper tag and microchip model must be identified.

F Mapping the current situation: Ōtākou, Murihiku and Rakiura

Mapping the Working in groups that revolved around each map, participants created Current a set of maps to update the current situation for sea lions in each area. Situation The maps developed are below.

The key as to what was mapped, and the colours used, is as follows:

• BLACK pen: Where the sea lions are; and whether the land is private or public. • RED pen: The current issues. • GREEN pen: Current projects, and who is doing them. • BLUE pen: Any new needs or gaps, and who needs to be involved if these are to be dealt with.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 7 Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 8

Key Participants discussed what had been identified through the mapping Considerations exercise and named the following as key considerations to keep in from Mapping mind when reviewing and generating projects for future sea lion TMP Activity effort. The maps represent the main sea lion distribution areas around the southern , but sea lion sightings have also been recorded in other locations. We need to:

• Understand the foraging range of sea lions, and then understand the threats /risk, especially along the Catlins coast • Ensure effective follow through for compliance when negative interactions between human and sea lions occur • Identify critical habitat areas and mechanisms for protecting them, e.g. through statutory plans such as the coastal plan (Otago’s coastal plan is due for review) • Ensure that there is engagement in Aquaculture at both the policy and industry level • Develop and implement a National Engagement Plan: o This needs to be two-way, e.g. surfers, what do they know? o Needs to include how we interact and connect with social media. o Needs an education focus, e.g. communication tools for tourists and industry organisations.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 9

G: 2020 / 21 Research Proposals for Discussion and Development

2020/21 The table below sets out the draft research proposals put forward for Research consideration and further development by the Forum. proposals Participants were also asked to consider additional projects.

Projects for Project proposals 2020/21 Interaction type Discussion and Development Ōtākou Interactions with coastal users Coastal Users

Interactions with coastal structures / Infrastructure and developments Developments Sea lion coastal habitat management on private Private Land land Activities Recreational, customary and commercial fisheries Fisheries and (to be discussed with Fisheries ) Aquaculture

Murihiku Interactions with coastal users Coastal Users

Interactions with coastal structures / Infrastructure and developments Developments Sea lion coastal habitat management on private Private Land land Activities Recreational and commercial fisheries (to be Fisheries and discussed with Fisheries New Zealand) Aquaculture

Rakiura Interactions with aquaculture Fisheries and Aquaculture Interactions with coastal users Coastal Users Recreational, customary and commercial fisheries Fisheries and (to be discussed with Fisheries New Zealand) Aquaculture Multi-Year Pup count, tagging – Ōtākou, Murihiku, Rakiura Monitoring Projects for Endorsement Liaison Officer – marine mammals and TMP Engagement only programmes everywhere Mātauranga Māori

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 10

Development of Participants worked in groups to consider proposed projects, and offer 2020/21 up additional projects for Ōtākou, Murihiku and Rakiura under the Research following four headings: proposals 1. Private Land Activities 2. Infrastructure and Development 3. Fisheries and Aquaculture 4. Coastal Users.

Each group circulated around each of these four areas, building on the work of previous groups. The questions were:

1. Review the draft research proposals relating to sea lion / rāpoka interactions with your focus topic. 2. Are the goals correct? Amend as you see fit. 3. Rank the goals in terms of order of priority – so that if we had to choose between them what should be done first? 4. Where would be a good place to test each project? 5. Who could lead this project? Who else would need to be involved?

The results from each area are set out in Appendix One.

Additional projects identified and developed by participants are listed in Appendix Two.

Evaluation of Following this activity, participants worked in groups again, this time 2020 / 2021 to evaluate the projects within these four areas (those developed from Projects the initial list proposed, and new ones generated at the workshop) according to: • The extent to which the project aligned with mātauranga Māori; • The extent to which the project aligned with the considerations identified from the ‘current situation’ mapping exercise.

The projects were then put in priority order in terms of which needed to be done first, if a choice had to be made on their timing.

The results for each area are summarised below.

Next steps: DOC in coordination with the TMP partners (Fisheries NZ and Ngāi Tahu) will update the 2020/21 Proposals document to include the recommendations from the Forum. This document will be later discussed and refined in a technical working group.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 11

Fisheries and Evaluation of 2020/2021 proposals for Fisheries and Aquaculture Aquaculture Projects. See table below.

Projects listed: Mātauranga Māori Current Situation Alignment Score 1-3 Considerations Alignment Score 1-3 Sea Lion Foraging (Satellite tagging 3 3 of females and isotope testing) - Fishing characterisation - Overlap

Indirect effects: 3 3 - Climate Change - Prey availability

Recreational setnets 3 3

Aquaculture Spatial 3 3 Code of Practice 3 3 Projects Listed in Priority Order (not done by this sub-group)

Infrastructure Evaluation of 2020/2021 proposals for Infrastructure and and Development Projects. See table below. Development

Projects listed: Mātauranga Māori Current Situation Alignment Score 1- Considerations 3 Alignment Score 1-3 Project 1 – Identify gaps in existing 3 3 planning and legislation: Planner to review literature and gaps from district and regional councils to plan for Otago Regional Council administration Project 2 – The planning context for 3 3 Rāpoka survival and success Projects Listed in Priority Order

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 12 Project 1, Project 2

Private Land Evaluation of 2020/2021 proposals for Private Land Activities. See Activities table below.

Projects listed: Mātauranga Māori Current Situation Alignment Score 1-3 Considerations Alignment Score 1-3 1 Financial Support for 1 1 Private Land Owners 2 Rakiura: Private and 3 National Park. RMLT. 1.5 compliance, RNLT communication 3 Ōtākou 2 1.5 compliance, communication 4 Murihiku 3 (SILNA, TITI IS, 1.5 compliance, RUAPUKE, WH) communication Projects Listed in Priority Order (not done by this sub-group)

Coastal Users Evaluation of 2020/2021 proposals for Coastal Users. See table below.

Projects listed: Mātauranga Māori Current Situation Alignment Score 1-3 Considerations Alignment Score 1-3 Ōtākou Coastal User 3 1 Murihiku Coastal User 3 1 Rakiura Coastal User 3 1 3 2 National Engagement Strategy 3 2 Projects Listed in Priority Order 1 Hoopers Inlet, 2 Ōtākou, 3 Murihiku, 4 Rakiura, 5 National Engagement Strategy.

H: Conclusions and Next Steps

Conclusions and In the concluding discussions, participants were of the view that the Decisions work had two dimensions: areas where ongoing effort was required, and specific projects. The table below summarises where participants wanted to see efforts and resources go.

NB: NZSLT, F&B and Aramoana Conservation Trust did not want to confirm support for the detail of these priorities until they had seen the project briefs worked up to a finer level of detail.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 13

Priority Projects Ongoing Effort Required •  Hoopers Inlet (coastal users) •  Ongoing Communications / •  Sea Lion foraging (fish, aquaculture…and USING engagement with all coastal users this data for management purpose) • Infrastructure / development – • Reframe coastal user projects for key user groups, e.g. ongoing advocacy task here with fishers, and recreational fishers should be the priority councils and developers. • National engagement strategy (coast users) with specifics for each user group. NB: All stakeholders can do the • Aquaculture Impacts (fisheries management) internal advocacy that is required • Identifying gaps in statutory resource management plans with their own groups / – district, regional (infrastructure) organisations.

Actions and The following actions were identified: follow up • Share reference on PhD sea lion foraging and associated papers for Ōtākou: areas We need to learn from past research. • Private land – need ability to react quickly. Also need to build relationships long term. Should effort be targeted, rather than across large areas? • Provide any additional comments on the 2019/2020 projects that were presented today to Enrique and Greg by 30 June 2019. • NZSLT, Aramoana Conservation Trust and F&B requested that the projects for 2020 / 2021 that were discussed and developed today be written up and shared around the Forum again before priorities are chosen. • A lot of projects have been labelled as ‘liaison officer to do.’ There must be realism about the Liaison Officer role.

Engagement with Recreational Fisheries • Jim and Enrique asked that those with connections into the recreational fishing community please provide names and contact details to them. • It was noted that the effort with recreational fishing interests needs to be about respect for sea lions, and advice and education on correct behaviour around them.

Forum membership • The question of how we determine the membership of the Forum was raised as a topic for further discussion. Whilst there are good connections with Fisheries NZ nationally, local connections should be developed. • A further question asked was whether Forums for Hoiho should be linked into the Sea Lion Forum

How far off is extinction? • This question was asked. • The measure for a ‘generation’ was clarified: One generation is 20 years.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 14 2019 Advisory Group

Summary This report summarises notes from the Sea Lion TMP Advisory Group workshop held on Thursday 13 June, 9:00 – 3:00 at Taiaroa Head Royal Albatross Centre, 1260 Harington Point Rd, Dunedin.

Contents This report includes:

1. Workshop participants 2. Purpose 3. Agenda 4. Workshop Notes: a. Progress Report – Findings from the 2018 / 2019 work b. Understanding the 2019 /2020 Sea Lion TMP Projects c. Reflection on the Sea lion TMP Forum held 11 June 2019 d. Mapping the current situation – Auckland and Campbell Islands e. Development of Seven Project Proposals for 2020 / 2021 year – Subantarctic islands f. 2020 / 2021 Reflection on All Research Proposals g. Concluding Discussion – Mainland and Sub-Antarctic Projects h. Additional topics discussed in the afternoon i. Appendix: Flipchart Photos.

Refer also to the following documents circulated with this workshop report: • NZ Sea Lion TMP AG June 2019.pptx (Advisory Group Meeting Slides) https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/native- animals/marine-mammals/nz-sea-lion-tmp/nz-sea-lion-tmp-advisory- group-presentation-june-2019.pdf

And these documents, circulated prior to the Advisory Group Meeting: • 2019-20 Sea lion projects - DOC-5956011.docx (updated following Forum recommendations) • 2020-21 proposals_working_docm_ForumAG - DOC- 5963327.docx (to engage with stakeholders for its update in coming working groups)

Participants Participants:

Monique Holmes, Tamar Wells (Te Ohu Kaimoana), Tom Clark (Fisheries Inshore), Richard Wells (Deep Water Group Ltd), Shawn McConkey (NZSLT), Katrina Goddard (F&B), Greg Lydon (Fisheries New Zealand), Phredd Dobbins (DOC Rakiura), Ros Cole (DOC Murihiku), Jim Fyfe (DOC Coastal Otago), Enrique Pardo, Helena Dodge (DOC National Office)

Facilitator: Michelle Rush, Participatory Techniques Ltd

Apologies: Gail Thompson, Awarua Runaka, Tiffany Bock (Fisheries NZ), Kirsten Rodgers, Tony Preston (DOC Murihiku), Mike Hopkin (DOC Ōtākou)

Workshop The workshop purposes were: Purpose 1. To build an understanding of the results of the past year’s Sea Lion Threat Management Plan work 2. To review the projects being undertaken in 2019/2020 and provide an opportunity to make suggestions about the methods 3. To discuss and develop projects for the 2020 / 2021 financial year for Auckland and Campbell Islands. 4. To review these projects, and the priorities recommended from the Forum for the Mainland and identify an overall set of priorities.

Workshop The table below sets out the workshop agenda. Agenda

Time Task 9:00 Karakia, Mihi Whakatau, Introductions Purpose and Agenda 9:15 Progress Report – Findings from the 2018 / 2019 work. Workshop Activity

10:00 Sea Lion / Rāpoka TMP Research Proposals 2019/2020 Strategic Overview Presentation and Workshop Activity

10:45 Morning Tea 11:00 Forum Catch Up and Review

11:15 Updating the Current Situation for Sea Lions Mapping Exercise for Auckland and Campbell Islands. Workshop Activity

11:30 Proposals for Research Focus Areas 2020 / 21. Workshop Activity 1:00 Workshop Evaluation & Next Steps 1:15 Lunch 2:00 Q & A Other Matters

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 16 Time Task 3:00 Close

A Progress Report – Findings from the 2018 / 2019 work

Research Programme Area No. 2018 – 2019 Project Name POP2018-03 New Zealand 1 Auckland Islands pup counts and updates Sea Lion TMP New Zealand Sea Lion 2 Otago and Southland pup counts and updates 3 Stewart Island pup counts and updates 4 Campbell Island pup counts, updates and preliminary results from gross post-mortem investigations 5 Suitable habitats model – southern South Island project updates 6 Enderby Island pup mortality and necropsy preliminary results 7 Campbell Island pup behaviour in relation to terrain traps

8 Fisheries New Zealand projects update 9 Mātauranga project update

Workshop Taking one 2018 / 2019 TMP project each, participants were asked to Activity - 2018 / 2019 Progress prepare a 32-word progress summary from reports presented at the Reports Technical Working Group in March. These were then presented by participants, with an opportunity for clarification and further questions. The key points for each project are reproduced below.

Project 1 Objective: Auckland Island • counting, tagging, re-sighting ~ 1678 individuals NZSL Pup Counts Discussion: • Most accurate method for counting • Late start dates don’t allow for full picture • More re-sighting on Dundas, new microchips (PIT tagging) • Shark activity from scars photo library

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 17 • Ramp success • Chip retention.

Project 2 Otago • Pups tagged in Rakiura are being re-sighted in Otago and Southland • Two juvenile females died during the season Pup Count & • 17 pups tagged in Otago region Updates • New tracking app to map individuals useful • People’s behaviour a problem for rāpoka.

Project 3 Port • 51 pups tagged, March 2019 Pegasus • Remote, expensive / difficult to access. 1 trip per annum. (Rakiura) NZSL • Need good relationships with: Iwi, aquaculture, tourism, local Pup Counts community • Need repeatable consistent monitoring.

Project 4 • Latest fieldwork found unsustainably high pup mortality rates Campbell island (54% Campbell overall, 77% Davis Point) which were ascribed Pup Mortality to starvation and exposure. • A workshop was held in 2019 to develop mitigation options to reduce deaths, e.g. weather shelters.

Project 5 • This study modelled attributes that may enable sea lions to Suitable colonise sites in the lower South Island. Habitats Model • It included issues that might stop this, like human impacts. • The modeller accepted advice to improve it.

Project 6 • Team arrived early January. Missed early pup mortality period. Enderby Pup • 44 dead pups. 35 necropsied = 22 Klebsiella (TBC) Mortality Questions: • Longer season on Enderby? • The presence of Klebsiella inn Campbell is known, but not its relevance in pup mortality • Where to focus the resource.

Project 7 • Davis Point “Planks for Pups” Campbell Island • What can we do to protect pups from mud pools when pups pup behaviour keep moving? in relation to “terrain traps” • We have a bunch of tools, but we need to apply them to the right place and at the right time.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 18

Project 8 • Fisheries related mortality limit (FRML) is highly uncertain Fisheries NZ • Updating A.I. demographic model to estimate alternative Projects Population Sustainability Threshold (PST) • Assessing risk of overlap between sea lion foraging and fisheries.

Project 9 • Due to report September 2019 Mātauranga • Important to look to the past for knowledge, lessons etc Māori Project • Ngāi Tahu is here, have been for a long time, and will be for a long time to come • Unique relationship with rāpoka and will continue to be involved with recovery including TMP • Interviews going well, just sticking to Ngāi Tahu area / SI • Very important that cultural narratives are correct and shared in the right way.

B Understanding the Planned 2019 /2020 SL TMP Projects

Introduction A brief presentation was given on the 14 planned 2019/20 TMP projects. These are set out in the table below.

Project Related impact/issue Workstream Project location Campbell • Pup count, tagging Monitoring population Evaluation Island • Operation Endurance Pup mortality Direct mitigation • Davis Point mitigation Pup mortality Direct mitigation Auckland • Pup count, tagging, Monitoring population Evaluation Islands microchipping1, tagging, extended season • Necropsies at Enderby Is and Pup mortality Targeted research analysis of samples • Dundas re-sighting Monitoring population Evaluation Ōtākou • Pup count, tagging, microchipping Monitoring population Evaluation Murihiku • Pup count, tagging, microchipping Monitoring population Evaluation Rakiura • Pup count, tagging, microchipping Monitoring population Evaluation Others / all • Mātauranga project Iwi perspective & input All areas • Liaison Officer Human interactions and Engagement engagement • SQU6T Operational Plan review Fisheries interactions Direct mitigation • Cryptic mortality in fisheries Fisheries interactions Direct mitigation • Update Campbell Island NZSL Monitoring population Targeted research Population Sustainability Threshold (PST) estimation

1 Also known as PIT (Passive Integrated Transponder) tags

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 19

Review of 2019 / Following the presentation, participants had the opportunity to read more 2020 Proposed detail about each on posters provided. Participants were asked for method Projects suggestions and to note any questions they had about each project.

The table below records the method suggestions, questions and comments made by participants.

NB: Only the projects for which comment was made are included in the table below.

Method suggestions will be conveyed to the technical working group that will be developing the implementation plan for each of the projects.

2019 / 2020 Project Advisory Group Method Suggestions and Comments / Questions Estimation of annual pup Questions: production and population • How will capping be done? monitoring on Campbell • Will you microchip pups about to die? Island • How do goals for demographics link in with other populations for prioritisation? Sea Lion / Rāpoka Questions: Mātauranga Project • How will learnings from this project enable Mātauranga Māori to be a part of other projects? PMM2019-10 Update • Selected not just in consultation with FNZ? Campbell Island NZSL PST estimation (Fisheries NZ) Operation Endurance – • Ngāi Tahu needs to be involved in the planning for Campbell Island sea lion campsite improvements. monitoring • Opportunistic. Is it likely to occur? • How will the waterfall fence be robust enough and not a hazard to other wildlife etc? • What happened to Paradise colony? Is it increasing? • Removal and maintenance of any structures post its usefulness – track record is not good. • Risk assessment of Shoal Point. Dundas Island sea lion • Microchip traps? population monitoring • Everything depends on tags and chips. • Business as usual Sea Lion population • Business as usual monitoring Enderby Island • Important to have tags sorted out.

C Reflection on the NZSL TMP Forum held 11 June 2019

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 20 NZSL TMP For the benefit of the people present who hadn’t been at the Forum Forum – key earlier in the week, a brief overview of the Forum was presented, points including the priority areas that emerged, and the key considerations from the Mātauranga Māori project presentation that participants identified.

D Mapping the current situation – Auckland and Campbell Islands

Mapping Working in groups, participants built maps of the current situation for Activity sea lions on both the Auckland and Campbell Islands.

The key to the photos of the maps is as follows: • BLACK pen: Where the sea lions are, e.g. where the pups are etc • RED pen: The current issues in the place(s) they are occurring. • GREEN pen: Current projects, in the places they are under way. • BLUE pen: Any areas with new needs or gaps, and who needs to be involved if these are to be dealt with.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 21

E Development of Seven Project Proposals for 2020 / 2021 year – Subantarctic islands

Introduction A brief overview was given of the seven projects proposed for the Sub-Antarctic Islands for the 2020 / 2021 year. The project proposals are detailed in the table below.

Area Project Workstream

Auckland Pup count, tagging, re-sighting, microchipping at Evaluation Islands Enderby Is (extended season, Dec-March)

Pup count, tagging, re-sighting at Dundas Is Evaluation (extended season, Dec-Jan)

Necropsies Enderby / Dundas? + analysis Targeted research

Klebsiella trail solution** Direct mitigation

Foraging behaviours (video / tracking data)** Targeted research

Campbell Island Pup count, tagging, re-sighting Evaluation

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 22 Area Project Workstream

Terrain traps solutions assessment Direct mitigation

Foraging behaviours (video / tracking data)** Targeted research

Fisheries and SQU6T Operational Plan review Direct Mitigation aquaculture Aquaculture in Rakiura: analysis and engagement Engagement

Fisheries NZ projects (TBC)**

Photo ID library of animals with shark scars or Evaluation distinct scarring Multi-Year Projects Liaison Officer – marine mammals and TMP Engagement for Endorsement programmes everywhere only Mātauranga Māori All Notes: **Projects to be budgeted, explored and/or developed.

Advisory Group Working in breakout groups, participants reviewed one or more of the Feedback project proposals for work in the Sub-Antarctic Islands for 2020 / 2021 year. They were asked to:

1. View the proposal in light of the issues, needs and gaps identified on the relevant map. 2. Consider the proposal in light of the Mātauranga Māori considerations that were identified out of the Forum.

With these two dimensions in mind, discuss and determine:

• Are the goals correct? Amend, or add a goal if you think that is required to make sure an issue, need or gap is fully addressed. • Is the project targeting the right area? • What skills are needed in this project?

The results recorded by the breakout groups are set out below.

Proposed Project for Break Out Group Comments 2020/21 GPS / video tracking on Method: Enderby and Dundas • Co-develop with Ngāi Tahu to set out animal handling Islands protocol. • Goal is good: need to ensure sample size is big enough to be representative. • Are video cameras necessary? What cost/benefit trade-offs are happening?

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 23 Proposed Project for Break Out Group Comments 2020/21 GPS / video tracking on Comment: Campbell Island • Yes. Improves knowledge of impacts at Campbell’s. Campbell Island Comment: necropsies • Does add new information. Dundas Island necropsies Comment: • Will support knowledge / information on mortality factors wider than just Enderby. Method: • Veterinary support – Increase capacity/ skills capability. Opportunity for Ngāi Tahu internship etc? • Access – how to get there, keep team safe – boat based – a cost. • Ensure Enderby best practises necropsy, and things learned are applied. Trial of mitigation Method: measures to reduce the Needs: - impact of Klebsiella on • veterinary support skills pup mortality – Enderby • Immunology specialists Island • Good trial design – statistics • Ngāi Tahu views on disease management – support or not?

Method / Research Question comments: • How quickly is treatment expected to have an impact? I.e. can we measure the impact within sea lion season / dispersal etc? • Is it a prevention measure or a treatment measure? • If prevention: How to know if would have got it, and measure immunisation – seasonal factors • If treatment: requires confirmation of disease first as well as control. Sample size? Seasonal factors. • Ability for ‘treatment’ to pass to future generations? • Is there a difference in pups that predispose to Klebsiella, i.e. are we going to make things worse with treatment? Is there natural immunity developing as fewer deaths impact now from Klebsiella, e.g. pup deaths stabilised – why are things stabilising?

Comment: • Ros note: Liaison role = a recommendation to improve to 1 FTE -why not keep the role as it is, and look for ways to get another role – make it have a Ngāi Tahu focus and help deliver the work / involve with field work.

New Projects One new project was identified and discussed. It is detailed in the table below.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 24 New Project Title: M.O.U between FNZ, DOC, Ngāi Tahu for TMP Location N / A Description • To implement findings from the Mātauranga Māori project. • To enable and build capacity for Treaty partner relationship. Project Lead To be co-developed by Ngāi Tahu and Government agencies Who else needs to be involved?

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 25 F 2020 / 2021 Reflection on Research Proposals

Report Back Each group then reported back, and a plenary discussion was held, and and Plenary further questions about each project answered. The table below Discussion summarises this.

No. 2020/2021 Project Advisory Group Comments & Questions (as discussed and answered in plenary) 1. Dundas island population Sort out tags! monitoring  2. GPS / video tracking on Enderby Ensure sample size is big enough. What is C.B.A for video and Dundas islands cameras? Need to co-develop animal handling protocol with Ngāi Tahu. Why is tracking needed? 3. Campbell Island necropsies Needed because adding new information in respect of disease at Campbell Island. Do we need this? 4. Annual pup production Campbell Very difficult to cap pups in harems – perhaps a feasibility estimations also comparing marked study? Use different colour caps to help people quickly see. recapture TMP priority is for 5 years consistent monitoring. Should we revisit? Should we separate out the disease element as a separate project? If 2019/2020 information says so… would need criteria.

5. Trial and mitigation for Klebsiella – Is it prevention or treatment? It is treatment, thus a lot of Enderby  detail in trial design. 6. Dundas Island necropsies Fills a knowledge gap. Add in a goal of looking at distribution and re-sighting during this survey. Make place available for Ngāi Tahu on the team. 7. Photo Identification of animals – Adds knowledge. Opportunistic. But lesser priority. What shark scars are you going to do with the data? 8. Liaison officer Great. Change to Full Time for 2020/21. Make a case for this. 9. Mātauranga Māori Yes continue! What dollars will be allocated for implementation? Relationship needs to be resourced. 10. GPS / video tracking on Campbell Needed to track foraging patterns of habitat use for Island Campbell Island. Is it worth the cost? 11. Population Monitoring on Enderby Sort out tags! Island

G Concluding Discussion – Mainland and Sub-Antarctic Projects

Concerns and Participants were refreshed on the full set of projects developed Key Messages including those recommended as priorities for both Mainland and Sub- Antarctic Islands for 2020/21.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 26 A structured discussion followed, out of which concerns, key messages and next steps for the TMP work programme for 2020/21 were identified.

Concerns: We are missing projects for nutritional stress / stable isotopes; also projects to measure the indirect effects (Climatic and Oceanic effects) and understanding prey availability.

There is a lack of funding and skilled capability (limitation of skilled people, e.g. vets) for the number of projects.

There is a lack of observer coverage in mainland inshore fisheries.

Information not communicated / passed on for fisheries research.

Messages:

• Need different approaches for Mainland sites and the Sub- Antarctic islands. • Projects need to be of a sustainable design, e.g. ensuring you are gathering the correct information. Ensure that we are asking the correct questions so that data that is gathered can be used and implemented. • Look for opportunities for leverage, e.g. NIWA’s Sub- Antarctic ecosystem study. • Find ways to communicate between projects and groups, e.g. sharing minutes and other things relevant to what’s happening. • Make the most of trips to the subantarctic islands – but samples gathered do need to be used.

Next Steps Priority Focus Areas:

1) Nutrition – foraging / diet, stable isotope studies for the Mainland, also the Sub-Antarctic Islands.

2) Memorandum of Understanding to implement Mātauranga Māori project

Next Steps for the 2019/2020 Projects Refine package for 2019/2020, taking into account feedback from the Forum and Advisory Group

Next Steps for the 2020/2021 Projects • Refine the package for 2020/21, providing a technical / science overview.

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 27 • The process needs to include discussion and resolution on the nutrition question, starting with a stocktake from the work done already.

• Provide an opportunity for further comment from both the Forum and Advisory Group.

• Then seek science input.

Improvement suggested for next Advisory Group Meeting: Need a bigger room. Need recreational fishermen, inshore MPI, Ngāi Tahu (at Advisory Group not just Forum)

H Additional topics discussed in the afternoon

Issues & The following topics were identified as needing more in-depth Questions for discussion in the afternoon: Afternoon Session • Tag and Chip durability • Timing of advice in respect of the fisheries operational plan. • Addressing barriers to including Mātauranga Māori • Liaison officer actions and priorities.

Key points and actions from this discussion are detailed below.

Flipper Tag and • Where are we at with the process of finding durable tags and PIT tag chips? (microchip) This is critical to the work. Durability o Clarified that alternatives are going to be explored and evaluated, including asking stakeholders for feedback. o Recommendation: that a decision on tags and chips be made by July so that they can be ordered. Issue: Need for at least some microchipping of surviving pups so we can track over time.

Afternoon discussion resolutions: Microchips: • Want a plan or schedule for actions. Flipper tags: • How important is it to know tag loss rate on Campbell Island specifically? • If we get better option before this summer (i.e. July) if not, use Trovan. Question: How important is knowing the loss rate at Campbell Island specifically?

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 28

Timing of advice Timing of advice for Squid 6T fisheries operational plan. and fisheries operational plan

Mātauranga How to address the barriers to including Mātauranga Māori / Māori Māori / Māori involvement in sea lion projects. involvement in NZSL Projects Afternoon discussion resolutions: 1. September recommendations: MOU? / Opportunities e.g. in field / research. 2. National Engagement Strategy includes Ngāi Tahu 3. Recovery group representative for Ngāi Tahu?

Liaison Officer Liaison officer actions / priorities Tasks to Assign Afternoon discussion resolutions: 1. National Engagement Strategy – toolkit 2. TMP Projects 3. Field 4. Internal (operational) Communication and Engagement with Forum and Advisory Group

Workshop Report NZ Sea Lion TMP Forum 11 June 2019 29

Appendixes - 2019 Forum Appendix One: Forum Development of Proposed Projects for 2020/2021 for Ōtākou, Murihiku and Rakiura

Key: Red Bold = Questions to the Forum Red font = Revised wording and comments from the Forum.

Note: The population monitoring projects, liaison officer proposal and Mātauranga Māori projects are multi-year projects and included in the 2020 / 2021 proposals, but not discussed in this session.

Project name: Interactions with coastal users – Ōtākou Forum Comments

Goals: Review the goals. Are they right? 1. To identify the nature and extent of Need a tangible timeline for completing this Suggest re-wording or alternatives(s) current and potential interactions between work. coastal users and sea lion including Need more emphasis on education, not just hotspots and most common users to mitigation. identify where this is having the most impact on sea lions. 2. To propose and agree management measures to mitigate negative interactions with sea lions ▪ Dog walkers when dogs are not on lead and chase sea lion ▪ Tourist operators when protocols, permit conditions and/or recommendations are not followed ▪ Visitor behaviour when not signage or enough information is provided ▪ Surfers approached by sea lion while in the water or on the shore ▪ Divers approached by sea lion while in the water or on the shore ▪ Fishers approached by sea lion while on the water or on shore

Method and Materials: ▪ This project is a proposal to develop a specific plan of action that will identify issues with and actions to mitigate them. ▪ These actions will require engagement with other authorities/organisations directly involved in the management of these areas.

If you had to choose which goals to do first, Goal 1 is already known. Focus on Goal 2 how would you rank them?

Where would be good to test this project? Allan’s Beach (and Hoopers Inlet). Possibly Smaill’s Beach. Aramoana Mole. E.g. diverse, recreational fishers.

Who could lead it? This is the National Engagement Campaign. $ needed from DOC and NZSLT in support.

Who needs to be involved? Aramoana Conservation Trust; University of Otago, Marine Studies Centre, Fish and Game, Also Ngāi Tahu, Ōtākou Marae, DCC, ORC esp regional coastal plan.

Also dog walkers, owners; duck hunters, diverse, fishers, land owners e.g. those at Allen’s Beach. Tourist Operators, surfers.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 31 Project name: Interactions with coastal structures / developments – Ōtākou Forum Comments Priority Project 1?

Goals: 1. (2)To identify issues recorded with existing coastal Review the goals. Are they structures right? Suggest re-wording or 2. (#3)To identify potential issues/risks with existing alternatives(s) coastal structures 3. (4)To identify risks on sea lion expansion and existing or planned coastal developments 4. (5)To propose management measures to reduce the risk of existing structures on sea lion and potential risks in the future. 5. (6) Tangible timeline for actions

1) Identify gaps in existing planning and general planning legislation re potential future interactions with growing SL populations. Ask if the goals and policies are adequate.

Method and Materials: ▪ An initial review of issues recorded with an analysis of the type of infrastructure that appears to be targeted by sea lion. Ongoing research on habitat suitability modelling can provide useful information for the development of a spatially explicit risk map ▪ Actions to mitigate these issues would be proposed following analysis. These actions will require engagement with other authorities/organisations directly involved in the management of these areas. If you had to choose which 6, #3, w/5, 4, 2, - 1 is always being done. goals to do first, how would #5 could coincide with #3. you rank them?

Where would be good to test Around Dunedin would be a good place. this project?

Who could lead it? Who needs When DOC reviews. Prepare for opportunities to engage liaison officer in coastal plans. Aukaha with to be involved? Dunedin City Council once gather information to come up with management measurements.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 32

Project name: sea lion coastal habitat and their management on private land – Ōtākou Forum Comments

Goals: Review the goals. Are 1. To identify presence of sea lion on private land Case by case. Goal 2 represents a they right? Suggest re-wording 2. To identify potential expansion of sea lion on private land conflict problem with no solution. Need or alternatives(s) 3. To develop positive engagement strategies with to assess value to sea lions. landowners

1) To manage risks to sea lions on private land. 2) Evaluate potential expansion onto private land. Ground-truth (spatial map Veronica F)

Method and Materials: ▪ This project will create a record of existing and potential areas where sea lions are present on private land including the nature of interactions and potential conflicts. This will be based on DOC records and through speaking directly with landowners and other relevant parties. ▪ The engagement process and direct actions should be determined case by case, depending of the needs. There should be a sorting process to identify priorities based on needs.

Re ‘DOC records’ – there are many other sources, e.g. iwi, NZSLT, volunteers, etc, also Fisheries. If you had to choose which goals to do first, how would you rank them?

Where would be good to test this project?

Wh0 could lead it? Who needs to be involved?

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 33 Project name: Recreational and commercial fisheries (to be agreed with discussed with Fisheries Forum Comments New Zealand) – Ōtākou Project Priority 3?

Goals: Review the goals. Are 1. To review records of sea lion engagement on all Combine this project with the they right? Suggest re-wording types of fishing gears recreational and commercial fisheries or alternatives(s) 2. To assess the effectiveness of the local set-net project proposed for Murihiku and protocol and potential update Rakiura. 3. To engage with coastal/recreational fishermen to understand the interactions and develop solutions

Method and Material: ▪ To review historic and anecdotal records of interactions with active or abandoned fishing gear in the coastal areas. ▪ To contact and identify the use and suitability of the setnet protocol. If you had to choose which 3,1,2,1. Where land could be purchased. goals to do first, how would you rank them?

Where would be good to test Allan’s (Neill’s); Okia Reserve (DCC and YEPT); Smaills (DCC) / . this project?

Who could lead it? Who needs Liaison officer – lead – delivery. Runaka involvement / lead? to be involved? Supported by some good research and social science and communication experts. Multi-stakeholders.

Project name: Recreational and commercial fisheries (to be discussed with Fisheries Forum Comments New Zealand) – Murihiku

Goals: Review the goals. Are 1. To review records of sea lion engagement on all types Combine this project with same projects they right? Suggest re-wording of fishing gears for Rakiura and Ōtākou or alternatives(s) 2. To assess the effectiveness of the local set-net protocol and potential update 3. To engage with coastal/recreational fishermen to understand the interactions and develop solutions

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 34 Method and Materials: ▪ To review historic and anecdotal records of interactions with active or abandoned fishing gear in the coastal areas. ▪ To contact and identify the use and suitability of the setnet protocol.

Project name: Recreational and commercial fisheries (to be agreed with Fisheries New Zealand) – Forum Comments Rakiura

Goals: Review the goals. Are they right? 1. To review records of sea lion interactions Combine this project with same Suggest re-wording or alternatives(s) entanglement on all types of fishing gears. To projects for Murihiku and Ōtākou research to gain knowledge of the magnitude of the issue, e.g. breeding females, pups, juveniles. 2. To assess the effectiveness of the local set-net Breeding risk and overlap for female protocol and potential update satellite tags. 3. To engage with coastal/commercial, and customary recreational fishermen and paua divers – DOC CSP Need to refine research focus and Liaison Officer, Graham Parker to understand the questions interactions and develop solutions 4. Management actions. Set net data – last 4 years – Need to 5. Effectiveness? know amount Method and Materials: ▪ To review historic and anecdotal records of interactions with active or abandoned fishing gear in the coastal areas. ▪ To contact and identify the use and suitability of the setnet protocol. If you had to choose which goals to do first, how would you rank them? Higher rank is where there is also observer coverage and cameras (from othter projects… focus on areas of overlap)

NB. Do Fishers go to both areas?

Where would be good to test this project? Otago? Fouveaux Strait? All sites? Comes out of foraging research.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 35

Project name: Interactions with coastal users – Murihiku Forum Comments

Goals: Review the goals. Are 1. To identify the nature and extent of current and they right? Suggest re-wording potential interactions between coastal users and or alternatives(s): sea lion including hotspots and most common users to identify where this is having most impact on sea lions. Note: For South Catlins, South Coast and Invercargill (additional effort… less is already known about them…) But compile for whole area. Note: Difference of opinion on this one, “Murihiku spreadsheet captures these interactions.” – During discussion it was agreed that this spreadsheet data was limited, so extra effort was still required.

2. To propose and agree management measures to mitigate negative interactions with sea lions

On land: ▪ Dog walkers when dogs are not on lead and chase sea lions ▪ Visitor behaviour when not signage or enough information is provided On water: ▪ Surfers approached by sea lion while in the water or on the shore ▪ Divers approached by sea lion while in the water or on the shore ▪ Fishers approached by sea lion while on the water or on shore

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 36 If you had to choose which goals For North Catlins: Goal 2 to do first, how would you rank them? For South Catlins, = Goal 1

Method and Materials: ▪ This project is a proposal to develop a specific plan of action that will identify issues with sea lion and actions to mitigate them. ▪ These actions will require engagement with other authorities/organisations directly involved in the management of these areas.

Where would be good to test this project? Waipapa Point – Goal 1; Surat Bay, Cannibal Bay Goal 2.

Who could lead it? DOC, NZSLT.

Who needs to be involved ? CDC, SDC, ORC, ES, Ngāi Tahu, South Catlins. Catlins Coast. Catlins Promotions. Surfers, dog walkers, divers, fishers, tourists.

Project name: Interactions with coastal structures / developments – Forum Comments: Murihiku

Goals: Review the 1. To identify issues recorded with existing goals. Are they right? coastal structures Suggest re-wording or 2. To identify potential issues/risks with alternatives(s) existing coastal structures 3. To identify risks on sea lion expansion and existing or planned coastal developments 4. To propose management measures to reduce the risk of existing structures on sea lion and potential risks in the future.

Reword as for Ōtākou

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 37 Project name: Interactions with coastal structures / developments – Forum Comments: Murihiku

Method and Materials: ▪ An initial review of issues recorded with an analysis of the type of infrastructure that appears to be targeted by sea lion. Ongoing research on habitat suitability modelling can provide useful information for the development of a spatially explicit risk map ▪ Actions to mitigate these issues would be proposed following analysis. These actions will require engagement with other authorities/organisations directly involved in the management of these areas. If you had to choose which goals to do first, Reword as for Ōtākou how would you rank them?

Where would be good to test this project? Kaka Point – Catlins Estuary

Who could lead it? Who needs to be Southland District Council; Clutha District Council. Liaison officer also. involved? DOC leading once the information is gathered. DOC’s professional planner work with district and regional councils to come up with management measures. Te Ao Mārama.

Project name: Sea lion coastal habitat and their management on private land – Forum Comments Murihiku Priority Project 4

Goals: 1. To identify presence of sea lion on Note that ‘private land’ includes TLA land, private land. To identify the extent and Māori land, forestry companies, and Review the goals. Are they right? level of interaction with land owners. corporations. Add SILNA land to this too. Suggest re-wording or alternatives(s) 2. To identify potential expansion of sea lion on private land 3. To develop positive engagement strategies with landowners

Alternative (to complete/replace) goals 1) To manage risks to sealions on private and SILNA land.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 38 Project name: Sea lion coastal habitat and their management on private land – Forum Comments Murihiku Priority Project 4

2) Identify what the limitations to expansion by SL on private land and waork with the potential / evaluation potential expansion onto private land.

If you had to choose which goals to do 3, 2, 1. Where land could be purchased. first, how would you rank them?

Method and Materials: ▪ This project will create a record of existing and potential areas where sea lions are present on private land including the nature of interactions and potential conflicts. This will be based on DOC records and through speaking directly with landowners and other relevant parties. ▪ The engagement process and direct actions should be determined case by case, depending of the needs. Where would be good to test this Focal points identified in mapping exercises (hot spot sites) e.g. Catlins Lake area. project? Jacks Bay. Interaction with Invercargill city. NB: Someone added: “Not enough sea lions to be a good test.”

Who could lead it? Murihiku District / Awarua Runaka lead –

Who needs to be involved? delivery through Owaka. Involved DOC, Awarua, landowners, community, CDC, SLT and new liaison officer.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 39 Project name: Interactions with aquaculture - Rakiura Forum Comments

Goals: 1. To characterise the potential overlap * Bluff Harbour. * Sea lions foraging. “Predator” Proof fencing. Review the goals. Are and possible interactions of sea lion they right? Suggest re- with aquaculture activities Existing: wording or Big Glory Bay alternatives(s) Paterson Inlet Review Mitigation. Agreed Best Practice. (Industry code of practice?)

• What do we do? • What sites to protect? • Larger environmental effects • Blockage of Habitat.

Method and Materials: ▪ Review of existing data on sea lion habitat, existing and proposed aquaculture development to assess potential spatial overlaps that could lead to negative interactions ▪ Review of existing data on potential impacts of aquaculture on sea lion and other marine mammal species to assess the potential for future interactions. ▪ Engagement with all stakeholders, e.g. including Bluff Harbour. Management Actions

If you had to choose which goals to do first, how would you rank them? Education!

Where would be good to test this project? Where there is greatest magnitude of the issue.

Who could lead it? Who needs to be involved?

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 40 Project name: Interactions with coastal users - Rakiura Forum comments

Goals: 1. To identify the nature and extent of current and Review the goals. Are they right? Suggest potential interactions between coastal users and re-wording or alternatives(s) sea lion including hotspots and most common users to identify where this is having most impact on sea lions. 2. To propose and agree management measures to mitigate negative interactions with sea lions On land: ▪ Tourist operators when protocols, permit conditions and/or recommendations are not followed? ▪ Visitor behaviour when not signage or enough information is provided? ▪ Hunters operating in the coastal area where NZSL may occur (e.g. Port Pegasus) On water: ▪ Divers approached by sea lion while in the water or on the shore ▪ Fishers approached by sea lion while on the water or on shore If you had to choose which goals to do first, how would you rank Goal 1 is likely known and just requires compiling what is known. them? Focus should be on Goal 2.

Method and Materials: ▪ This project is a proposal to develop a specific plan of action that will identify issues with sea lion and actions to mitigate them. ▪ These actions will require engagement with other authorities/organisations directly involved in the management of these areas.

Where would be good to test this project? Around Oban township.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 41 Project name: Interactions with coastal users - Rakiura Forum comments

Who could lead it? DOC

Who needs to be involved? Rakiura Māori – Ngāi Tahu. Rakiura Hunters Trust. Southland District Council, Southland Regional Council, esp w.r.t coastal plan. Paua divers, commercial fishers, tourist operators, locals, e.g. resident’s association. The Pub!

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 42 Appendix Two: Additional Projects for 2020/ 2021 for Ōtākou, Murihiku and Rakiura

1 Financial Support for Description: Private Land Owners Engagement with commercial users Where: Rakiura Who could lead? Who needs to be involved?

2 Rakiura Private and Description: RNLT Engagement with commercial users Where: Rakiura

Who could lead? Who needs to be involved?

3 What are sea lions feeding Description: on? What is their diet? What about climate change? Sea Lions shot at sea – recreational people? What are the ecosystem changes? Tagging data is old. Where: Sources of information: Local fishing clubs, e.g. Karitane Recreational overlap with coastal project. Who could lead? Who needs to be involved? Graham P, Mark G, Richard W.

Develop a National Description: Multi-stakeholder approach. Aim to be able to have ‘meaningful conversations’ and positive Engagement messages to foster empowerment / ownership. Aim is that Sea Lions become theirs. Has to include visible and Approach / Plan high level support, e.g. by Minister / D.G. / Celebrity(ies) Where: Throughout. NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 43 Who could lead? National. Who needs to be involved?

Develop a National Description: Key messages and tailored information for key user groups. Engagement Campaign Tool Kit How to get the messaging out, and in an appropriate medium, e.g. social media; newsletters; media; key sites etc.

Target key sites.

Where: Throughout. Social media channels. International marketing, communicating to visitors. Who could lead? National. Ngāi Tahu, hunters, divers… Everyone involved including user groups and what information they want need. Involve bodies like surfers in designing the messages. Companies, e.g. Korona story. Who needs to be involved?

Hoopers Inlet Description: A concentrate creche site facing many impacts from humans on pups and females. Do benchmark study; test changes; look ‘before and after’.

The site is close and localised, easy to research both for sea lions and people. So a good place to test possible mitigations.

Where: Hoopers Inlet

Who could lead? DOC, look for independent provider. Who needs to be involved? DCC, ORC, NZSLT, local communities, landowners, Ngāi Tahu.

The Planning Context for Description: This relates to interactions with coastal structures and developments. Otago Regional Council, via Rāpoka Survival and Coastal Plan Process. Coastal and District Plan overview for the Southern Districts that provides advice on the Success ability to make submissions on consents or plans for the benefits and welfare of Rāpoka.

The project needs to follow a stage of identifying the issues and proposing management.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 44 Literature and policy review of RMP district plans and coastal plans.

Collate information for input into the planning process. Also spatial mapping exercise. Collage information from Treaty partner sand stakeholders and researchers.

Where: Priority is ORC administrative area, and Environment Southland’s administrative area. Southern Districts, TWP. Coastal planning areas administered by ORC. Also those administered by SRC?

Who could lead? DOC leads, but ho and who needs to be clarified. Ngāi Tahu too? Who needs to be involved? Ngāi Tahu, DOC – local DOC districts and planner and stakeholders. Aukaha planning organisation TMP Forum. (Can TMP get involved in the process, and how?) Council biodiversity officers, e.g. Southland District Council, Environment Southland, Richard Evans in DCC in Dunedin.

NZSL TMP Advisory Group Meeting 13-6-19 45