New Zealand Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum 2021
Forum Report | 14 April 2021 – Ōtepoti
Cover: Pakake on Muaupoko/Otago Peninsula. Photo: Megan Abbott, DOC. DOC – April 2021 Crown copyright [2021], New Zealand Department of Conservation In the interest of forest conservation, we support paperless electronic publishing.
2 DOC - 6645797
Contents:
1 New Zealand Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum 2021 ...... 4 1.1 Recommendations to the Technical Advisory Group ...... 4 1.2 What is working well in the current Threat Management Plan ...... 5 1.3 Recommendations for the upcoming review of the Threat Management Plan ...... 5 2 Forum minutes ...... 6 2.1 Purpose and Terms of Reference ...... 6 2.2 Participation ...... 7 2.3 Agenda ...... 7 3 Desired outcomes for the 2021 Forum ...... 8 4 Terms of reference and TMP review ...... 8 5 Subantarctic Islands Field Report ...... 9 6 South Island Field Report ...... 10 7 Volunteers ...... 11 8 Community engagement and kōrero ...... 12 8.1 DOC Hotline ...... 12 8.2 Ranger capacity ...... 12 8.3 Council representation at the Forum ...... 13 9 Rakiura Field Report ...... 13 10 Fisheries New Zealand update: New Zealand Sea Lion Threats ...... 14 11 Marine and Coastal Species Liaison Officer ...... 15 12 Traffic Light Report ...... 16 13 Next steps...... 17 14 References...... 17 15 Appendix – post-hui feedback from the NZSLT ...... 17
3 DOC - 6645797
1 New Zealand Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum 2021
This report summarises notes from the New Zealand Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum held from 10.30am to 5.00pm on 14 April 2021 at the Dunedin Town Hall, Ōtepoti. Recommendations to the Technical Advisory Group were formulated following presentations and group discussions, and are presented in 1.1 to 1.3. Minutes of the presentations and group discussion are presented in sections 2 to 12 of this report.
1.1 Recommendations to the Technical Advisory Group The recommendations to the Technical Advisory Group are summarised below. This is a list of recommendations put forward during the hui but does not reflect consensus of the group.
Funding: Identify and communicate funding priorities for 2021/22; Prioritise and communicate the funding priorities for both northern and southern populations.
Vessels: Prioritise looking for partnerships (e.g. cruise ships) to allow for more cost- effective travel to the subantarctic islands and more options for transport during the field season.
Subantarctic research: Ensure that 2021/22 research trips go ahead, and that they are adequately resourced. Ensure that appropriate vessels are secured for the 2021/22 field work. Investigate remote sensing options if teams cannot be deployed on the ground.
Fisheries interactions: A uniform set net ban1 in estuaries should be considered, as estuaries are important habitats for sea lions, e.g. Blueskin Bay, Papanui Inlet, Hoopers Inlet, Otago Harbour, Catlins Estuary. The interaction of sea lions and aquaculture development needs to be addressed as northern populations expand.
Long-term Council Plans: Submissions can be made by organisations to Councils to advocate for safeguarding sea lion habitat, e.g. restricting vehicles on beaches. Consider assembling formal submissions to Council long-term plans for sea lion management, particularly addressing the issue of vehicles on beaches and protection of animals near coastal roads.
Engagement and Education strategy: Ensure that this strategy is prioritised in 2021/22, as it is a key tool for managing threats for northern populations. Identify specific advocacy initiatives that can be trialled and reported on in 2021/22. Improve year-round reporting on the progress of these strategies and initiatives.
Engagement workstream: Ensure that DOC have enough resources for the 2021/22 season, in terms of Summer Rangers, Biodiversity Rangers, the Liaison Officer role, and that volunteers are recruited and trained. Standardise reporting of human-sea lion
1 set net bans already apply to Blueskin Bay (Karitāne Estuary, Waitati Estuary, Pūrākaunui Estuary) and most of the Catlins Estuary. Papanui Inlet has a code of practice. This leaves Hoopers Inlet, which generally has a closed bar, and Otago Harbour, which is closed at the mouth and upper half of the Harbour. Most of the outer harbour is a mātatitai.
4 DOC - 6645797
interactions, so that negative and positive events can be reported on and tracked over time (i.e. SMART statistics).
Evaluation: Improve the TMP methods for measuring and reporting on successes and failures, (e.g. “learnings” in the form of report-writing and dissemination of information from interventions). Plan a pre-season meeting (e.g. August/September) to help align efforts across Forum members. Improve year-round communication of the progress towards TMP goals.
Secure terrestrial habitats for sea lions: Consider stocktaking of land where sea lions are present, including private land, so that habitats can be managed in the long- term. Improving landowner education and enabling landowners to protect sea lions on their properties should be prioritised (e.g. management of coastal pine forest harvesting). Identify areas of private land that could be secured for long-term sea lion habitat.
1.2 What is working well in the current Threat Management Plan
Forum structure: Open and honest kōrero is happening in the Forum, and it is well facilitated. Face-to-face meetings improve relationships between groups. Opportunities to give feedback to the TAG are invaluable. This Forum was a vast improvement on past hui with the focus being on South Island and Rakiura issues.
Information availability: All reports, minutes, and presentations are available online via DOC’s website.
1.3 Recommendations for the upcoming review of the Threat Management Plan
Consider delaying the modelling of population dynamics for the review of the TMP: In light of the poor quality of data from the subantarctics in recent years, and missing data from 2020-21 due to COVID.
Action for the Technical Advisory Group: Can the TAG confirm if the truncated or missing data from the last two field seasons affect population modelling?
Site-specific measures of success: Widen the scope of human-sea lion conflict beyond “deliberate mortality”; Consider developing an “action plan” for TMP goals.
Mana whenua engagement: Improve the ways in which mana whenua can exercise kaitiakitanga across the takiwā. Resource and enable mana whenua engagement through the new TMP structure.
Terms of Reference: Consider changing the terms of reference for the Forum by clarifying the role of the hui in the decision-making process. Consider changing the format of the Forum, so that reports are taken as read, and skip the presentations, so that the Forum is focused on discussion and recommendations for both northern and southern populations of sea lions.
5 DOC-6645797
Improve structure and accountabilities: In the past there has been inconsistent management of the TMP. Clarify which agencies are leading which initiatives. The new TMP should consider setting priorities with SMART goals. Investigate alternative opportunities to resource some of these goals.
Expand Forum membership: Solicit participation from Councils, recreational fishers, divers, tourism operators, local community groups. Focus the Forum predominantly on northern populations where there are greater human-related conflicts.
Formal recommendations from members of the TMP Forum: Consensus was reached that the Forum needs to allow for individuals and groups to have time to consider their official feedback following presentations and discussions at the Forum. This might include reporting back to their organisation and giving more formal feedback to the Forum.
Action for Forum members: The Forum members agreed that individuals and groups could give feedback on their official position after the meeting, for incorporation into the report.
2 Forum minutes
2.1 Purpose and Terms of Reference The New Zealand Sea Lion Threat Management Plan Forum’s purpose is to review and recommend priorities for each of the four workstreams (engagement, direct mitigation, targeted research, and evaluation) for the following year, based on the previous year’s findings. The Forum meets annually in the Otago/Southland region. The Terms of Reference for the Forum can be found here.
2.1.1 Functions The functions of the New Zealand Sea Lion Forum are to: • Consider the results of the previous field season in relation to the 5-year and 20-year goals of the TMP; • Review and evaluate the effectiveness of local (Otago, Catlins, and Stewart Island) interventions and provide advice on improvements; • Provide a forum for discussion of proposed approaches to management (including Operational Plans for fisheries); • Aid in the establishment of a transparent New Zealand sea lion database and data- sharing process, and; • Incorporate local community stakeholder feedback into the project prioritisation for the upcoming research season.
6 DOC-6645797
2.2 Participation The Forum allows iwi, the Crown and stakeholders to come together to discuss and prioritise recovery actions under the TMP.
The 2021 Forum was attended in person by the following people: Aramoana (Otago) Conservation Trust: Bradley Curnow; Department of Conservation: Charlie Barnett, Laura Boren, Rosalind Cole, Phred Dobbins, Jim Fyfe, Kat Manno, Chris Page, Kris Ramm, Marcus Simons, Mel Young; Fisheries New Zealand: Tony Brett, Greg Lydon; Forest and Bird: Rick Zwaan; Independent facilitator: Sarah Wilson; New Zealand Sea Lion Trust: Bryony Alden, Shaun McConkey, Amanda Nally, Hanna Ravn, Jordana Whyte; Otago Conservation Board: Robyn Shanks; Otago Peninsula Community Board: Paul Pope; Otago Regional Council: Scott Jarvie; Sea Society: Sian Mair; Southland Conservation Board: John Whitehead; Te Ohu Kaimoana: Tamar Wells; University of Otago: Moss Thompson; Volunteers: Janet Ledingham.
Every effort was made to ensure that the Forum was available online, and a Microsoft Teams interface was used to connect with participants that were not able to attend in person. MS Teams attendees were: Deepwater Group: Richard Wells; Department of Conservation: Katie Clemens-Seely; Southern Inshore Fisheries: Carol Scott.
Apologies were received from: Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu: Mark Witehira; Te Rūnaka o Awarua: Gail Thompson; Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou: Hoani Langsbury; Dunedin City Council: Aalbert Rebergen; Fisheries Inshore New Zealand: Tom Clark; Box of Light: Derek Morrison; Waitaki District Council: Gareth Boyt; Wildbase: Louise Chilvers.
In addition, representatives from the following groups were invited to attend but no response was received: Auckland Zoo, Bluff Community Board, Dive Otago, ECO, Environment Southland, Hokonui Rūnanga, Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki, landowners (various), Ōraka Aparima Rūnaka, Rakiura Tītī Island Administering Body, Southland District Council, Te Rūnanga o Moeraki, and WWF.
2.3 Agenda The following presentations and discussions were presented at the 2021 Forum (presentations and field reports can be found here):
Time Items 10.30 Registration and informal greetings 11.00 Hui commenced Karakia Welcome from Facilitator Sarah Wilson Introductions/pepeha, and desired outcomes for the day Forum Terms of Reference, TMP Review Process – Kris Ramm 11.30 Presentations Subantarctic populations: 2019/20, 2020/21 and upcoming – Kat Manno South Island population: 2020/21 – Jim Fyfe, Volunteers – Jordana Whyte Community and engagement kōrero 12:30 Lunch 1:15 Presentations Rakiura population: 2020/21 – Phred Dobbins Fisheries New Zealand Update – Greg Lydon Marine and Coastal Species Liaison Officer overview – Chris Page Community and engagement kōrero Traffic light report – Kat Manno
7 DOC-6645797
2:15 Break-out groups: to consider: 1. What do we need to recommend to the Technical Advisory Group? 2. What is working well in the current TMP? 3. What would we change in the new TMP? 3:15 Afternoon tea 3:30 Recommendations for the Advisory Group and TMP review process Closing karakia 5:00 Hui concluded
3 Desired outcomes for the 2021 Forum
Participants were asked to indicate their desired outcomes for the 2021 Forum in a round table introduction/pepeha session. The following responses were received:
• To meet others working with New Zealand sea lion issues, to improve networks, and face-to-name contact with others that are geographically dispersed; • To be briefed on the New Zealand sea lion population size, trends and local issues, with the most up to date information, and how this information can be incorporated into long-term or national-level planning and policy; • To have clarity around roles and responsibilities of different staff within the Department of Conservation (DOC) for New Zealand sea lions; • To have clarity on the plans for the 2021/22 season (engagement, mitigation, research and evaluation); • To have clarity on the progress of the current Threat Management Plan, and that clear priorities for the new TMP are identified as part of the 2021 Forum; • To determine if there is potential to develop educational and advocacy resources with DOC and others as part of the current Threat Management Plan; • To have clarity around the planning for future human-sea lion interventions, as the numbers of mothers and pups continues to increase in northern populations; • To ensure that DOC has enough resources to achieve the objectives of the TMP for all populations; To assist with operations and business planning; To coordinate future mahi across multiple organisations that are involved, and how to best support each other; • To ensure that there is a long-term commitment to the Liaison Officer position created as a function of the TMP; • To discuss the role and functionality of the Forum and how the terms of reference address the capacity to assess the four TMP workstreams; • To hear and take onboard feedback from stakeholders.
4 Terms of reference and TMP review
Kris Ramm, Department of Conservation
Kris acknowledged that the Department of Conservation administer the Threat Management Plan (TMP) Forum as an opportunity for stakeholders to provide feedback, however that decision-making occurs at a higher level. The TMP review process would consider the focus of the current TMP in achieving its goals across the four workstreams
8 DOC-6645797
(engagement, direct mitigation, targeted research, and evaluation), and whether after five years that the TMP goals had been achieved.
Due to the low quality of the data collected in the 2019/20 season and the subsequent cancellation of the 2020/21 season in the subantarctic, several questions related to the TMP review timelines, and whether these would be pushed back to allow for more data collection and research to occur. It was acknowledged that a delay in review of the TMP might be appropriate so that robust data could be collected, however that would need to be considered by the Technical Advisory Group and the TMP Partners (DOC, Ngāi Tahu and Fisheries New Zealand).
In addition, Kris confirmed that the Department are working with Ngāi Tahu with respect to the Te Reo Māori name for New Zealand sea lions, following the report by Scott-Fyfe (2019).
5 Subantarctic Islands Field Report
Kat Manno, Department of Conservation
Results for the 2019/20 field seasons on Auckland Islands/Motu Maha and Campbell Island/Motu Ihupuku were presented. On the Auckland Islands, 510 pups were tagged across three colonies, with a mark-recapture estimate of 1740 pups, which is within the TMP measures of success for this site. However, there was 49% mortality of pups on Figure of Eight Island, with an unknown cause of death. Due to multiple issues with boat transport, the field season was truncated, and in combination with the inexperience of the team, the fieldwork was less effective than desired. The spread of two teams across Campbell Island was also considered ineffective due to team inexperience and being spread too thinly across a wide geographical area, as well as extreme weather, and inability to conduct resights because of male sea lion territoriality. In total, 223 pups were tagged, and pups died in large numbers following a storm in early January. The mark-recapture estimate was 595, below the TMP measure of success, and there was 81% pup mortality.
Due to the ongoing situation with COVID-19, the decision was made to cancel the field season in the Subantarctic for 2020/21, based on health and safety concerns. This allowed resources to be re-focused into the northern populations, and to appropriately plan the 2021/22 field seasons, including adequate planning of proposed interventions, including the trial of pup shelters, and Ivermectin to reduce Klebsiella-related pup mortality. At this stage a full field season is proposed for both Auckland Islands and Campbell Island for 2021/22. Improvements are being made to the recruitment and training processes, taking onboard feedback on team structure and limitations at site that compromised the 2019/20 data quality.
There were several questions relating to the 2019/20 surveys. On the Auckland Islands, it was confirmed that the cause of death on Figure of Eight Island could not be determined, as dead pups were already decomposed when the field team arrived. In addition, there was a suggestion that the Campbell Island fieldwork must consider adequately surveying the Shoal Point colony (previously known as Paradise A and B), as this is a dynamic colony that is moving further up the harbour. Kat confirmed that there were logistical and physical complexities with having the Campbell Island teams on
9 DOC-6645797
foot, and that focus would remain at Davis Point in 2021/22, as this is the area of greatest concern for pup survival.
The Department were asked if Heritage Expeditions were able to provide DOC with colony count data from 2020/21, as they visited Enderby Island with tourists over that period. Kris confirmed that whilst Heritage Expeditions had visited the island, it was not appropriate to ask them to conduct research, as DOC had decided to cancel the season based on health and safety concerns.
Comments were made that vessel procurement was an ongoing issue affecting the subantarctic fieldwork, and whether it would be prudent for the Department to consider having its own vessel to safeguard the long-term commitment to this work. In response, it was indicated that vessel ownership and management is specialist work, and with the need being for only a small part of the year, it was still more practical to contract services. The Department indicated that work was being done with determining longer- term vessel security in the meantime.
There were also queries about previous trials of Ivermectin for Klebsiella control. Laura Boren confirmed that the TMP supported research into Klebsiella risk factor analysis, with helminth infestations increasing the risk of Klebsiella-related mortality.
6 South Island Field Report
Jim Fyfe and Charlie Barnett, Department of Conservation
The results for the 2020/21 field season were presented, with an estimate of 22 pups and 24 breeding females being sighted. Jim acknowledged the significant contribution of communities in alerting DOC to births, and the role that the New Zealand Sea Lion Trust (NZSLT) has taken with follow-up and community engagement.
For the last five seasons, the South Island population had produced more than 16 pups, and was on track in terms of the measures of success outlined in the TMP. However, this season two pups had died; one was stillborn, and the other went missing. There were general issues with uncontrolled dogs, vehicles near sea lions on beaches, and thus there was still potential for accidental deaths, particularly with the pup that was born at Lawyers Head/Tomahawk. DOC had received reports that 4-5 New Zealand fur seals had been shot, however no sea lions were confirmed to have been deliberately killed. A male sea lion had died from systemic infection on the North Otago coast, and one other was euthanised after a suspected propeller strike in the Catlins. In addition, a 2-year old female’s tags had been found in a recreational set net, but the animal had later been seen alive.
There had been positive engagement with many sea lion related press releases, and with the community noticing sea lions more, particularly as more adult males remained in Otago over summer. This has resulted in greater exposure of sea lions on social media as well. Charlie commented that there had been a change in attitude of Catlins residents to sea lions, with more locals becoming involved, and there had been active support from Clutha District Council for managing hotspots on walkways and near roads.
Managing birth sites was improved through community involvement, including pre- season community meetings by DOC and NZSLT, the use of official signage, and 10 DOC-6645797
newsletter updates. The Hoopers Inlet creching site was being managed by NZSLT, and Dunedin City Council have been engaged to construct a fence on the DCC road reserve.
Comments from the Forum members indicated that there had been ongoing problems with increasing the community’s involvement, because the DOC hotline were screening calls about pinnipeds, and local issues were not being dealt with, leaving the community feeling disenfranchised. The DOC hotline was currently being refreshed and expanded in scope. Others indicated that when they had contacted the local offices directly, that local Rangers had dealt with the problems and provided them with feedback.
Jordana acknowledged the support of the Department to intervene with Pippa’s pup, and appreciated the swift decision-making and response, despite the difficulty of the task and the subsequent outcome.
Questions were asked regarding if there had been any noticeable change in the behaviour of sea lions since the borders had been shut. Jim commented that around Otago, sea lion harassment events had declined, and that locals had been engaging with domestic tourists positively. Charlie commented that his observations were the opposite of Jim’s, and that domestic tourists were less likely to engage with the rules or behave appropriately compared to international tourists.
7 Volunteers
Jordana Whyte (NZSLT) lead a discussion about the use of volunteers in all aspects of sea lion fieldwork.
Volunteer trustees and trained community members were involved with monitoring and surveys, and this occasionally also included inexperienced volunteers and students. Advocacy was a key task for volunteers, which included talking with beachgoers and using educational engagement, which had a ripple effect as beachgoers repeated information to others. It was important that volunteers engaged in advocacy and outreach were all on the same page, so that educational messages were not misconstrued, and that they were not trying to ‘police’ sites.
Jordana acknowledged that NZSLT helped to coordinate and manage birth sites, but that it is a major challenge to get more people involved, given the time of year. Rostering during the busy season, and on weekends or evenings when more people were on the beach, while volunteers have jobs and whānau commitments, were identified as one of the biggest issues.
Having the capacity to train and organise volunteers is a major constraint. It was identified that it is important to work with the Department and other groups to empower the people on the ground and ensure that they feel supported. Others indicated that some groups have the skills and rapport with the local community, but they need the Department’s help with boosting volunteer numbers and to provide volunteers with training. It was suggested that volunteers needed more training with respect to conflict management (e.g. conflict flow charts, formal training), and for gathering evidence.
11 DOC-6645797
Action: Chris Page to work with the NZSLT to develop support materials for volunteer training.
It was felt that the DOC/DCC summer rangers had greatly improved the support available to local groups and volunteers to manage issues and events. Others commented on the success of the summer ranger programme, and that this could be expanded further.
Action: Chris Page to advocate for the expansion of the summer ranger programme.
Jordana commented that NZSLT receive callouts that bypass the DOC hotline, because individuals are dissatisfied with the DOC hotline response, in addition to being asked by the Duty Officer to respond to official callouts. NZSLT recognise that the Department are strapped for response capacity, but felt that a lot of the critical response callouts were falling on NZSLT, and that this situation would only get worse as the number of pups increases.
8 Community engagement and kōrero
Participants were given the opportunity to give feedback on the morning session and to ensure that their desired outcomes were addressed.
8.1 DOC Hotline The screening being undertaken by the DOC hotline was identified as a barrier to communication and was causing frustration within communities, particularly as callers were trying to be consistent with the conservation messages about reporting sea lions. It was indicated that callers could ask the DOC hotline to be put through directly to the Duty Officer, and that local Rangers may be able to check in with the hotline to ensure that sea lion calls would not be screened from the Duty Officers.
DOC staff clarified that Duty Officers must stay in cell phone range, and it is their role to coordinate response rather than respond themselves. NZSLT were asked to decline Duty Officer callouts if availability was an issue, so that the capacity issue can be addressed by the Department internally.
8.2 Ranger capacity It was expressed that there was not enough official presence in the Southland region on beaches where sea lions were present, particularly with respect to vehicles and motorbikes around sea lions. Capacity was a major limitation this season, with limited Biodiversity Ranger positions and no Summer Rangers in the Catlins, so existing Ranger capacity was prioritised for hoiho and sea lion issues in high-risk areas.
Forum members commented that it is important to expand the advocacy reach to the whole country, as sea lions are expanding their range, and yet might not be identified or reported because of community unfamiliarity further north.
12 DOC-6645797
It was commented that the new interpretation panels on the Otago coast, particularly at Allans Beach, are fantastic, and that visitors are engaging with them. Having basic information on the ground is a cheap option, and it has made a significant difference.
8.3 Council representation at the Forum It was suggested that we need to understand the barriers for attendance at the Forum, particularly from City, District and Regional Councils who have the power to manage bylaws in sea lion habitat.
The Department has a good ongoing kōrero with local councils over issues such as dog control, however it was identified that while those working with sea lions might have local/coastal contacts within Councils, that planners might be more appropriate to include in the Forum.
Action: Chris Page to reach out to local Councils to determine the barriers to Forum attendance and develop a plan to improve attendance in the future.
With the Long-Term Council Plans currently being determined, it was identified that critical issues for the regions and regional economies are supported as part of these processes. Long-term Council plan submissions from the sea lion community could address the need for resourcing volunteer capacity, beach bylaws, road management and traffic signs, and management of specific sites. The Long-Term Plans are a council process this year, which allow for online submissions from members of the public.
Action: Forum members to submit their views to Council Long-Term plans to advocate for improvements to volunteer capacity, road signage and coastal habitat where sea lions are present.
9 Rakiura Field Report
Phred Dobbins, Department of Conservation
The results of the 2020/21 Rakiura Field Season were presented, with high pup counts being recorded in Port Pegasus for several years. There has been variability in survey timing in some years due to boat availability. Tag re-sighting effort is difficult because most animals are widely distributed in the forest or in the water. Some animals are starting to congregate around the sandy beaches. The survey was expanded this year to include Paterson Inlet and Port Adventure, and two local iwi members joined the tagging trip in late February.
There was no observed deliberate mortality caused by humans. One sea lion died with a suspected infection; however, a post-mortem was not conducted due to the difficulty of transporting a large male from Rakiura, and the deceased animal was towed out to sea.
Public involvement on Rakiura is increasing, and has been supported by a range of documentaries, media articles and informative videos on human/sea lion interactions. Ideally being able to promote safe viewing and good visitor behaviour could occur before visitors come to the region (e.g. on shared transport). The Department engaged
13 DOC-6645797
with Halfmoon Bay School to promote good behaviours with the local community, and opportunistic outreach to local hunters and fishermen was generally well received.
Comments were made on the role of education and engagement in the current TMP and the NZSLT offered their assistance with delivering key messages for Rakiura, in the absence of a finalised engagement campaign as part of the Engagement Workstream of the TMP.
With respect to aquaculture in the area, there had been increasing interactions between sea lions and the salmon farms. Consultation between the Rakiura Operations Manager and aquaculture companies was ongoing.
10 Fisheries New Zealand update: New Zealand Sea Lion Threats
Greg Lydon, Fisheries New Zealand (MPI)
Greg Lydon presented an update on Fisheries New Zealand’s work in managing fisheries and sea lion interactions. Greg acknowledged that there were changes to the Ministry over the course of the TMP, with the agency nomenclature changing from MPI, to Fisheries New Zealand, and the Minister of Fisheries now being the Ministry for Oceans and Fisheries, which has a wider ecosystem-based focus.
Fisheries New Zealand acknowledges that one of the threats to sea lions is fisheries interactions. Interactions between sea lions and the Southern Squid Trawl Fishery (SQU6T) are managed by the SQU6T Operational Plan, which is reviewed and publicly consulted every 4 years. The current Operational Plan sets mandatory use of sea lion exclusion device (SLED) and high levels of observer coverage. Standardised SLEDs have been reported being deployed on 100% of tows in SQU6T since 2008, and 98% of tows have been observed so far in 2020/21 (91% in the previous year). Observers were onboard 24 vessels and accounted for 800+ observer days in 2020, which was a large investment. The Minister has set an annual fishing-related mortality limit of 52 sea lions and over the last six seasons the known bycatch has been between 0 and 7 animals per year (mean = c. 3). Fisheries New Zealand produces a weekly report, which includes vessel numbers, the number of tows, and observer coverage rates.
Fisheries New Zealand has sponsored sea lion research to better understand risks, including a desktop estimation of cryptic mortality rates, dive simulation to improve understanding of post-exit survival of animals encountering SLEDs, and a spatially- explicit fisheries risk assessment for female sea lions on the Auckland Islands. Current research is focused on the interactions of fisheries and sea lion distribution on the South Island and Rakiura.
Questions were asked about how sea lions were killed in SQU6T despite the widespread use of SLEDs. Greg indicated that some had gone through the bars which are 23cm apart, and that smaller sea lions can pass through the grid device. Others might possibly be towards the end of their breath, or their vision might be obscured by ink or sediment, which means they were unable to find the exit. Video footage of SLED use by sea lions in the net is inconclusive due to the lack of light at these fishing depths, but we do know
14 DOC-6645797
the devices are not perfect. Greg also commented that last season there were twice as many tows as this season, and that no sea lions were caught last year.
The proposed tracking for Auckland Islands sea lions was discussed, with specific reference to the parameters that were going to be assessed. Greg indicated that this project is being managed by Ben Sharp at Fisheries New Zealand, and that they were considering options to track sea lions outside of summer, and that longer deployments could provide more information, but that this project was currently on hold.
11 Marine and Coastal Species Liaison Officer
Chris Page, Department of Conservation
Chris indicated that once an engagement framework was set up for hoiho and sea lions, that the Marine and Coastal Species Liaison Officer role would engage with other coastal species.
Chris reported that during Seaweek, DOC districts promoted Lead the Way with DOC Rangers at a stall, and that there has been positive feedback from this outreach.
The Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) student project examining the issue of dogs and coastal wildlife was restarted remotely by phone interviews due to COVID restrictions. The focus of the new project was to scale up to a national programme of messaging for dog owners. The students have produced a final report with key recommendations for signage consistency, education etc.
Chris has been sending out periodic newsletters He Pānui Pakake to update on DOC activities in the sea lion space.
Plans for the coming year included implementing WPI recommendations, tying together the engagement strategy, planning annual events and advocacy implementation, improving signage consistency, and implementing recommendations from today’s hui.
Feedback received indicated that the Marine Studies Centre, DOC and NZSLT had developed an education resource package in 2005, which was still useful but needed to be re-organised for primary and secondary curricula. There was still interest from both groups to re-vamp this, and DOC could potentially offer support by assisting with printing. There were questions about DOC’s national strategy for education, and whether this was intended just to develop resources, or whether this would include outreach to schools.
Comments were made about the inconsistency of sea lion signage at place on the South Island, and that some signs were still in the ‘scare campaign’ era, rather than promoting positive behaviours.
Chris indicated that there had been few opportunities for his role to engage with mana whenua in the past year due to capacity issues, and Chris indicated that he has had to learn how to best identify engagement and feedback opportunities and is progressing towards making these connections stronger. Comments were made that the mātauranga
15 DOC-6645797
Māori project had been a major engagement opportunity with mana whenua, prior to the commencement of the Liaison Officer role.
Clarification was given as to whether the Liaison Officer role was intended to actively engage or just organise engagement events, and who NZSLT and others should approach within DOC since many people work with sea lions at different levels. Chris confirmed that his role was in the coordination space, with the intent of bringing people and concepts together, rather than being on the ground. The role was not intended to replace existing relationship holders, and that Operations staff should still be contacted for operational matters, and that science and technical staff were available to consult, with Kris Ramm being the manager responsible for the mahi overall.
Action: Chris Page to include a flow chart of role accountabilities and photographs of DOC staff in the next He Pānui Pakake newsletter.
Engagement of the Liaison Officer role with councils and their long-term planning was queried, and how much engagement had been achieved with councils. Chris indicated that he had some ad hoc conversations, and that council staff were receptive to what the Department want to achieve with sea lion advocacy, but that it is apparent that most councils are not aware of what the Department are achieving for sea lions. Chris indicated that he will take today’s feedback and endeavour to keep these conversations with councils and others ongoing.
12 Traffic Light Report
Kat Manno, Department of Conservation
Kat Manno prefaced the session with a summary of Scott-Fyfe (2019). The overarching message of the Scott-Fyfe (2019) report was that Ngāi Tahu whānui needed to be engaged with early, and to ensure that processes are done in such a way that enable partnership and provide genuine and resourced opportunities for Ngāi Tahu individuals, whānau and hapū to be active participants in kaitiakitanga for sea lions.
The “traffic light report” was created by Amélie Augé as a tool for managers and the Technical Advisory Group to assess the progress of the TMP measures of success. Green indicates “on track”, yellow indicates “unknown or no progress”, and red indicates “not on track”.
Significant issues in the past few seasons of shortened subantarctic trips and lack of focus on adult resights were creating a data gap in our understanding of survivorship. In addition, the Rakiura pup counts were constrained by the challenging nature of the fieldwork, and fluctuations did not necessarily reflect the dynamics of the population. Because the TMP does not list assessment methods for measures of success across the workstreams, it is difficult to report quantitatively. For example, methods for assessing progress on public engagement are lacking.
Kat commented that the revised TMP needs to consider specific leadership for each of the Plan goals, and that the Evaluation workstream should include metrics for assessment of progress on appropriate time scales for each goal.
16 DOC-6645797
Comments were made that the new TMP should consider broadening the scope from ‘deliberate human-related mortality’ to ‘human-sea lion conflict’, which would include issues with dogs, roads and vehicles, entanglement and debris, because as sea lions increase in numbers, these negative interactions have the potential to increase in frequency and scale up in importance to the overall population.
The qualification for certain colours in the traffic light report was queried, i.e. if something was 90% there but not 100% achieved, was this considered a “fail”. Kat confirmed that the traffic light system is indicative but not quantitative and is used only as a management tool for discussion at the annual hui. Thoughts were expressed that there needs to be further division of “no progress” vs. “unknown” to indicate data deficiencies.
SMART goals (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-based) might be relevant for the new TMP so that we can clearly and quantitatively measure success.
13 Next steps
This report will be provided to the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for discussion at the next TAG hui in May 2021. TAG members will evaluate recommendations from the Forum and advise on specific actions to be implemented, as per the Terms of Reference.
The action items will be reported on in the periodic newsletter He Pānui Pakake and a summary report of progress on these items will be presented at the next Forum.
Action: Mel and Kat to distribute these minutes to the Forum participants, incorporate feedback and upload the final report to the web for discussion at the next TAG hui.
14 References
Scott-Fyfe, R. (2019). Mātauranga Māori Project on the New Zealand sea lion (Phocarctos hookeri). Recommendations and report prepared by Rauhina Scott-Fyfe for the Department of Conservation and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, Dunedin, New Zealand. 63p.
15 Appendix – post-hui feedback from the NZSLT
The following is the post-hui feedback from the New Zealand Sea Lion Trust.
17 DOC-6645797
TMP Forum 2021 - post forum recommendations list compiled by NZSLT 15.4.21
Questions asked in the forum breakout groups
What is going well with the TMP? • The TMP creates an injection of funding that is available for sea lion work that would not likely be available. • The TMP process has benefitted from consistent and highly competent coordination in the last 12 months. • There has been increased correspondence and engagement with the TMP coordinator in the last 12 months. • Adherence to the terms of reference regarding focusing the annual forum on the mainland.
What would we like to see for the coming season - recommendations to the Advisory Group • More engagement and collaborative work with iwi and landowners o Identify key landowners by leveraging relationships and knowledge of operational staff and reaching out. • Increase and change of outdated signage (remove all ‘scare campaigns’), including in expansion areas north of Dunedin • Ban set nets in estuaries on the mainland where sea lions are found - including areas where we would expect sea lions to range in the next 50 years (e.g. Fiordland in the South to Banks Peninsula in the North). • Uniform bylaw/ban of vehicles on beaches - with a few exceptions for boat launching, when wildlife is not present, etc. • Promotion of marine protected areas that may benefit sea lions. • Investigation into the possible negative effects of Stewart Island aquaculture on the expanding sea lion breeding population in the area. • Continuation and expansion of the summer ranger program including expanding into Southland/Catlins; begin groundwork for similar positions in Waitaki for future seasons. • The Coastal Species Liaison Officer role should revert back to the original intent of the position which was 100% sea lions (in the forum it was disclosed that the role is only 40% sea lion work). o The Trust is requesting clarity on how this role is funded; is 60% of the funding coming from a hoiho budget? • Look strategically at opportunities for vessel use to ensure continuity of the subantarctic research and fieldwork programmes. What opportunities are there to collaborate with other groups with access to vessels and other key equipment such as Heritage Expeditions, Predator Free? • Prioritise acquisition of critical sea lion habitat on the mainland which is known to be under threat of redevelopment o There are currently several key parcels in known breeding/creching areas that could soon be lost to development. This is an urgent matter and the ability of the TMP to speed the process of acquisition must be understood.
• The development of educational resources should be approached collaboratively and leverage what's already out there instead of reinventing the wheel. o Utilise NZ Sea Lion Trust and Marine Studies Centre resources • Use of more localised staff, organisations and resources in the community for multimedia engagement pieces (ex: Centre for Science Communication, NHNZ) versus international entities brought in from overseas; again, there is a desire to see local talent and skills used. • Explorations of tools that make surveying possible when people can’t reach breeding areas, such as during covid outbreaks. o The Trust sees an ongoing need for on-the-ground field teams, but this work can be complemented by or temporarily replaced with alternative tools when an entire season may otherwise be lost.
What would we like out of the review process/changes we recommend? • Maintain the separation of the mainland and subantarctic population foci in the forum and advisory groups. • In the forum, reduce the time designated for presentation of information that can be sent ahead of time and taken as read; focus on questions, discussions and problem solving • Give organisations/individuals an opportunity to bring issues they face to the forum and look for collaborative solutions. • Improved communication of TMP developments throughout the year. Provide a list of goals and/or actions coming out of the forum and a timeline of when things are likely to be achieved. o This need not be exhaustive. A short, bulleted list of developments, meetings, actions, etc. every couple of months would be suitable. • Change the terms of reference to remove emphasis on recommendations coming out of a single-day forum; this does not allow enough time for discussion or reflection on topics that may be newly raised in the forum. o The current language suggests this is the only opportunity for members of the forum to bring suggestions forward to decision makers. o Better describe the purpose of the annual forum and how it sits within the decision-making process for each field season. • Change terms of reference regarding non-disclosure outside of the forum; eNGOs need an opportunity to disseminate information and concerns amongst their membership. • Add a measure to the TMP to encapsulate negative/harmful human impacts (dog attacks, vehicle strike, fishing/debris entanglement)
Areas for improvement • A more effective DOC hotline and duty officer response system to sea lion issues is required.
Other thoughts/fundamental problems with this process • What is the role/point for eNGOs in participating in the forum and advisory group if all decision making is done outside these platforms? Can we get clarity on how our input is considered and influences decision making?
Sea Lion Liaison Officer position This is the job description for the Sea Lion Liaison Officer as outlined in the TMP • Working with local wh ānau, hap ū, communities, stakeholders and regulatory bodies to support population growth and promote positive messaging around sea lions • Coordinating an engagement campaign that facilitates a positive and accepted expansion of the range of sea lions • Coordinating the New Zealand sea lion/r āpoka Forum and fostering positive working relationships with stakeholders • Supporting local DOC staff with monitoring, sea lion incidents, and callouts throughout the prescribed South Island/Te Waipounamu range • Ensuring coordination of protocols to guide decision-making on local interventions for sick or injured sea lions
We would like a list of what this position has achieved to date in relation to the above description and if the role has changed what is the reasoning behind it. In particular: o What new relationships have been established since the creation of this position? o Which stakeholders/audiences are now being regularly engaged with that were not before? o What is new and has changed since this role was established?
Thank you for this opportunity to be involved in the sea lion TMP process.
Regards
NZ Sea Lion Trust