Posts

Posted on

Assessment of the proposed Bream Bay sand mine’s impact on scallops

Tipa / Scallop in the proposed Bream Bay sand mine

The New Zealand government has just introduced ‘fast track’ legislation to bypass the usual checks and balances for environmental protection. This means less voice for nature in the application and approval process. To help address that gap, I’ve been looking into the impact a proposed sand mine might have on the tipa / scallop population in Bream Bay. I shared the report with quota owners who have been fishing the area, they agreed with my findings and have sent the report to Ministers.

Posted on

A tī kōuka reef

This is an experimental idea for restoring severely degraded seafloor ecosystems in the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park. It was inspired by reforestation efforts in China, where desertification is being tackled using tools like sandbag tubes  and straw fences.

The idea I tested was based on the concept of straw fences and how they stabilise loose substrates. Underwater, a similar structure might:

  • Stabilise the seafloor by reducing sediment movement
  • Improve water clarity by slowing currents and allowing sediment to settle
  • Provide structure for marine organisms to attach to or shelter in

To test this, I needed to see whether natural fibres could be planted in the seafloor and remain in place. I chose tī kōuka (cabbage tree) leaves because they are tough, fibrous, and slow to decompose on land.

tī kōuka (cabbage tree) leaves
20 tī kōuka (cabbage tree) leaves
The triangle marker on the Ōkahu Breakwater

I collected ten live leaves and ten dead ones, plus two extras to bind them into bundles. The leaves were 67–80 cm long. I kayaked to the triangle marker on the Ōkahu Breakwater (-36.84498185012416, 174.8125985293282) and selected a site 10 metres north of this point, where the substrate shifts from broken shell (common around the piles) to soft mud.

On a calm, high-tide day 25 March 2025, I dived to 5-6 metres and planted the leaves vertically into the mud using a 2 × 2 cm, 40 cm wooden stake, driving each leaf 15–20 cm into the sediment.

The live leaves were planted in a cluster with 5–10 cm spacing. The dead leaves were placed in a similar cluster 1 metre east of the live group.

10 live leaves, Note the substrate was a little firmer here than were I planted the dead leaves.
10 dead leaves, 1 meter east of the live leaves.

Now I wait for nature…

Posted on

Submission on proposed amendments to the Fisheries Act

STET Ltd opposes all proposed amendments to the Fisheries Act. The changes prioritise commercial interests over ecosystem health, weaken regulatory oversight, and reduce public accountability. Key concerns include:

  • Multi-year catch decisions and management procedures: Reduce scientific scrutiny, ignore environmental variability, and risk locking in unsustainable harvest levels.
  • Low-information stock management: Lacks robust ecological data and invites industry bias.
  • Rebuild periods: Allow economic factors to delay recovery of depleted stocks.
  • Non-extractive values: Are overlooked, including ecological roles and non-commercial cultural practices.
  • Voluntary sustainability measures: Are unenforceable and exclude recreational/customary conservation efforts.
  • ACE carry forwards and deemed value threshold changes: Undermine sustainability and enable quota banking.
  • On-board camera proposals: Removing footage from OIA and weakening camera use reduces transparency and compliance.
  • Discard and landing rules: Erode sustainability by enabling increased discards, higher juvenile mortality, and underreporting.

STET urges Fisheries New Zealand to adopt science-led, precautionary, and ecosystem-based management that upholds public interest over industry lobbying.

Read the Full Submission here

Make your own submission here

Posted on

Waitemata Harbour Study 1973

Over the summer I read Lucy Baragwanath’s copy of Seacoast in the seventies – the future of the New Zealand shoreline by John Morton and friends. It’s a fascinating insight into the pressures on Auckland’s coastline in the early 1970’s. The book mentions an upcoming study on the ecology of the Auckland Harbour. Lucy and I were able to track it down and Paul Kennedy kindly let me borrow his copy.

The Waitemata Harbour Study 1973 by M. F. Larcombe is an incredible record of the intertidal zone but it’s very hard to read because, not only are there a lot of scientific names many of them have changed over time. I used records from iNaturalist.nz to make a visual alphabetic key with updated names to make it easier to read. For some reason not a single scientific study on Google scholar references the study. I hope that changes.

Posted on

Protecting Regional Councils’ Role in Marine Conservation

The proposed Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill threatens to strip regional councils of their ability to regulate fishing impacts under the Resource Management Act (RMA). This shift would place decision-making solely in the hands of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)—an agency primarily focused on fisheries extraction rather than ecosystem health.

This change ignores a key legal distinction: RMA-based marine protections are not about fisheries management but about safeguarding biodiversity, cultural values, and ecosystem integrity. The Motiti Decision confirmed that councils have the authority to protect marine habitats from fishing when necessary to maintain indigenous biodiversity.

The Fisheries Act has failed to protect marine biodiversity, as evidenced by the expansion of kina barrens in Northeastern New Zealand and the complete collapse of the commercial scallop fishery. If councils lose the ability to implement marine protections under the RMA, these problems will only worsen.

New Zealanders overwhelmingly support better marine protection, yet only 0.4% of our oceans are fully protected, placing us behind international standards. The Bill would make it harder to achieve meaningful protections, contradicting both public expectations and international commitments like the 30×30 initiative.

The RMA already allows for 10-year marine protection areas, providing a practical and adaptable tool for ecosystem recovery. Removing this mechanism would take away a proven, community-driven conservation tool.

We oppose the Bill and urge the Select Committee to reject these restrictions, retain regional councils’ ability to manage fishing impacts, and ensure marine protection remains in the hands of local communities—not just the fishing industry. Now is the time to strengthen protections for our oceans, not weaken them.

The STET LTD submission

Make your submission here

UPDATE: Speech presented 03/03/2025

Posted on

GoPro drop camera

GoPro Drop Camera Mount

I have been 3D printing different mount designs for my GoPro in order to take photos of the seafloor from my boat / kayak for several months now. I am finally happy with the design and have posted it on Thingiverse if you want to print one yourself.

The mount connects a GoPro to a 1kg dive weight with additional cable ties. You can then lower the drop camera into the water to take photos and videos of the seafloor at different angles. I attach the mount to a diving reel with a stainless steel carabiner snap hook.

Here are some photos taken with the set up.

Posted on

Submission on Regulatory Standards Bill

Regulatory Standards Bill

The proposed Regulatory Standards Bill prioritises private property rights over collective environmental interests. It asserts that “legislation should not take or impair, or authorise the taking or impairing of, property without the consent of the owner unless: there is good justification for the taking or impairment, fair compensation is provided to the owner, and compensation is provided to the extent practicable by or on behalf of the persons who obtain the benefit.” While this protects individual property owners, it could discourage essential regulations, like wetland protections or agricultural runoff controls, by imposing significant compensation burdens. This approach overlooks the shared value of ecosystems and the collective responsibility to safeguard them for future generations.

Full submission on the Regulatory Standards Bill here