Monthly Archives: Mar 2017

The test that could have been

Posted on by
Reply

The cricket season of 2016-17 had its highs and its lows. How close we came to winning a one day series against South Africa, only to have a monumental batting collapse in the fifth and deciding match. And yet three test matches later against the same opponent, how close we came to winning only for the weather to intervene.

So, as New Zealand’s domestic cricket season closes, we can look back at the matches played and enjoy the high’s and commisserate about the lows.

The matches against Bangladesh were a good warm up series. New Zealand had an opportunity to remove the rust from the winter season and get its bowling and batting line ups firing on all cylinders. Two tests including one where Bangladesh scored 595 showed up some serious issues with the bowling, whilst Tom Latham and Kane Williamson gave good accounts of their batting.

Australia followed in a rain interrupted Chappell-Hadlee series where New Zealand took both matches at 6 and 24 runs respectively. Both matches were nail biters that went into the final overs.

It will be the the test that ended yesterday that cricket followers in New Zealand will rue the most. New Zealand’s bowlers were afflicted by injury that in the third and final test against South Africa, left them without their two most potent bowlers Tim Southee and Trent Boult. It left them without batsman Ross Taylor to help Kane Williamson to steady the innings, despite at the end of the day the team doing a sterling job rallying to help.

It has been more than a decade since New Zealand bet South Africa in a test. With South Africa teetering at 95/5 in its second innings, still nearly 100 runs behind New Zealand, which still had a batting innings to spare, the prospect was there for a famous victory.

Alas, it shall now wait for another season as New Zealand reverts to its winter sports.

Quota Management System for fisheries criticized

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of days ago I was writing about Individual Transferable Quotas. I mentioned how New Zealand came to have them, what they do and why they are useful. I thought I was finished until I saw an article by a fisherman complaining about the state of New Zealand fisheries. And when I read it, his grumbling covered much of what I have been studying on my Polytechnic course at the moment.

The concept on the surface seems fine: Individual Transferable Quota’s that assure certainty about the management of what was becoming an unsustainable and uncertain resource, through their key characteristics of permanence, exclusivity, security and transferability:

  • Permanence: Instead of dying at the end of ownership, quotas are able to be transferred to other holders
  • Exclusivity: to qualify for holding a quota, the applicant needs to have taken and held a certain amount of stock, suggesting it will be used
  • Transferability: in the event of a major accident, ill health or other circumstances rendering a quota holder unable to use it, the quota can be transferred to another holder
  • Security: how good is the title of your property or resource? The less secure the resource, the worse the security of your title

But not everyone believes that the Quota Management System is perfect. Tony Craig is a recreational fisherman and partner at Terra Moana sustainability consultants. In an article he complains about an “ever diminishing pie”.

It is possible that the Minister of the day has chosen to reconfigure towards moneyed up commercial interests who are not necessarily deserving of additional quota. In this case it would suggest interference in the property rights model of fisheries managed by quotas. If Mr Craig is to be believed, the Minister of Primary Industries, Nathan Guy is reducing the permanence of quotas by reducing their scope, thereby making it harder for those without significant monetary interests to stay in the game.

Aside from threatening to upend the Q.M.S. system of quotas that has been operating with notable success in New Zealand since 1986, it raises other questions as well. One of those questions concerns a loss of trust that arises from the wilful destabilization of a system whose parameters were understood and respected. This could be damaging if allowed to continue because it assists the potential return of a race to the bottom, a race to take as much as one can before their competitors.

The Tragedy of the Commons in other words.

Now, there is nothing saying that the Q.M.S. system of quotas that was introduced in 1986 is perfect – it is only as good as the data sets for individual species, and can be subject to fluctuations if unforeseen inputs such as economic downturn, an ecological disaster in a key habitat occurs. But no one is suggesting – other than Mr Craig – that the system is in dire need of an overhaul.

But it might be in need of a few more checks and balances to stop what on the surface looks like political interference.

Armed offences spiralling out of control: A snap shot

Posted on by
Reply

Rather than write an article, I have decided to show a snap shot of armed offences that have occurred in New Zealand in the last few months. The number, the boldness of the offences, the ages of the offenders and their distribution across the country shows that no part seems to be spared. All of the offences mentioned below have happened since 01 January 2017.

There have also been a spate of dairy robberies in south Auckland.

What do you think needs to happen to offenders who are caught? I would like to see several things happen with convicted offenders:

  • Seize their passports, as why would other countries want convicted violent offenders from another nation visiting them?
  • Ask victims what they would like to see the offenders do if restorative justice is not an option
  • Assets confiscated in order to pay for damages if financial means to pay up does not exist

Given the lack of action by the Government in dealing with this spiralling violence the state of violent crime in New Zealand may become an election issue. This becomes particularly concerning with the increasing costs of cigarettes and other tobacco products, as well as drugs fuelling crime. Frustrated and fearful business owners trying to ensure that they are able to cope in the event of an attack on them, need to know that someone will help them.

Individual Transferable Quota’s in fishing: Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

In my previous article I introduced Individual Transferable Quota’s in regard to our fisheries as a resource. This article looks at some of the problems with I.T.Q.’s.

It is first important to know that there is no such thing as “the perfect system”. Any number and potentially any combination of variables, foreseen and unforeseen can interfere with the I.T.Q. system. They can be environmental, or economic, social or political, driven by local, national or international issues.

In New Zealand, perhaps the biggest problems with I.T.Q.’s are:

  • Enforcing them
  • Maintaining their sustainability against increasing demand both locally and internationally
  • Balancing the resource for commercial and non commercial interests

New Zealand’s economic zone has a varied marine life inhabiting it, from hapuku and hoki to Bluff oysters and crayfish

Enforcing New Zealand fisheries has been a problem. Other articles I have written allude to a problem with foreign flagged vessels that have been operating in New Zealand. Because of the vast area under New Zealand jurisdiction, it is necessary to involve both the New Zealand police and Royal New Zealand Navy in these operations as only they have the logistical and legal means. With regards to the I.T.Q.’s, these foreign flagged vessels have been caught catching over their quota’s and the crews have admitted to dumping the excess so as not to be caught.

It is not just a foreign vessel issue though. Many locals feign ignorance of the local rules irrespective of species. This is mainly around coastal fisheries and not on the open sea. Normally Ministry of Primary Industries rangers and local police monitor activity. They are looking out for over catching, undersized shells, inappropriate equipment and catching outside of designated areas or seasons.

New Zealand fisheries are highly rated overseas because of their purity and attempts at being sustainably managed. It is an increasingly important challenge to ensure that the catches reported each year fall within the yields permitted. Just because New Zealand has taken steps that acknowledge the fallacy of the tragedy of the commons, other nations trying to maintain their economic growth, for whom sustainability is a westernized concept, getting as much as they can is more important.

Domestically the biggest challenge is balancing recreational interests with commercial fisheries. This just happens to be a part of a course assignment I am doing at the moment, putting a case forward for the use of I.T.Q.’s, and in doing so, I am addressing a stand off between these factions, along with iwi and hapu whose food gathering areas may have rahui applied that mean non-Maori have to stay out of certain areas.

So as we move forward in the 21st Century against a backdrop of other nations still being afflicted by the thinking that goes with a “get as much as I can” mentality, New Zealand has its own challenges. Burgeoning demand for New Zealand fish stocks, balancing that demand with local and customary needs means although I.T.Q.’s might be a significant step forward, they can only work if all parties concerned are on board.

Individual Transferable Quota’s in fishing: Part 1

Posted on by
Reply

As nations struggle with the over fishing of their resources, it is appropriate to look at economic means of stabilizing the death plunge in fish stocks worldwide. Some nations clearly not having learnt from the tragedy of the commons, or environmentalists and conservationists sounding ever more dire warnings, now seek to exploit other nations fish stocks.

But it is not all bad news, even if the good news is somewhat dated. Individual Transferable Quotas have been around for awhile now and New Zealand was one of the fist nations in the world along with Iceland to implement them.

I.T.Q.’s were implemented in New Zealand originally in 1986 (Dewees, 1998). It resulted from the overfishing of the known stock, changes in the New Zealand economic model away from Government subsidised industries to privatised ones with. A characteristic problem of fisheries as a commodity has been historically a tendency for users to compete for the resource, thus establishing a sort “must get what I can, before my competitor does” type approach, or otherwise known as “The tragedy of the Commons”. This is not a sustainable approach and depletes fisheries, as well as causing damage to the environment. In the long term – for the very opposite reasons that I.T.Q.’s are useful mechanisms – this mentality has failed economically significant booms that have been followed by equally significant busts.

The paper by Dewees concluded that the introduction of an I.T.Q system stopped or at least significantly slowed down the race for fish because the Total Allowable Catch (T.A.C.) would be more evenly distributed. It encouraged quota users to better manage their resource by giving them certainty of having a portion of the total amount.

Determining the quotas depends on what the yield of scallops from the fishing area is (Lock and Leslie, 2007). The two yields mentioned are important in calculating the Maximum Sustainable Yield, which determines the maximum yield that can be permitted without compromising the fishery. Without these, it is difficult to calculate, and thus poses a challenge determining how much a fishery may yield.

This may vary from year to year, depending on a range of factors such as human pressure through fishing and pollution as well as interaction between species. The yield determined from knowing this is called the Current Annual Yield and reflects the year by year fluctuations of the stock.

The Maximum Constant Yield is the maximum volume of biomass that can be harvested each year without depleting the stock, and is considered to have an acceptable level of risk. In order for this to work effectively it is set at level low enough to yearly fluctuations in stock and still be less than the volume of stock during periods of low abundance.

Are I.T.Q.’s perfect?

No. But nor is any system. Some of the problems seen in the use of I.T.Q.’s in New Zealand shall be explored in my next article.