WCC 2012 Res 076 - Activity Report

General Information
IUCN Constituent: 
Environment and Conservation Organisations of New Zealand
IUCN Constituent type: 
IUCN Member
Period covered: 
Geographic scope: 
Pacific Ocean
Southern Ocean
New Zealand
In implementing this Resolution your organization has worked/consulted with...
IUCN Members: 
Department of Conservation / New Zealand
IUCN Secretariat: 
Other non-IUCN related organisations: 
CCAMLR, Greenpeace, the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation, UN BBNJ processes, the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, the High Seas Alliance, the NZ Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Indicate and briefly describe any actions that have been carried out to implement this Resolution: 
Policy influencing/advocacyECO has worked in numerous fora including at the IUCN World Congress 2016, and in those preceding the Jeju Congress, to press for increased Marine protection, spatial planning and the formal legal establishment of substantial areas of no-take marine reserves, other area based protections, and the establishment of species specific sanctuaries such as the habitat of the Maui and Hector's dolphins around New Zealand. We have rejected the Bogus Benthic Protected Areas (BPAs) put in place in New Zealand's EEZ by a new minister of fisheries who was ambushed by the New Zealand fishing industry Deep Water Group. We have pressed CCAMLR to establish a network of MPAs in the Southern Ocean, have participated int eh UNICOPLOS and UN BBNJ processes to achieve MPA; we have rejected utterly feeble NZ proposals for MPAs put forward by the previous NZ government.On-going
Policy influencing/advocacyECO supports the idea of certification but we are well aware that the governance, incentives and client relationships of such schemes are vital. We have long since lost any confidence in the Marine Stewardship Council certification schemes, which favour the client and serve as an alternative to taking real remedial action, while conferring "greenwash" on the clients. The costs of appeals have been raised so that these are well beyond our means and yet the lack of appeals is claimed as evidence of good decisions. They're not.On-going
Scientific/technical activitiesECO has pressed in international negotiations and via the Scientific Committees of CCAMLR, SPRFMO, and a variety of other forums including domestic NZ processes in the drafting of text and discussions of implementation of measures to protect areas of the Southern Ocean, the South Pacific, the high seas, and in New Zealand's own EEZ and Territorial Sea with genuine MPAs. We have and continue to challenge fake ones MPAs such as the NZ Benthic Protected Areas. We endorse the concept of indigenous protected areas and have supported these in the NZ territorial sea.On-going
Please report on the result /achievement of the actions taken: 
Provision for MPAs and area protection is incorporated in the BBNJ, SPRFMO and CCAMLR. Some MPAs were established in the Ross Sea area of the Southern Ocean. Russia and China continue to block others. The New Zealand Benthic/Bogus Protected Areas are largely discredited thanks to work done by John Leathwick on their lack of efficacy, and because we and others have called them out. The Department of Conservation no longer counts the BPAs in its international reporting. New Zealand has not created any MPAs in the EEZ and there is a very low level of protection in the NZ territorial sea.
What challenges have you encountered in implementing this Resolution and what measures have you taken to overcome them?: 
The short-sightedness and greed of the NZ deep water fishing industry; Russia and China unsupportive in the Southern Ocean, the willingness of NZ's earlier govern to pass-off BPAs as genuine protection. We have succeeded in exposing the BPAs as Bogus. The Ross Sea MPAs were accepted, but others are stalled.
Identify and briefly describe what future actions are planned for the implementation of this Resolution: 
Future ActionDescription
Education/Communication/Raising awarenessThis is an on-going issue and even the 2019 IPBES report has not motivated nations to do better. We will continue to draw the public's and political and official attention to the benefits of MPAs.
Policy influencing/advocacyWe continue to press for better recognition of the importance of marine protected areas and the need for marine spatial protection, and in New Zealand for MPAs that give true protection in the NZ EEZ.