One hundred and sixteen. That’s the reported seabird death toll from just three months of surface longline fishing (April-June) earlier this year.
Among the dead: 40 albatrosses, a "nationally critical" Antipodean albatross and a northern royal albatross — the species that breeds at Taiaroa Head near Dunedin.
Every year, New Zealand’s commercial fishing fleet kills as many as 5000 seabirds. It’s a terrible fate and a horrific record that we are failing to remedy.
It’s heart-wrenching to watch — especially because we know it doesn’t have to be this way.
Right now, Fisheries New Zealand is reviewing seabird bycatch mitigation in the surface longline fishery — a "problem" fishery with low independent observer coverage (6%) and consistently poor use of measures to stop seabirds getting caught on hooks.
Fisheries bycatch is one of the main drivers for albatross, petrel and penguin population declines worldwide, alongside invasive predators and climate change.
Surface longline fishers can stop needlessly catching and killing seabirds by using a few different techniques: they can deploy lines of streamers to scare birds away; they can weight lines so they sink below the dive depth of seabirds; or they can set their longlines at night, when many seabirds aren’t feeding.
But to be really effective, they must do all three at the same time.
That is the best-practice approach outlined in the Agreement for Conservation of Albatross and Petrels (ACAP), to use all three techniques simultaneously, aka "3 out of 3". Or, if fishers really wanted to set lines during the day, they could use a hook-shielding device.
New Zealand signed on to ACAP, ostensibly endorsing this approach to protect seabirds.
Yet our fishing industry is fighting against regulation on stronger measures, claiming they are doing everything possible and in the same breath making excuses and telling lies.
In an article earlier this year, a fisheries representative stated: "Without known success in New Zealand, the 3 of 3 model across all surface longline fisheries is unproven and therefore not a priority."
This assertion is simply not true. There is strong international evidence on the effectiveness of 3 out of 3 nearly eliminating bycatch, at little-to-no cost and with no impact on fish caught.
There are some vessels already doing the right thing, implementing 3 out of 3, and achieving low bycatch rates — but not enough.
The Antipodean albatross, a seabird that breeds only in New Zealand, is predicted to be functionally extinct in three generations if we do nothing.
The surface longline fishery across the Pacific is particularly dangerous for this species. Because seabirds like albatross roam so widely, they are caught on the high seas by international vessels too.
But that doesn’t excuse inaction in our fishing fleet at home — as the seabird capital of the world, we should be global leaders in protecting our taonga.
Instead, we’re falling behind countries like Australia and the United States, who report lower captures per hook than we do.
Our rate of seabird bycatch observed in the surface longline fishery remains stubbornly high — and has even increased in three consecutive fishing years.
Given our ambitious goal of zero fisheries-related mortality, this record is unacceptable, and quite frankly, embarrassing. Efforts by the Ministry for Primary Industries and Department of Conservation to encourage the industry to voluntarily implement best practice have fallen on deaf ears.
Which is why we need 3 out of 3 simultaneously, everywhere.
Alternative proposals requiring 3 out of 3 only at certain times in some places are problematic and based on unreliable data, leaving the door open for further needless seabird deaths.
There are good economic reasons to institute 3 out of 3, too.
Some markets for our longline-caught tuna, such as the US, have trade laws banning fish from places where protected species bycatch — including turtles and seabirds — is not effectively managed.
Plus, there’s increasing market demand for sustainable fish: more than 40% of longline tuna fleets across the Pacific have Marine Stewardship Council certification.
To meet this, our fleet would need to move towards 3 out of 3. Regulation would help lift the standards of those laggards who are dragging the fleet down.
The opportunity to protect seabirds does not inhibit fishing, it makes it more sustainable.
This is a rare win-win, future-proofing New Zealand’s fishery for the long term, as well as saving our precious seabirds.
It’s immensely frustrating that this solvable issue has been dragging on for years.
So let’s get on with it.
— Dr Stephanie Borrelle is from BirdLife International; Sue Maturin is from Forest & Bird.
