title: Proposing an indigenous power of veto in Aotearoa New Zealand

authors: Te Aho, Linda

abstract: Tom Fookes was an architect of New Zealand's Resource Management Act passed in 1991 (RMA). When interviewed about his life's work, Tom responded that he had sought to create a 'fair, integrated consideration of the decisions and policy to do with the social, economic and environmental conditions of our people'. I am told that he worked hard to provide a fair opportunity for all people to have a voice in decisions that affect them and places they care about. Processes were included in the RMA to allow this to occur, with particular provisions for a distinctive Maori voice. Because of these provisions, and the Act's lodestar of sustainable resource management, the RMA was promoted as one of the 'world's finest national environmental policies'.

text: Proposing an indigenous power of veto in Aotearoa New Zealand Tom Fookes was an architect of New Zealand's Resource Management Act passed in 1991 (RMA). When interviewed about his life's work, Tom responded that he had sought to create a 'fair, integrated consideration of the decisions and policy to do with the social, economic and environmental conditions of our people'. I am told that he worked hard to provide a fair opportunity for all people to have a voice in decisions that affect them and places they care about. Processes were included in the RMA to allow this to occur, with particular provisions for a distinctive Maori voice. Because of these provisions, and the Act's lodestar of sustainable resource management, the RMA was promoted as one of the 'world's finest national environmental policies'.

year: 2015

title: Comparative fish abundance in the shallow Waikato lakes Whangape and Hakanoa

authors: Hicks, Brendan J.

abstract: The Waikato-Tainui College for Research and Development contracted the University of Waikato to conduct boat electrofishing estimates of the fish abundance in lakes Whangape and Hakanoa; both are shallow, riverine lakes in the lower Waikato River floodplain and are about 2,000 years old. Lake Whangape (latitude 37.46853°S, longitude 175.05120°W) is a large (1,450 ha), shallow (maximum depth 2.7 m) lake to the west of the Waikato River; Lake Hakanoa (latitude 37.55258°S, longitude 175.16859°W) is a 52-ha lake in suburban Huntly with a maximum depth of 2.5 m.
We fished 10 sites for 10 mins in both lakes Whangape and Lake Hakanoa; sites fished were 253-609 m long (1,012-2,436 m² in area) in Lake Whangape and 125-276 m long (500-1,104 m² in area) in Lake Hakanoa.
No submerged aquatic macrophytes were seen in either lake. Fishing was conducted close to the water's edge in Lake Hakanoa, but the shallow margins in Lake Whangape restricted fishing at most sites to 30-70 m from the shoreline. The shoreline was much more accessible in Lake Hakanoa, and was dominated by raupo (Typha orientalis) with willows (Salix spp.) in places. Submerged tree trunks and logs in Lake Hakanoa made navigation difficult in parts of the lake margins.
We caught a total of 118 fish in Lake Whangape, where shortfin eels (Anguilla australis) were the most abundant fish, and 594 fish in Lake Hakanoa, where gambusia (Gambusia affinis) the most abundant species. In Lake Whangape, shortfin eels comprised the greatest total biomass (12.4 kg), with koi carp (Cyprinus carpio) almost equally abundant (11.4 kg). In Lake Hakanoa, koi carp were most abundant (74.4 kg), followed by shortfin eels (22.1 kg).
Fish were unevenly spread among sites in Lake Whangape and koi carp were relatively sparsely among sites. In Lake Hakanoa, in contrast, fish were more evenly spread among sites, but with higher concentrations of catfish (Ameiurus nebulosus) and goldfish (Carassius auratus) at a few sites. Biomass of fish caught in each of the ten 10-min fishing shots reflected the numerical distributions, with some wide variations between sites. Fish densities were generally lower in Lake Whangape than in Lake Hakanoa; however, common smelt (Retropinna retropinna) and grey mullet (Mugil cephalus) occurred in Whangape but not in Hakanoa. Areal fish biomass was dominated by shortfin eels and koi carp in Lake Whangape, but koi carp dominated the fish biomass in Lake Hakanoa, despite the smaller number of carp than eels. This was because of the large mean weight of koi carp (about 1,000 g) compared to the smaller shortfin eels (mean weight about 200 g in both lakes).

text: Comparative fish abundance in the shallow Waikato lakes Whangape and Hakanoa The Waikato-Tainui College for Research and Development contracted the University of Waikato to conduct boat electrofishing estimates of the fish abundance in lakes Whangape and Hakanoa; both are shallow, riverine lakes in the lower Waikato River floodplain and are about 2,000 years old. Lake Whangape (latitude 37.46853°S, longitude 175.05120°W) is a large (1,450 ha), shallow (maximum depth 2.7 m) lake to the west of the Waikato River; Lake Hakanoa (latitude 37.55258°S, longitude 175.16859°W) is a 52-ha lake in suburban Huntly with a maximum depth of 2.5 m.
We fished 10 sites for 10 mins in both lakes Whangape and Lake Hakanoa; sites fished were 253-609 m long (1,012-2,436 m² in area) in Lake Whangape and 125-276 m long (500-1,104 m² in area) in Lake Hakanoa.
No submerged aquatic macrophytes were seen in either lake. Fishing was conducted close to the water's edge in Lake Hakanoa, but the shallow margins in Lake Whangape restricted fishing at most sites to 30-70 m from the shoreline. The shoreline was much more accessible in Lake Hakanoa, and was dominated by raupo (Typha orientalis) with willows (Salix spp.) in places. Submerged tree trunks and logs in Lake Hakanoa made navigation difficult in parts of the lake margins.
We caught a total of 118 fish in Lake Whangape, where shortfin eels (Anguilla australis) were the most abundant fish, and 594 fish in Lake Hakanoa, where gambusia (Gambusia affinis) the most abundant species. In Lake Whangape, shortfin eels comprised the greatest total biomass (12.4 kg), with koi carp (Cyprinus carpio) almost equally abundant (11.4 kg). In Lake Hakanoa, koi carp were most abundant (74.4 kg), followed by shortfin eels (22.1 kg).
Fish were unevenly spread among sites in Lake Whangape and koi carp were relatively sparsely among sites. In Lake Hakanoa, in contrast, fish were more evenly spread among sites, but with higher concentrations of catfish (Ameiurus nebulosus) and goldfish (Carassius auratus) at a few sites. Biomass of fish caught in each of the ten 10-min fishing shots reflected the numerical distributions, with some wide variations between sites. Fish densities were generally lower in Lake Whangape than in Lake Hakanoa; however, common smelt (Retropinna retropinna) and grey mullet (Mugil cephalus) occurred in Whangape but not in Hakanoa. Areal fish biomass was dominated by shortfin eels and koi carp in Lake Whangape, but koi carp dominated the fish biomass in Lake Hakanoa, despite the smaller number of carp than eels. This was because of the large mean weight of koi carp (about 1,000 g) compared to the smaller shortfin eels (mean weight about 200 g in both lakes).

year: 2016

title: Evolving marine biosecurity in the Galapagos Islands

authors: Campbell, Marnie L.

abstract: Some of my co-authors and I have just returned from one of the paradises on earth and a natural history mecca – The Galapagos Islands, Ecuador. We participated in (MLC, CLH) or hosted (IK, TD, KC) the 1st Tropical Island Marine Bioinvasions Workshop convened at the Charles Darwin Research Station. From a terrestrial standpoint, the Ecuadorian government’s biosecurity for the most part is intelligent (but see Gardener et al. 2010), well organised and seems to be effective, with a number of publications detailing introduced terrestrial plant (e.g., Buddenhagen 2006; Jager and Kowarik 2010) and animal (e.g., Cruz et al. 2005; Carrion et al. 2011) eradications and impacts (e.g., Schofield 1989; Itow 2003; Renteria et al. 2012; Kueffer et al. 2010), invasion risks (e.g., Gottdenker et al. 2005), and ecosystem restoration, management and conservation (e.g., Gibbs et al. 1999; Causton et al. 2006). Yet, as with so many other systems, marine biosecurity lags behind (a quick review of the literature shows no marine introduction publications) and is consequently less well managed, but not for a lack of effort.

text: Evolving marine biosecurity in the Galapagos Islands Some of my co-authors and I have just returned from one of the paradises on earth and a natural history mecca – The Galapagos Islands, Ecuador. We participated in (MLC, CLH) or hosted (IK, TD, KC) the 1st Tropical Island Marine Bioinvasions Workshop convened at the Charles Darwin Research Station. From a terrestrial standpoint, the Ecuadorian government’s biosecurity for the most part is intelligent (but see Gardener et al. 2010), well organised and seems to be effective, with a number of publications detailing introduced terrestrial plant (e.g., Buddenhagen 2006; Jager and Kowarik 2010) and animal (e.g., Cruz et al. 2005; Carrion et al. 2011) eradications and impacts (e.g., Schofield 1989; Itow 2003; Renteria et al. 2012; Kueffer et al. 2010), invasion risks (e.g., Gottdenker et al. 2005), and ecosystem restoration, management and conservation (e.g., Gibbs et al. 1999; Causton et al. 2006). Yet, as with so many other systems, marine biosecurity lags behind (a quick review of the literature shows no marine introduction publications) and is consequently less well managed, but not for a lack of effort.

year: 2015-09